Including the Tests, Pope has kept wicket in 7 first-class matches. Excluding Tests Jamie Smith has been wicket-keeper in 18 of his 59 first-class games.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
England players and selection discussion thread
- Thread starter Bijed
- Start date
I think England should try and craft a spin-allrounder, for the balance of the side. Swann was pretty good with the bat, then Mo Ali was even better, meaning they could always have a spinner in the XI and it wasn't about choosing between Bashir/Leach (who can't bat) or a seam option. I think that worked out pretty well for England.
Having two allrounders at 7 & 8 makes a team so strong I think (like India for example with the best 2 allrounders in Ashwin & Jadeja!).
England have Stokes at number 7, and well.. if their number 8 was say...... Jacob Bethell ? And then, you'd have 3 other bowling options to pick depending on the track.
Having said that, I'm part of the ones thinking Pope shouldn't be in the XI. And I'm part of the ones thinking Stokes could move to number 1, 2 or 3.
So I'll try something :
1. Duckett
2. Crawley
3. Stokes
4. Root
5. Brook
6. Smith
7. Bethell
8. Atkinson
9. Carse/Woakes/ ?
10. SAM COOK
11. Leach/Potts/ ?
Having two allrounders at 7 & 8 makes a team so strong I think (like India for example with the best 2 allrounders in Ashwin & Jadeja!).
England have Stokes at number 7, and well.. if their number 8 was say...... Jacob Bethell ? And then, you'd have 3 other bowling options to pick depending on the track.
Having said that, I'm part of the ones thinking Pope shouldn't be in the XI. And I'm part of the ones thinking Stokes could move to number 1, 2 or 3.
So I'll try something :
1. Duckett
2. Crawley
3. Stokes
4. Root
5. Brook
6. Smith
7. Bethell
8. Atkinson
9. Carse/Woakes/ ?
10. SAM COOK
11. Leach/Potts/ ?
LangleyburyCCPlayer
State 12th Man
If Stokes moves to #3, would it be worth picking Pope in the middle order? Struggled there when he played in the middle order in Test cricket, but his FC average is still very good there
LangleyburyCCPlayer
State 12th Man
What is Cox’s FC average with the gloves? Small sample size for sure, but the bulk of his glovework has been in T20s where average is not the most important stat by any means
30 with the gloves. 41 without them.
From memory, Pope kept wicket much better in Pakistan than Smith.
LangleyburyCCPlayer
State 12th Man
In the last Test we had Atkinson and Ahmed, with Woakes and Carse watching on, we have a lot of #8 bats, but none that I’m fully convinced can bat any higher (Ahmed is young, although he’s looked eight-ey at best with the bat so far). Bethell obviously can, but will he end up a frontline spinner? I suppose if Moeen Ali, who pretty much learned his craft as a bowler at international level could, it’s not impossible Bethell can, he’s got off to a pretty good start with the ball at international level
Chubb
International Regular
This is McCullum expecting NZ wickets to die and flatten out, looking for an attacking option. Wouldn’t be surprised if Ahmed played a test under those circumstances actually.
To expand a bit, if you look at the pattern of NZ home tests in recent times it is generally a tight first innings (unless visiting sides don't make the most of helpful conditions bowling first, which is the other way these games go) followed by a big third innings and a long slog to bowl out a side in the fourth. Because the pitches usually die. In that case a legspinner would be a helpful point of difference.
Last edited:
Third_Man
State 12th Man
They have, as recently as in Pakistan a couple of years ago. They gave a test debut to a (nother) white ball specialist who promptly got injured and was never re-selected for a Test match. The selector(s) probably can't remember even if it's less than two years ago as do they have the attention span to remember that far back?
Jarquis
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
He was the first name I saw, so I just assumed we had dropped Leach at first.
LangleyburyCCPlayer
State 12th Man
A leggie is useful anywhere really, if the pitch isn't offering much spin, they'll be able to get more movement than the finger-spinners tbf
Hungry Llama
U19 12th Man
Perhaps Key, or whoever, thought by replacing Smith with another debutant who doesnt usually keep in the CC, they
would hit the jackpot twice. But as theyr taking 3 spinners to NZ [+Bethel], youd think theyd choose a specialist keeper.
would hit the jackpot twice. But as theyr taking 3 spinners to NZ [+Bethel], youd think theyd choose a specialist keeper.
Nintendo
Cricketer Of The Year
Late to the party, but bethel is a crazy selection. If your gonna pick a left field white ball spin bowling all-rounder for red ball cricket, why not Livingstone or jacks? Just feels wrong for so many reasons.
Don't get me started with Cox as keeper. Reeks of picking bairstow while half fit for the ashes and losing the the first two tests because of his keeping. Or three spinners for a tour of NZ? I know lyon and phillips got some wickets last summer, but come on.
I think I've generally been a pretty fervent believer in mccullum and stokes, but a few calls here are just patently odd.
Don't get me started with Cox as keeper. Reeks of picking bairstow while half fit for the ashes and losing the the first two tests because of his keeping. Or three spinners for a tour of NZ? I know lyon and phillips got some wickets last summer, but come on.
I think I've generally been a pretty fervent believer in mccullum and stokes, but a few calls here are just patently odd.
GoodAreasShane
Cricketer Of The Year
Your one true failing as a poster here
On a more serious note though, I would have to agree that even by recent England standards some of the picks are puzzling
Molehill
Cricketer Of The Year
They would have had more credit in the bank had they not folded so abjectly in the 3rd Test in Pakistan. They've somehow got away with some of their bizarre **** in the past (Declaration v Aus, follow on in NZ etc) because they've been good to watch and winning a bit more. But if you stop winning, then the methods come far more into the spotlight. If they lose in NZ (on pitches that should be far more suitable to the team), then changes will have to be made.
Chin Music
State Vice-Captain
Surely Pope must be coming to the end of the road if he fails in NZ? To me, it was the utter inability of him, Crawley and Stokes to provide any sort of valuable ability to adapt that really stuck in the throat. The spinners have their limitations, Bashir doesn't really have as of yet the consistency and tactical intelligence to work over good players and Leach looks penny plain if the pitch hasn't got significant wear most of the time, despite his commendable performances in the first two tests.
Last edited:
Molehill
Cricketer Of The Year
You'd like to think so, but does he have extra leeway because he's the VC? They should make Brook VC for NZ and tell Pope he's got 3 Tests to prove his place.
Kenneth Viljoen
International Regular
Is that the way of Bazball though ?
Chin Music
State Vice-Captain
I edited/expanded my post a little because the relative weakness of the spinners was exposed in comparison to Noman/Sajid. However, that paled compared to the paltry performances of 3 of the top 7 and their skillset against the two bowlers. Pope is surely the most vulnerable because he is more prone to extended runs of low scores. He may well find NZ a happier hunting ground but his relatively good record at 3 in comparison to his weak performances when in the middle order is at risk of simply lowering to lower side of ordinary if a poor series results.
Molehill
Cricketer Of The Year
I'm still not entirely sold on this. If those two were so damn good, why weren't they selected for the First Test? Yes they bowled well, but I've got a feeling our spinners would've been picking up a lot of cheap wickets against Crawley, Pope, Stokes etc too. Pakistan generally had one bat in their middle order who was willing to get his head down and get properly stuck in. Smith showed a brief glimpse of that but even by the second innings he'd been dragged down by the others.