Red_Ink_Squid
Global Moderator
Especially as he's one of the few members of the squad in the current WC who hasn't significantly underperformed .Yeah that’s really terrible management. It doesn’t get any worse tbh. Awful for the bloke
Especially as he's one of the few members of the squad in the current WC who hasn't significantly underperformed .Yeah that’s really terrible management. It doesn’t get any worse tbh. Awful for the bloke
Yeah it might say a bit about how little they value the format.Especially as he's one of the few members of the squad in the current WC who hasn't significantly underperformed .
He did it falling off a golf cart.Glenn Maxwell will not play for Australia against us due to concussion rules.
Not that it will make much difference to the result.
Story of his England career really. Played lots last year in the build up to the world T20, then made the squad but dropped from the first XI.Yeah it might say a bit about how little they value the format.
cbf looking it up, did he playmuch T20 stuff for England recently?
According to Key, the players had already agreed these and it was just the announcement so I don’t think it is as bad timing as it maybe looks, though I’d question why need to announce it during a tournament if that’s the case. The timing is unavoidable in a sense given contracts expired on 30/9.Yes, and good luck to him. Whatever my thoughts on him as a player, he deserved better than being told about his contract being terminated in the middle of a WC.
He's nearly 34 and he's played 70 ODI's and 43 T20's. Surprising number to me is that he's only played 77 FC matches, but then I guess he's often been around England squads when FC matches were being played.Yeah it might say a bit about how little they value the format.
cbf looking it up, did he playmuch T20 stuff for England recently?
He wasn’t needed but we recalled Hales because he was injured and Hales has gone now. Bairstow looked imperious in the T20s v NZ so if he wants to be there I’d say we keep him in that format.Not convinced Bairstow is in that team, he wasn't needed for the last World Cup. Jacks should be a guarantee to open.
But Jacks can bowl.He wasn’t needed but we recalled Hales because he was injured and Hales has gone now. Bairstow looked imperious in the T20s v NZ so if he wants to be there I’d say we keep him in that format.
also Salt > Jacks
Agreed. I just don't understand why they revealed the contracts during an already miserable WC campaign. Willey is a fairly limited cricketer but he never let England down and squeezed as much from his talent as he could. He deserved better treatment than he received, both in 2019 and now.Yes, and good luck to him. Whatever my thoughts on him as a player, he deserved better than being told about his contract being terminated in the middle of a WC.
Jacks is a T20 slogger with a fairly average List A record. His bowling is nothing like at Livingstone's level either.But Jacks can bowl.
Erm, sort of. On a good day, anyway. And I say that as Surrey person.But Jacks can bowl.
I thought we were talking T20 what with the World Cup next Summer. In T20's Livingstone's average is 26 with an Economy rate of 8.4. Jacks is 20 and 7.4.Jacks is a T20 slogger with a fairly average List A record. His bowling is nothing like at Livingstone's level either.
Buttler's not going anywhere yet. He's having a bad tournament but he's still a guarantee in the team.Looking at the possible line-up in our ODI team after this WC, given the number of players vying for the opening positions (Jacks, Salt, Crawley and Duckett), I wonder whether Jacks may actually bat somewhere down the order in those games. I know he doesn't at present, but he's probably a better option than the guys currently being touted to bat at 6 or 7 in the side. My other thought is that we all seem to have forgotten that Salt keeps wicket, so we don't need to be playing Jamie Smith (who is more of a red ball player anyway) or any of the other keepers instead of one of the recognised batters. Something like: (1) Crawley (2) Salt (3) Duckett (4) Brook (5) Hain (6) Jacks and then the five proper bowlers. Maybe Pope shoud be in the side instead of one of that top 6.
Dangerous sport, golf. Ask Jonny Bairstow.He did it falling off a golf cart.
****ing brilliant
It's difficult for me to grasp as we won the final on the boundary count. We didn't win the WC on a boundary count, we won the final.The won the WC. They didn't win the WC final. This is not a difficult concept to grasp.
Maybe. I certainly want to move on wrt the captain of the side, and maybe that would help Buttler's batting anyway. Looking at his record, I'd forgotten his very good series in SA at the start of the year tbf, even if his ODI record either side of that series is less than spectacular. As for the games in the WI, if you're right guys like Crawley, Duckett, Brook and Pope won't be available, then we won't be writing off all of the present incumbents just yet anyway. And Buttler will probably captain that side too. Thereafter, who knows?Yeah no way they should be moving on from Buttler. Sure you can debate him being captain or not but he is England's best ever ODI batsman and doesn't play Tests. No reason why he shouldn't play in the West Indies. Surely none of the Tests guys will be there and wouldn't have been even if this tournament was going well.
I actually disagree with Pothas on the Test guys. I could see Crawley, Brook etc being there.Maybe. I certainly want to move on wrt the captain of the side, and maybe that would help Buttler's batting anyway. Looking at his record, I'd forgotten his very good series in SA at the start of the year tbf, even if his ODI record either side of that series is less than spectacular. As for the games in the WI, if you're right guys like Crawley, Duckett, Brook and Pope won't be available, then we won't be writing off all of the present incumbents just yet anyway. And Buttler will probably captain that side too. Thereafter, who knows?