Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Guptill's not a very good Test opener. He's going to suck away from home, and he's going to suck at home too against quality opposition in favourable bowling conditions. When he comes up against Pattinson and Hazlewood on the first morning of a Test with the wicket doing a bit, I'm absolutely expecting him to fail. Honestly, 18 was a better return than I think you could regularly hope for.
However, that's not actually a compelling reason to drop him because the same is true of all the other candidates for his spot as well, and at least this incarnation of Guptill has shown signs to suggest he might score runs against weaker attacks in more favourable conditions. I think that's the best that can be expected out of the current crop of non-Latham openers. I like Papps and Brownlie but honestly, cycling through all the blokes in domestic cricket would achieve nothing other than giving up the sort of runs Guptill scored against Sri Lanka in a futile pursuit. If someone starts scoring absolutely massive runs in domestic and/or A-level cricket, or if a promising young opener comes along then sure, drop Guptill. Not a lot of point in doing so at the moment though IMO.
However, that's not actually a compelling reason to drop him because the same is true of all the other candidates for his spot as well, and at least this incarnation of Guptill has shown signs to suggest he might score runs against weaker attacks in more favourable conditions. I think that's the best that can be expected out of the current crop of non-Latham openers. I like Papps and Brownlie but honestly, cycling through all the blokes in domestic cricket would achieve nothing other than giving up the sort of runs Guptill scored against Sri Lanka in a futile pursuit. If someone starts scoring absolutely massive runs in domestic and/or A-level cricket, or if a promising young opener comes along then sure, drop Guptill. Not a lot of point in doing so at the moment though IMO.