• 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.

*Official* England in India 2023/24 #CryMoreTour

sledger

sledger

Spanish_Vicente
Owzat said:
I absolutely hate those debates, theoreticals come out in their droves with "better keeper is worth 100+ runs" and all kinds of nothing provable

bottom line is the side needs to score enough runs to win, yes dropping catches/missing stumpings CAN cost but ultimately if you are posting 200-250 on a better than that kind of par pitch then doesn't matter - and also depends on bowlers creating chances, not all of which go to the keeper....

and for the record I just hate the debate, was also Stewart vs Russell, how much importance it has ranks in terms of influence an outcome is debatable but the batting, the bowlers, and all fielding play a significant part as do the opposition of course so it's as much the extreme opposite of the elephant in the room
Click to expand...
right yeah ok
 
Owzat

Owzat

U19 Captain
Socerer 01 said:
a lot of verbal diarrhoea to support a **** Bairstow that has only 3 years of good batting output and will likely be the worst cricketer in the 100 test club when he gets there
Click to expand...
tripe, I didn't once suggest Bairstow should keep I merely pointed out that in the ridiculous debate so many arguments are made at the importance of wicket keeping

find me one post I've EVER said Bairstow should keep, in batting form he's lucky to be in the side at all so the "verbal diarrhoea" is from you sunshine....
 
S

Socerer 01

International Captain
Owzat said:
tripe, I didn't once suggest Bairstow should keep I merely pointed out that in the ridiculous debate so many arguments are made at the importance of wicket keeping

find me one post I've EVER said Bairstow should keep, in batting form he's lucky to be in the side at all so the "verbal diarrhoea" is from you sunshine....
Click to expand...
the enlightened both sides are wrong, im the right one argument. havent seen that one in a while
 
Owzat

Owzat

U19 Captain
Chin Music said:
I don't get the counter arguments re Foakes. At test level he is a solid no.7 bat, not outstanding but decent and a high class keeper. Bairstow is a mediocre keeper at best, and probably worse than that in Asia with the potential for exciting innings but short of the highest tier of batting by some distance.
Click to expand...
at present it struggles to be even a debate, yet debated it gets. At which point since some false accusations and consideration of my stance fallacious, I'll duck out as I'm fuelling a debate I loathe.... (and not actually debating it, just pointing out the weakness of arguments in the keeper's favour which ironically when it comes to "pick your best keeper" side of it will invariably mention their batting in a favourable context - in Read's case it was often "pick the best keeper, oh and Read has a brilliant FC average this season" !!!!)
 
BazBall21

BazBall21

International Vice-Captain
The dismissal may or may not still have happened, but there was definitely a flick of the switch from Foakes after tea. England needed him to keep playing his natural game and bat with Root for as long as possible. Three proper tailenders exposed now. Foakes could have made more runs and so could Root if Foakes stuck around. Root also isn't as good as Stokes with the tail.

Even if Root finishes on an unbeaten century, England have left a few runs out there. You don't do that in the first innings of a test match. Particularly in a must win game.
 
Owzat

Owzat

U19 Captain
so Michael Yawn is saying this is on for par, not sure how you can conclude anything about par with one side yet to bat, comparing England batting with India in India is a fool's errand, and early help in the wicket seen off it is possible to score runs/stay in
 
C

Chin Music

State Vice-Captain
Owzat said:
at present it struggles to be even a debate, yet debated it gets. At which point since some false accusations and consideration of my stance fallacious, I'll duck out as I'm fuelling a debate I loathe.... (and not actually debating it, just pointing out the weakness of arguments in the keeper's favour which ironically when it comes to "pick your best keeper" side of it will invariably mention their batting in a favourable context - in Read's case it was often "pick the best keeper, oh and Read has a brilliant FC average this season" !!!!)
Click to expand...
I also found the Jones/Read debate nauseating. Jones clearly had talent with the bat but was rather awful with the willow after his first year whereupon he barely averaged 25. Then you had Read who averaged about 18 with the bat if my memory isn't failing me.

The Stewart/Russell one was more nuanced. You were sacrificing Stewart's world class opening/top order ability to try and better balance the side. Stewart averaged about 46 without the gloves and 34 with the gloves in an era with a myriad of world class fast bowling attacks.
 
Molehill

Molehill

International Captain
social said:
Far be it for me to support a Pom but some of you have obviously forgotten how dog**** Bairstow was behind the stumps during the Ashes

Byes would be India’s top scorer if he was keeping
Click to expand...
Some of us haven't forgotten, whilst the declaration in the First Test was daft, it was still his drops that cost the game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top