LegionOfBrad
International Debutant
Bairstow should be 6 if he's going to be in the team.
-
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 South Africa 2015/16
- Thread starter GIMH
- Start date
Why? He is the keeper, 7 is the standard position.
LegionOfBrad
International Debutant
Yeah I spotted that even before snicko replay. Com's are blind.
indiaholic
International Captain
Think they will go for it.. Going for it won't be anything dramatic though.. Score three runs an over for 140 overs or so..
LegionOfBrad
International Debutant
Because currently he's a miles better bat than Stokes. 7 seems like a brilliant position for Stokes to come in the way he plays.
LegionOfBrad
International Debutant
Going for it on this pitch is the sure way to lose wickets. You bat normally then if you have wickets in hand have a go tomorrow evening.
indiaholic
International Captain
Yup agreed. Pretty sure they won't start a blockathon for a target of 400.
OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I think that's what he meant by "going for it"
Yeah sure you can think he should bat ahead of Stokes, but that is not the same as 'he should be at 6 if he is going to be in the team.'
As it happens there is no way he is a 'miles' better than Stokes, one of them has two test hundreds, it is not Bairstow. He is looking decent at 7, no need to change now.
wpdavid
Hall of Fame Member
Without wishing to be awkward, I can think of several test keepers who have batted in the top 6, so swapping Bairstow and Stokes shouldn't be a problem. I wouldn't make that decision based on one match, but Stokes' batting has been poor for about 10 matches now, so it may well make sense to give the better batsman more time at the crease.
wpdavid
Hall of Fame Member
Absolutely. This situation is nothing like the final test match in India.
From an English pov, I don't think we've quite made the most of these circumstances. I know it's not always easy to get the balance right, and we didn't want to be bowled out for 150, but once we had a start and Steyn was out of the picture, I think we could have set 450 by mid-afternoon without undue difficulty.
flibbertyjibber
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Batted Bairstow. Not enough time to double it.
flibbertyjibber
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I think they will declare at a certain time they have set already. Be it 30 minutes or 40 or more to bowl before tea.
Stapel
International Regular
I'm not so sure about that. A run-a-ball so far. And I don't think Cook will declare as soon as the lead is 400. He'll declare at tea. It's imho the right thing (I know there's a gazillion of you who think that's too late). And that might give Jonny a chance to get to 100.
Tom Halsey
International Coach
Nah I agree with you. Declare too early and you give yourself less time because they'll merely get the runs before the end of the 5th day.
SA's blockathons complicate things slightly but I don't see them blocking the **** out of it immediately if they are set 400 as someone said.
Yeah that is fine, I personally think it is better with Stokes at 6 but there are arguments both ways, I don't think it really matters a huge amount. The point was that Bairstow should only be in the side if he bats 6, which is clearly nonsense.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Then isn't that more of a reason to set them less of a target?
Set them 550, they'll just be ****s and block the game out. Set them 400 and they might have a go for a while and lose a few wickets, hence giving you a better chance to win.