He seems to have improved quickly though.....Never any concern about his death bowling but the selectors were clearly worried about him upfront....he has bowled well with the new ball, and got good wickets with proper wicket taking deliveries....May be a better option than Willey, who can only bowl with the new ball as he gets tonked everywhere...not saying he gets in the XI, but surely a better squad member than Willey??
-
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 Tour of West Indies 2019
- Thread starter Gomez656
- Start date
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Jordan has always been a good death bowler, so if that ends up an area England are struggling in particularly he should be considered. It's kind of made possible by how many allrounders you carry too - he wouldn't have to bowl ten necessarily. If you dig through my posts this is something I've said before too; it's not exactly a knee jerk.
Whether England need to carry someone for such a specialist role is of course a different debate though, and I don't think anyone should suddenly be thinking he's going to bowl an awesome full set of ten based on this. He's still the same bowler he was last week.
Last edited:
Howe_zat
Audio File
Considering he can bat slog overs and field it's not exactly carrying someone for the role, and at least he has previous in actually bowling well at the death.
Other 'specialist death bowlers' we have carried in the past have done none of these things. So it'd be far from a terrible selection.
I think Jordan would probably contribute as much as Willey for example who I wouldn't trust to bowl 10 overs in an ODI, as when batsman get used to him his mediums tend to look very gentle.
I wouldn't go as far as to call Jordan underrated, but perhaps 'needlessly pilloried'
Other 'specialist death bowlers' we have carried in the past have done none of these things. So it'd be far from a terrible selection.
I think Jordan would probably contribute as much as Willey for example who I wouldn't trust to bowl 10 overs in an ODI, as when batsman get used to him his mediums tend to look very gentle.
I wouldn't go as far as to call Jordan underrated, but perhaps 'needlessly pilloried'
Last edited:
Howe_zat
Audio File
My guess is the world cup side right now looks like
Top four
5) Stokes
6) Buttler
7) Ali
8) Woakes
9) Plunkett
10) Some guy
11) Rashid
10) can be any of Willey, Wood, Jordan or a Curran of some description and I don't think any of them have really demanded selection or dropped out of favour completely, though personally I'd be reluctant to include Wood.
Wouldn't be too hard for Archer to claim it so if he's half the bowler these threads tend to claim it'll probably be him
Top four
5) Stokes
6) Buttler
7) Ali
8) Woakes
9) Plunkett
10) Some guy
11) Rashid
10) can be any of Willey, Wood, Jordan or a Curran of some description and I don't think any of them have really demanded selection or dropped out of favour completely, though personally I'd be reluctant to include Wood.
Wouldn't be too hard for Archer to claim it so if he's half the bowler these threads tend to claim it'll probably be him
Starfighter
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I see WI aiming at another sub-100 total.
Starfighter
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Gotta let Willey bowl out here, T20I five-fors a so rare.
theegyptian
International Vice-Captain
These last two games have been good for a laugh. I don't think either team is particularly bothered.
SillyCowCorner1
Moooo
T20s lol
SillyCowCorner1
Moooo
Never mess with the composition of a team that has previously won an away series. Never.
Beamer
International Vice-Captain
Absolutely the selectors got it massively wrong. These guys don't look like they have plan and also look like they can't be arsed.
theegyptian
International Vice-Captain
Worrying for the England ODI side that 2 of the 3 banker bowlers over the last 3+1/2 years have form and fitness issues.
Woakes has been really good with the new ball, and is an excellent number 8 bat but this chronic knee issue is a big issue. His pace has been on the wane for a while but he looked very medium pace during this series, and missing the odd game is hardly reassuring.
Plunkett is injured again, some foot issue. At 33 and nearly 34 he's just about going to make it. Pace has completely gone too. Max speed like 84mph. Heavily reliant on cutters and slower balls now into the middle of the pitch.
Both have been key since the last wc. Woakes with the new ball and clean striker and intelligent number 8 bat. Plunkett bowling middle overs with Rashid (and Ali), no other fast bowler has done much of this for England. Woakes is going to be wheeled out whatever the injury almost - he's too vital to the cause. With Plunkett I dunno- The increasing injury issues, lack of pace - it feels like his output maybe about to go massively down and could be a disaster. However they don't really have any alternatives to him with game time so I feel like they'll stick with him and hope for the best.
Archer would be the guy who could maybe bowl in the middle of the innings for England (tall, good pace, angles it in), but he's got no experience really of doing the Plunkett job. Plunkett's done a very defined role these last few years. He doesn't bowl up front or at the death much. He just bowls through the middle of the innings back of a length with lots of cutters.
Ideally what you want going into a world cup is players with at least 20 or 30 caps who know their role in their side. Should they replace Woakes, and/or Plunkett through form or injury they are going to have to pick some guys who haven't played much and haven't been drilled for that role. That's also a big risk
Woakes has been really good with the new ball, and is an excellent number 8 bat but this chronic knee issue is a big issue. His pace has been on the wane for a while but he looked very medium pace during this series, and missing the odd game is hardly reassuring.
Plunkett is injured again, some foot issue. At 33 and nearly 34 he's just about going to make it. Pace has completely gone too. Max speed like 84mph. Heavily reliant on cutters and slower balls now into the middle of the pitch.
Both have been key since the last wc. Woakes with the new ball and clean striker and intelligent number 8 bat. Plunkett bowling middle overs with Rashid (and Ali), no other fast bowler has done much of this for England. Woakes is going to be wheeled out whatever the injury almost - he's too vital to the cause. With Plunkett I dunno- The increasing injury issues, lack of pace - it feels like his output maybe about to go massively down and could be a disaster. However they don't really have any alternatives to him with game time so I feel like they'll stick with him and hope for the best.
Archer would be the guy who could maybe bowl in the middle of the innings for England (tall, good pace, angles it in), but he's got no experience really of doing the Plunkett job. Plunkett's done a very defined role these last few years. He doesn't bowl up front or at the death much. He just bowls through the middle of the innings back of a length with lots of cutters.
Ideally what you want going into a world cup is players with at least 20 or 30 caps who know their role in their side. Should they replace Woakes, and/or Plunkett through form or injury they are going to have to pick some guys who haven't played much and haven't been drilled for that role. That's also a big risk
Last edited: