He's never truly in because of his propensity to do dumb ****Root has to be the dumbest high class batsman in world cricket.
Endorse this punCrawley ain't crawling this morning.
He's no Peter Siddle though.Strauss reckons Yasir Shah is going to be needed 'to tie up an end'. Bloke takes more wickets a test than Dennis Lillee
That's why the competition is so fierce; several players are equally shite.No idea what Strauss is wobbling on about competition for places at the top of the order. Sibley is about the firmest in position and hardly sure about him.
its a minority sport and we prioritise white ball cricket now over red.This is a constant surprise for me. How English cricket is always struggling for batsmen. Even when picking players who aren't doing great or don't look great, the reply is "well actually we have nobody better?" And that is baffling for me.
I was thinking about the almost career-long moaning about Bell being in the team a couple of weeks ago when reading a Cricinfo article about Pope.its a minority sport and we prioritise white ball cricket now over red.
remember the days when people used to moan about bell when all of englands top 7 averaged 40+? lol grand days
Tbf most of the moaning was before Bell became a really good player. Say 2006-9 when we had Strauss, Cook, Vaughan, KP, Collingwood and Bell all averaging 40+ but we didn't really win any series. Part of that was Vaughan being past it and the bowling being crap, but a lot was that Bell never seemed to make enough runs compared to the opposition. Matches were a lot higher scoring at that time and we had guys like Dravid and Kallis coming over to show us how to bat in England.I was thinking about the almost career-long moaning about Bell being in the team a couple of weeks ago when reading a Cricinfo article about Pope.
The crux of the article was that Pope was similar in both style and ability to Bell, and that this meant he was a total godsend to the side. Times have definitely changed.
I posted somewhere else about how it's completely forgotten that Bell successfully overcame his tendency to only make easy runs to become a genuinely top-tier batsman for a while. He's just remembered as an easy runs guy, which is strange and unfair. It would be like if Mitchell Johnson was now remembered as a scattergun disappointment.Tbf most of the moaning was before Bell became a really good player. Say 2006-9 when we had Strauss, Cook, Vaughan, KP, Collingwood and Bell all averaging 40+ but we didn't really win any series. Part of that was Vaughan being past it and the bowling being crap, but a lot was that Bell never seemed to make enough runs compared to the opposition. Matches were a lot higher scoring at that time and we had guys like Dravid and Kallis coming over to show us how to bat in England.
We definately underrated him post 2012-ish when Test cricket in general reverted away from being the high scoring 2000s and people didn't really adjust quickly enough.