The "Channel 9 Commentary Is Hurting Brain" Thread

[Jono]

I wouldn't argue with that. KP is another one that certain pundits have always said should bat higher up the order. He started at 5, was comfortable and did well there, and I've never understood the clamour to turn him into a top order player.

I guess it was because Collingwood was batting at 4, and just didn't look the part.

#4 (like #3 always used to) has become a position of greats, simply because Lara and Sachin batted there for so long (and Kallis then moved from 3 to 4).

#3 always had that "oh he better be damn good to be batting there", but it's become similar with #4 as well.

It's interesting because I agree, KP to me is a #5. Bell can be a #4, but I don't see the need to make the change. I'd put Bell at #5 maybe to allow the new batsman to go #6.

I definitely wouldn't move Trott.

 

[zaremba]

It's interesting because I agree, KP to me is a #5. Bell can be a #4, but I don't see the need to make the change. I'd put Bell at #5 maybe to allow the new batsman to go #6.

I definitely wouldn't move Trott.

As I said before, I wouldn't argue against Bell 4 and KP 5, but I think your analysis is actually spot-on. Given how well he's been playing I think Bell at 6 was maybe a bit low, and that gets neatly resolved by bringing the new man in at 6. My vote I think goes to Morgan at this stage, who happens to be someone potentially very well suited to no 6.

 

[Howe_zat]

Still don't think that he's cut out for Test cricket, not sure he ever will be for me. Way too loose in defence and seems very easy to rattle, this bowling would come in handy what with Colly's retirement though. People seem to be underrating Trott's bowling as well he can certainly do the same job that Colly's done for England ever now and again. So in short I'd still go for a proper batsmen.

Stat attack: Colly's bowled 10000 balls in First Class cricket exactly.

Do we really need a batsman who bowls a slightly better variety of pie than the batsmen currently in the side?

I'm not convinced he's a better 5th bowling option than Jonathan Trott anyway.

Collingwood as an all round package might prove a little more difficult to replace than perhaps anticipated (I've no idea how Morgan, Taylor or Hildreth compare in the field) but his bowling has never really been utilised all that often in Tests. He's good for a couple of tidy overs of medium pace to give the quicks a breather, no reason why Trott can't take over that mantle.

Fair enough. Just throwing it out there. I for one still think England could do with an extra bowler but maybe not during the English summer, so they can sit and wait on the idea for now. Would be happy to see Morgs or Hildreth play at #6.

Morgan seems to me to be a very sprightly fielder, if not quite Colly standard. As a player to have around the side, Colly is a huge loss.

 

[howardj]

Surely Benaud's last Ashes summer.

 

[Burgey]

As I said before, I wouldn't argue against Bell 4 and KP 5, but I think your analysis is actually spot-on. Given how well he's been playing I think Bell at 6 was maybe a bit low, and that gets neatly resolved by bringing the new man in at 6. My vote I think goes to Morgan at this stage, who happens to be someone potentially very well suited to no 6.

He's a lefty too isn't he? Breaks up the right handed middle order quite well.

 

[Howe_zat]

He's a lefty too isn't he? Breaks up the right handed middle order quite well.

Yup. I've just realized that Morgan aside, England haven't had a left-handed middle order bat since Graham Thorpe. Checking, The only lefties to play 50+ Tests in the middle order for England are Thorpe, Gower and Wooley.

 

[Prince EWS]

Yup. I've just realized that Morgan aside, England haven't had a left-handed middle order bat since Graham Thorpe.

Cook and Strauss both batted three a couple of times, and Broad's batted seven. Not to mention the nightwatching of Jimmy Anderson.

I guess it depends on how you define "middle order batsman" (three and seven could be termed top and lower order respectively), and also how much of a douche I want to be in reply (quite a lot, so it seems).

 

[Howe_zat]

Cook and Strauss both batted three a couple of times, and Broad's batted seven. Not to mention the nightwatching of Jimmy Anderson.

I guess it depends on how you define "middle order batsman" (three and seven could be termed top and lower order respectively), and also how much of a douche I want to be in reply (quite a lot, so it seems).

I was commenting on the style of batsman rather than literally where they batted. Even when Strauss bats at three, he's still an opener who happens to be batting at three. #7 isn't really a middle-order spot, 30 years ago it was the start of the tail.

 

[GIMH]

Cook and Strauss both batted three a couple of times, and Broad's batted seven. Not to mention the nightwatching of Jimmy Anderson.

I guess it depends on how you define "middle order batsman" (three and seven could be termed top and lower order respectively), and also how much of a douche I want to be in reply (quite a lot, so it seems).

Wac

 

[Burgey]

I was commenting on the style of batsman rather than literally where they batted. Even when Strauss bats at three, he's still an opener who happens to be batting at three. #7 isn't really a middle-order spot, 30 years ago it was the start of the tail.

This series it was the start of our better batsmen, save Hussey.

 

[zaremba]

The only lefties to play 50+ Tests in the middle order for England are Thorpe, Gower and Woolley.

Wouldn't mind watching that lot batting together tbh