creeeeeeeekeeeeeet

[Prufrock]

Archer must not be 100% or surely he plays. Perhaps he's 90% but with Jimmy coming back they don't want to take two risks.

[jimbo]

For number 3 I’d have been tempted to give Ballance another go. I know he’s been ditched twice, but initially he was a good player and scored some important runs. He seemed to lose confidence and get into a habit of overthinking things and his technique went haywire, but he’s back on form for Yorkshire. Even if not scoring heavily he’s got the ability to hang around and blunt the attack slightly before the middle order come in. Even when he was coming under heavy criticism his record for England wasn’t *that* bad, especially compared to who else has been tried recently.

[Prufrock]

Aye, Curran also seems to have that ability to step up and dig in with the bat when it counts (much like Stokes). Kind of the anti-Moeen. Would've been a risk to only play 5 batsmen plus Bairstow but as Worthy says, not convinced there's anything to lose.

Cannot get my head around Denly batting at 4 though. The only reason he was in the in the first place really was to try to find some semblance of a top order to stop Root coming in at 11.15. Given Burns' shakiness and the fact that even when playing well Roy isn't going to hang around for hours means Root is almost always going to be coming in to their new ball attack. And then a wobbly Denly afterwards.

I’m not sure Curran’s bowling is quite there at the moment. His problem is he’s the weakest of our bunch of ‘not too quick blokes who can swing it’. If you’re picking him ahead of Ali, I’m not sure he’d get much of a go with the ball. If it’s suitable conditions you’d back Anderson, Broad and Woakes to do enough so he wouldn’t be needed. If it isn’t, he’s unlikely to offer anything more than the others, and a different type of bowler would be needed. Agreed he’s good for some lower order runs, but not sure that alone warrants a place.

Denly, I used to like. Always felt he could have had a decent England career if given a go 8 or 9 years ago. Can’t help but feel he’s on the wane now.

Also agreed on Root at 3 - he’ll be in before 11.20 in more than half the innings this summer.

Think that all got mixed up as I started replying to Worthy then Bruce posted. I was initially talking about Curran v Denly. Would leave you v short on specialist batsmen (though would probably mean Stokes wouldnt need to bowl at all, and would you rather have Stokes as a batsmen and Curran as an all rounder 5th bowler, or Denly as a batsmen and Stokes as an all rounder 5th bowler?)

Could do with Moeen stepping up. Depending on the pitches you'd think it's a straight fight between him Broad and Woakes assuming Archer comes back in. On form I don't think he'd make it, but being the only spinner he probably will.

[jimbo]

Has Moeen got over the nonsense yet where he has to be called the second spinner?

[BWFC_Insane]

For number 3 I’d have been tempted to give Ballance another go. I know he’s been ditched twice, but initially he was a good player and scored some important runs. He seemed to lose confidence and get into a habit of overthinking things and his technique went haywire, but he’s back on form for Yorkshire. Even if not scoring heavily he’s got the ability to hang around and blunt the attack slightly before the middle order come in. Even when he was coming under heavy criticism his record for England wasn’t *that* bad, especially compared to who else has been tried recently.

And the thing is - he's the type we need. A blocker.

[jimbo]

For number 3 I’d have been tempted to give Ballance another go. I know he’s been ditched twice, but initially he was a good player and scored some important runs. He seemed to lose confidence and get into a habit of overthinking things and his technique went haywire, but he’s back on form for Yorkshire. Even if not scoring heavily he’s got the ability to hang around and blunt the attack slightly before the middle order come in. Even when he was coming under heavy criticism his record for England wasn’t *that* bad, especially compared to who else has been tried recently.

And the thing is - he's the type we need. A blocker.

Yeah, he was jettisoned for spending ages getting a load of 20s. Our expectations of the top 3 are so low that consistently doing that this series would be a success and protect the middle order for long enough.

[Prufrock]

No pressure on Joe then to be captain, in at 3 and No1 spinner .

[jimbo]

No pressure on Joe then to be captain, in at 3 and No1 spinner .

He’s the only one who can catch at slip as well.

[Worthy4England]

No pressure on Joe then to be captain, in at 3 and No1 spinner .

He’s the only one who can catch at slip as well.

His Keeping is a bit shit though, as I understand it...

[Bruce Rioja]

I don't know if any of you have seen this. I wasn't sure whether to put it in this thread or the politics thread. Someone sent it me a few weeks ago. It's a superb piece by Marina Hyde in The Guardian about Geoffrey Boycott. I've never hidden my lifelong dislike of Boycott, as a cricketer, as a pundit or as an outspoken, over-opinionated bloke. Now I find I'm also at complete odds with him on Brexit too.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/ ... it-no-deal

[jimbo]

I don't know if any of you have seen this. I wasn't sure whether to put it in this thread or the politics thread. Someone sent it me a few weeks ago. It's a superb piece by Marina Hyde in The Guardian about Geoffrey Boycott. I've never hidden my lifelong dislike of Boycott, as a cricketer, as a pundit or as an outspoken, over-opinionated bloke. Now I find I'm also at complete odds with him on Brexit too.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/ ... it-no-deal

I know we’ve disagreed on his punditry before. I find him pretty astute and switched on to the modern game for a bloke of his age. Also very quick to spot any technical deficiencies in players. I don’t disagree about the rest of it though.

To carry on your tangent - how good has Marina Hyde’s writing been recently?! That column one of many.

[Prufrock]

Exhibit no. 1

IMG_20190731_173450.jpg (55.68 KiB) Viewed 2210 times

[Bruce Rioja]

I know we’ve disagreed on his punditry before. I find him pretty astute and switched on to the modern game for a bloke of his age. Also very quick to spot any technical deficiencies in players. I don’t disagree about the rest of it though.

To carry on your tangent - how good has Marina Hyde’s writing been recently?! That column one of many.

We have, Jimbo, and I fully take on board what you're saying, I just find it almost impossible to get past the bluff Yorkshirean with his sticks of rhubarb and what have you. Sounds to me, by the way, like Michael Vaughn's recognised that there'll become a vacancy in that department at some point and is currently developing his routine.

Of the tangent, I hadn't heard of Marina Hyde until I received this link, Now I track her work down when I can. What a talent.

[BWFC_Insane]

For number 3 I’d have been tempted to give Ballance another go. I know he’s been ditched twice, but initially he was a good player and scored some important runs. He seemed to lose confidence and get into a habit of overthinking things and his technique went haywire, but he’s back on form for Yorkshire. Even if not scoring heavily he’s got the ability to hang around and blunt the attack slightly before the middle order come in. Even when he was coming under heavy criticism his record for England wasn’t *that* bad, especially compared to who else has been tried recently.

And the thing is - he's the type we need. A blocker.

Yeah, he was jettisoned for spending ages getting a load of 20s. Our expectations of the top 3 are so low that consistently doing that this series would be a success and protect the middle order for long enough.

I'm warming to this idea. Ballance at 3 and Root and 4 would make a lot of sense and give us some semblance of a top order than on paper at least looks balanced (pardon the pun).

We desperately need someone who can blunt the bowling and Ballance might be it. I imagine our top order will have very little resistance as it stands. I'm expecting 4/5 down by lunch frequently this series for both sides. I just feel their world class batsman in Smith is better than ours in Root and that for me is the only real point of difference. If Smith averages an extra few that could be the difference between the two sides.

[Worthy4England]

I think we've moved on from Ballance and moving back to him probably isn't the right thing. In his 6 innings against Australia, he averages 20 and lasts an average of 8 overs at the crease...

I agree that might be longer than some we've picked, but having moved on, I'm not sure we should move back.

[BWFC_Insane]

I think we've moved on from Ballance and moving back to him probably isn't the right thing. In his 6 innings against Australia, he averages 20 and lasts an average of 8 overs at the crease...

I agree that might be longer than some we've picked, but having moved on, I'm not sure we should move back.

And we've moved on from 29 year old Ballance to 33 year old Denly?

I get your point - its just our batting line up is not only full of shite but also not balanced properly. Root doesn't want to come in at 3 and behind Roy and Burns almost certainly should be protected from that. Denly is a nothing player who certainly if anything at test level is a very average number 5.

We're picking from a poor pool to put together a non-ideal batting line up. Personally I'd not have Burns or Denly anywhere near it and Ballance is as good a shout for a number 3 as I've heard....

[Worthy4England]

I think we've moved on from Ballance and moving back to him probably isn't the right thing. In his 6 innings against Australia, he averages 20 and lasts an average of 8 overs at the crease...

I agree that might be longer than some we've picked, but having moved on, I'm not sure we should move back.

And we've moved on from 29 year old Ballance to 33 year old Denly?

I get your point - its just our batting line up is not only full of shite but also not balanced properly. Root doesn't want to come in at 3 and behind Roy and Burns almost certainly should be protected from that. Denly is a nothing player who certainly if anything at test level is a very average number 5.

We're picking from a poor pool to put together a non-ideal batting line up. Personally I'd not have Burns or Denly anywhere near it and Ballance is as good a shout for a number 3 as I've heard....

I didn't suggest Denley for Ballance was moving on - had I spotted I'd missed Buttler in my 11, then Denley would've been gone. I don't think age has anything to do with it - If I had a 37 year old top 5 batsman that I thought was going to average over 40 - they're in. If Denley bats like David Steele did against the West Indies then it'll have been the right choice, but I don't see that occurring. I don't see the Ashes as a "building for the future" test series - the Ashes are the reason we play test cricket, they're our world cup - so the best here and now is what's required (for me).

2014-2015 was when Ballance made test runs having just come on the scene (except in the Ashes where he averaged 20). Since then at test level, he's averaged 21 v Saffers, 28 v Pakistan and 6 against Bangladesh.

[jimbo]

I’m not for one minute suggesting Ballance is a player or the future, more a pragmatic approach for now in the hope he can dig in a little. The fact I’m even considering him an option shows how far we’ve fallen.

I did see a good statistics based analysis on Stokes and whether he could do well batting at 3 which made many good arguments. He’s probably technically our best after root, and stats show him doing better when coming in earlier in the innings.

[TANGODANCER]

Here's hoping the current wet climate doesn't ruin things. Our back garden is like Lake Windermere right now. Come on England.....

[BWFC_Insane]

I’m not for one minute suggesting Ballance is a player or the future, more a pragmatic approach for now in the hope he can dig in a little. The fact I’m even considering him an option shows how far we’ve fallen.

I did see a good statistics based analysis on Stokes and whether he could do well batting at 3 which made many good arguments. He’s probably technically our best after root, and stats show him doing better when coming in earlier in the innings.

I think he will become a number 3 if his batting continues to progress. I would be tempted to try him there this summer to be honest if the first test doesn't go well especially.

He's got the mentality now I'm just not sure whether technique is quite ready for potentially facing Starc and Cummins with the new ball in over 3 at Lords....