Main Menu

Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 28, 2024, 11:31:55 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Cricket 2019

Started by iamcoop, May 14, 2019, 08:29:50 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Cuellar

I'd forgive Ellyse Perry anything. I hope she goes on and gets a massive score.

Cuellar

And then we can get married

Shoulders?-Stomach!

#1472
Ashes first XI

Main issues:

1) Spin options

50/50 over whether we give Ali 1 last summer of spin, or we shitcan him and go for Leach batting down at 9/10. No point pissing about with Liam Dawson when Ali is probably a better spinner and 'theoretically' better batsmen.

2) Top order batting

I would recall Ballance who has scored 5 centuries and 2 fifties this year at a good average and looks back to his best. He has been a success in the past and still remarkably has the best record of any England batsmen selected for England in the last 6 years to have played over 10 tests. If we hadn't made the mistake of dropping him in the first place and making him fixate on a technical weakness as thought it was the be all and end all, his brain might not have gone to toilet. We won't know if there's a test player left in there unless we give him one last chance.

There's an equally fair argument to try someone else:

- Northeast in form but nothing special record wise and he's 29
- Sibley, still touch and go, but he's young and been having a decent year
- If Hameed gets any runs prepare for half the country to jizz themselves. No pressure, lad.

I would definitely go nowhere near Denly, Gubbins, Hildreth, Crawley. Not Sam Hain who averages 36 in first class cricket ffs.

3) How many all-rounders

If we pick Stokes and Curran how do we get Woakes in the team alongside Broad and Anderson and a spinner without making our batting even lighter. Bizarrely this seems to be the direction the setup are thinking of going in.

4) Backup bowlers

We seem to have no shortage of options here

Woakes, Broad and Anderson is a terrific first line attack in England. And it's not even assured whether Woakes will play. It's those people that will likely win us the Ashes if we win.

Backup:
We now potentially have Archer in the wings, TRJ was a success when he played, they still like Wood and reverse swing/pace could work in England late summer.
Then you have the Currans, Overtons, even Gregory is now being proposed, probably fairly too! It's fair to say that this is a selection issue really. Do we go horses for courses or actually try and get some of these people to replace Broad and Anderson in the next 2/3 years.

Anyway, my 11:

Burns
Roy
Root
Ballance
Bairstow
Stokes
Butter
Woakes
Leach/Ali
Broad
Anderson


Inspector Norse

No way should Ballance be there, the man is to quality fast bowling what a piñata is to excitable Latino children. He was averaging 3,890 in the Championship last time he got recalled and the South African quicks ate him alive.

Shoulders?-Stomach!

#1474
Quote from: Inspector Norse on July 21, 2019, 09:21:15 PM
No way should Ballance be there, the man is to quality fast bowling what a piñata is to excitable Latino children. He was averaging 3,890 in the Championship last time he got recalled and the South African quicks ate him alive.

We have possibly ruined Ballance mentally due to dropping and reselecting so many times. That hardly ever goes well.

However, look at track record:

No-one ever seems to bring up the fact about 18 batsmen since him have not just done worse but significantly worse than Ballance. You don't get 4 centuries and 7 fifties from 23 tests unless you are capable of doing alright. He was averaging 46 when he was dropped. And literally no-one has come in and done better in 4 years.

No-one brings up that Bairstow has only scored 2 more centuries than Ballance despite having played 40 more tests or that he has a lower test average than him! Or that he has clear technical weaknesses in his guard (bowled too many times) and against high quality pace bowling. Because guess what, hardly anyone does well against high quality pace bowling. Alastair Cook rarely did well against high quality pace bowling. His average is based on cashing in on flatter surfaces and the occasions he negotiated the new ball.

No-one brings up that Stokes has only scored 2 more centuries than Ballance despite having played 30 more tests or that he has a significantly lower test average than him (at least Stokes can bowl, eh). He is an all-rounder but is batting in the top 6. In the last era of England having a good team you needed to average 40 to do that. He averages 33.

Both of these men have occupied batting positions for England for years and done worse. Both have shown major technical weaknesses and form slumps and mental weakness. You are not proposing dropping them.

All of Ballance's replacements did significantly worse.

You, nor anyone else when I have this discussion make positive proposals that make sense. You nor they have suggested anyone that isn't 1) a very probable failure without even a good record at first class level (Westley, Jennings, Stoneman) or 2) a total unknown but either way hasn't played enough cricket yet (Pope, Hameed, Duckett). Unless you are able to select someone who doesn't fall into either of those categories you pick the last person to succeed and persevere until someone better comes along. You don't do what England have done and burn through every average Joe gambling that one of them may come off.

However, I agree that trying someone new is fair enough, as the man may be broken by the experience of being treated incredibly unfairly, but it's only 50/50 in my view. No-one is knocking the door down. Sibley may be worth a crack.




Shoulders?-Stomach!

In the last ten years we have given 25 cricketers their debut who have gone on to bat in the top 6 for England. Of those who played more than 8 tests, they fall into the following categories:

Successful test batsmen/Hall of famers

Trott - av. 44
Root - av. 49
-----

Batsmen who have shown they can play competently over sustained periods for England but have also gone through long bad patches and been fucked around

Ballance - av. 37
Bairstow - av. 36
Buttler - av. 35
Stokes - av. 33

-----

Glimpses but ultimately tried and tested failures

Robson - av. 30
Morgan - av. 30
Compton - av. 28
Stoneman - av. 27
Malan - av. 27
Hales - av. 27

----

Total and utter embarrassments

Jennings - av. 25
Vince - av. 24

sevendaughters

Hameed will be lucky to see out this season for Lancashire. He's been terrible. Shame, I got fully behind him, and his brief test run was genuinely impressive.

Shoulders?-Stomach!

By contrast, between 1999-2009 the England selectors managed this run of players

(criteria also 8+ tests)

Vaughan
Trescothick
Key - av. 31   - Didn't make the grade
Collingwood
Strauss
Bell
Pietersen
Cook
Prior
Bopara - av. 32 - Didn't make the grade.

There were only 5 other batsmen picked over that period of ten years (3 of which were during the rebuilding period 1999-2001 and were dropped very quickly)

The contrast is stark. Yes, there was a lot of talent around at once, but they did not drop people on a whim, they did not place much stock in the county championship as a never ending well of players. It was simply a carefully thought through selection policy which placed as much emphasis on fostering the right team environment to give new players the chance to perform, as it did on picking "the right" person. The selection of Collingwood for example, with no mega record to speak of, yet one of the ultimate 'rise to the occasion' players - mentally strong, a world class fielder and team player who not only surpassed himself but demanded others met his standards - was a masterstroke no-one has come close to bettering since. The identification of Trescothick and Vaughan as being ready to play at test level also essential as they became the bedrock in the early 00s of a team that ended up at number 1 in the world by the start of the next decade. Despite the fact they were out of the picture by then, I credit them with having set that train in motion.


Inspector Norse

Quote from: Shoulders?-Stomach! on July 21, 2019, 09:32:05 PM
No-one ever seems to bring up the fact about 18 batsmen since him have not just done worse but significantly worse than Ballance. You don't get 4 centuries and 7 fifties from 23 tests unless you are capable of doing alright. He was averaging 46 when he was dropped.

But he was averaging 63 before he got found out, and that has dropped by 25 - a whole James Vince - over the latter part of his career.

Of those big scores you mention, all the centuries and five fifties came in the space of nine or ten tests, against Sri Lanka and India at home and a hapless Windies away.

He has since then made two fifties in 25 innings against teams with proper pace attacks (and you can make that 27 innings if you include his debut against Australia, before that big-scoring run). Now the likes of Vince have also been dire, but that can't disguise the fact that Ballance's big start against some weak bowling boosts his average, and serious bowlers have completely exposed his flaws, and would exploit that reluctance to move forward and off-stump uncertainty time and time again.

Who else should play? I'd argue that the mess that is the openers aside, there are several players on the fringes whose county records suggest they should get a try. And if we're talking about players who've been fucked about by England, Foakes should have been given much more time to bed in, and most probably for Bairstow - you'll note I've mentioned his lengthy spell of lame form upthread. It is much harder now, though, to identify the players with the X factor in the county game, as it's been shunted to the margins so much, which is why they're turning to the Buttlers and Roys who've proved themselves in the short form. And it's the short-form obsession that I think has led to the likes of Root and Bairstow lacking focus. There's a stat around somewhere showing that England batsmen make, IRC, more 50s (per innings) than any other country's, but that their conversion rate is better only than Zimbabwe. The guys there now have the talent but not the focus.

What is causing the problem is supposedly Root's reluctance to bat at 3. But Smith bats 4, Kohli bats 4, why is there such an issue with England's best batsman wanting to bat in his preferred position? Don't fuck him about to fill a gap.

poo

On Sky the other day sumcunt introduced Robert Key as "England legend"

Shoulders?-Stomach!

QuoteWho else should play? I'd argue that the mess that is the openers aside, there are several players on the fringes whose county records suggest they should get a try.

Why aren't you naming them then? No need to be coy (Jason) Roy.

You can dissect all Ballance's innings but he has played enough tests for his average to be a fair reflection. This record shows only Root in the last 10 years has been selected as a batsmen and done better from 10 tests or more. That doesn't make Ballance god, it simply shows he is likely the next best batsmen we had, flaws and all. And we fucked him about and ruined his mental strength, easily his best asset.

We haven't messed Bairstow around anywhere near as much, in fact he has acted like a baby on a couple of occasions despite perfectly reasonable instructions and still averages less than Ballance from not 23 tests but 60 odd tests.

Remember, debutants should not fall into category 1 or 2 as I outlined above.

Quote1) a very probable failure without even a good record at first class level (Westley, Jennings, Stoneman) or 2) a total unknown but either way hasn't played enough cricket yet (Pope, Hameed, Duckett).

BlodwynPig

Quote from: Shoulders?-Stomach! on July 21, 2019, 08:02:21 PM


Anyway, my 11:

Burns
Roy
Root
Ballance
Bairstow
Stokes
Butter
Woakes
Leach/Ali
Broad
Anderson

beans...
all the beans...

sevendaughters

would beg Cook for one last go around. failing that.

Roy
Burns
Root
Ballance / Livingstone
Bairstow (wk)
Stokes
Curran
Leach
Archer
Wood
Anderson

poo

Roy
Sibley
Root
Bairstow
Stokes
Buttler
Curran
Woakes
Leach
Archer
Anderson


Inspector Norse

Quote from: Shoulders?-Stomach! on July 22, 2019, 07:02:39 AM
Why aren't you naming them then? No need to be coy (Jason) Roy.

Well the most consistent batsman over the last few years has been Northeast, while Sibley is the one making the best case right now; he too-scored against Aus A last week too.
Foakes, as mentioned, should be there on the strength of both his batting and keeping.
Clarke might have got a look-in (he made the squad last year I think) but for the Whatsapp revelations, and that situation seems to have affected his form.

The guys who watch county cricket most presumably see something in the likes of Hain and Pope the way they saw something in Trescothick, Vaughan and others. Hain's first-class record is only decent, but he's excelled in one-dayers, which will impress the current management, and it was he who batted patiently to hold Aus A at bay last week.

Now I don't watch county cricket so maybe there are things about Northeast etc that give the selectors pause. But I do watch test cricket and I remember how Ballance was taken apart by Boult and Southee, and he's never recovered. Whether that was due to technique or due to low confidence as you suggest, only he can know for sure, but he seems to have been written off by the selectors now anyway - and Roy will probably be the only top-order newcomer in the Ashes - so it's academic.

I think of him a bit like Adam Voges (a more extreme example): someone who cashed in big-time when on form, but was found lacking against superior opposition.

Regarding Bairstow, I certainly agree that he's not really deserved his place over the last couple of years. But his record is mitigated a little by having often batted down the order and sacrificed his wicket looking for quick runs before running out of partners. And his ODI form earns him goodwill.

sevendaughters

I think Livingstone and Pope are the ones that they see "class" in and if they're going to do that then they may as well gamble.

sevendaughters

I have to say I am a bit worried about this Ashes. It will probably be a bowler's feast and they've probably got more in the way of nuggety resistance and accumulation. Even someone like Cummins has shown he's an absolute twat to get out when you really want a wicket. Starc and Anderson probably as good as each other, ignore the fact that Anderson will be 37 - he's as hot as ever. Lyon is better than any spinner we have right now. Their good batsmen have been gently playing themselves into form around England while no one for us has really put their hand up. Tickets for day 5 at OT are still on sale...I can't see too many games going past 3 and a bit.

Prediction: 3-2 to them.

I hope it is a bowlers series. No individual score higher than 38. Broad can lose a leg.

poo

Very much looking forward to the inevitable batting collapse against Ireland.

Harry Badger

Quote from: poo on July 22, 2019, 04:25:44 PM
Very much looking forward to the inevitable batting collapse against Ireland.

I've got a ticket for the third day of that test so hopefully we don't roll Ireland out completely before then. Wouldn't be at all surprised if there is a case of after the Lord Mayor's show for the world cup players.

poo

At least we'll get decent highlights on normal telly at a sensible time unlike the woeful shit Channel 4 laid on for the WC.

What I'll be doing is recording the cunts and watching them at 9 after the kids have gone to bed. Just so you know. Might even have a CHEEKY whisky eh lads? A CHEEKY one. You know, CHEEKY little whisky? Ooh, cricket's on, METHINKS I'll have a CHEEKY whisky. Just a CHEEKY little one. Ashes on the telly, CHEEKY whisky #winning.

poo

Quote from: Harry Badger on July 22, 2019, 04:31:30 PM
I've got a ticket for the third day of that test so hopefully we don't roll Ireland out completely before then.

Of course we won't you fucking mental cunt.

Harry Badger

Quote from: poo on July 22, 2019, 04:35:33 PM
Of course we won't you fucking mental cunt.

Totally possible if Ireland bat first, all out 130-odd, England bat for a day, then rip through them again. Maybe not inside two days but could be looking at the game being done well before end of the third. As I say, it wouldn't surprise me if the world cup hangover sees us a little less sharp than that.

poo

Well yes. Sorry Harry I was being silly. I don't really think you're a mental cunt.

poo

we need some kind of competition/sweepstake type thing I think, to maintain interest in the Ashes when things start to get bleak.

Harry Badger

Quote from: poo on July 22, 2019, 10:12:10 PM
Well yes. Sorry Harry I was being silly. I don't really think you're a mental cunt.

I am a bit. Supposed to be in the mid-thirties in London all week so I suspect it will be a decent batting track.

Cuellar

Sorry, how is any of this helping me and Ellyse Perry get married?

sevendaughters

Dial M For Murtagh will be tricky on his home deck, I fancy.

sevendaughters

Jimmy 'injured' for Ireland game. I think they're just not taking the chance.

What was billed as Australia v Australia A down at Hants has become the Brad Haddin XII v Graeme Hick XII, mixing up the probables with the possibles. No major news except Warner got out for buttons.

PowerButchi

Mon the Hick XII. I'd support a Hick team over anythig in the world  my hard on for Graeme Hick is such.