3rd Ashes Test: England V Australia 29th July

Status
Not open for further replies.


It is quite clear that Bell has been out of form in last 12/18 months or so,but it also clear as day that he is easily in the top 5 batsman in this country by a mile.

Form is temporary class is permanent and he has that in bucket loads.
 
Aleem Dar said:
An interesting read.

Certainly proves Bell is out of form but not many people would deny that.

However, it also blows the myth that he "only scores at 250/3" out the water. Less than 100/3 avg is 62, more than 100/3 avg is 20-odd.
Click to expand...

Love it when stuff like this happens. :lol:
 
TopCat said:
Since 2012


Shame the article ignores the previous 8 years of his career
Click to expand...
So.

Pre-2012, England good. Ian Bell scores runs. Proven fact.
Post-2012, England not so good. Ian Bell still scores runs, and in tough situations.

Yet you're claiming Ian Bell is not worthy of an England place?
 
Aleem Dar said:
Certainly proves Bell is out of form
Click to expand...

A bit more than that though, isn't it?

"Bell's Test career is now in its 11th year, but despite some periods of excellence, his overall report card isn't outstanding."
"Over the last three-and-a-half years, Bell's stats are unquestionably one of the poorest for specialist batsmen.
"One of the most disappointing aspects for Bell over his entire career has been his inability to become a strong batting force up the order."

Aleem Dar said:
Less than 100/3 avg is 62, more than 100/3 avg is 20-odd.
Click to expand...

Those are his stats for batting at number five.
 
smoker said:
A bit more than that though, isn't it?

"Bell's Test career is now in its 11th year, but despite some periods of excellence, his overall report card isn't outstanding."
"Over the last three-and-a-half years, Bell's stats are unquestionably one of the poorest for specialist batsmen.
"One of the most disappointing aspects for Bell over his entire career has been his inability to become a strong batting force up the order."



Those are his stats for batting at number five.
Click to expand...
Pretty hard to come in at number 3, if you're three down mind! :):);)
 
Aleem Dar said:
Pretty hard to come in at number 3, if you're three down mind! :):);)
Click to expand...

His stats for batting at number 4:

Worse than 60/2: 25
Better than 60/2: 35

He does have a surprisingly good career average batting at three mind....(well, compared to four anyway)
 
Aleem Dar said:
So.

Pre-2012, England good. Ian Bell scores runs. Proven fact.
Post-2012, England not so good. Ian Bell still scores runs, and in tough situations.

Yet you're claiming Ian Bell is not worthy of an England place?
Click to expand...
Did I say that? The article that has been quoted looks at his record post-2012 for some arbitrary reason. Throughout his career Bell has scored runs, but has under achieved given his immense talent. The fact that people are using this article to dismiss this fact is North Korean in its fantasy.
I would have Ian Bell in the side every day of the week. I just think he is a better player than his record shows
 
smoker said:
His stats for batting at number 4:

Worse than 60/2: 25
Better than 60/2: 35

He does have a surprisingly good career average batting at three mind....(well, compared to four anyway)
Click to expand...

Even so, I'm on the pro-Bell side of the fence. I can understand the discussion as he has been in frankly woeful form. I just don't think there is that many players who can come in and score like he can. He doesn't do it every innings but then, no one does.

I hope he goes on to score another 50 next innings. And has a couple more years at number three.
 
smoker said:
If Michael Clarke is asked a direct question about an opposition player who is - quite possibly - in last chance saloon, what do you expect him to say?

I doubt very much he'll get five, never mind fifty, in the second innings. A half decent score is generally followed by four or five shit ones in his current form.
Click to expand...
I hope he won't even get a chance to have a bat in the 2nd innings. Same goes for Lyth and Cook :D
 
Bell is clearly a talented player but has simply not produced as much as his talent suggests he should. All this "form is temporary" stuff is garbage - how long does a run of bad performances have to last before it stops being form and starts being an indication that the player in question is not/is no longer good enough? With the exception of the last home ashes series (in which he was very good but let's not get carried away, he averaged 65 not 150), he has generally been shite for three years now. I hope he gets a hundred in the second innings here, but even if he does that doesn't change the fact that he should not be playing based on recent (and not so recent) performances.
 
Sweeper said:
Bell is clearly a talented player but has simply not produced as much as his talent suggests he should. All this "form is temporary" stuff is garbage - how long does a run of bad performances have to last before it stops being form and starts being an indication that the player in question is not/is no longer good enough? With the exception of the last home ashes series (in which he was very good but let's not get carried away, he averaged 65 not 150), he has generally been shite for three years now. I hope he gets a hundred in the second innings here, but even if he does that doesn't change the fact that he should not be playing based on recent (and not so recent) performances.
Click to expand...

English cricket fans and pundits are total technique snobs. Play a beautiful, textbook cover drive, then that makes you a brilliant player, even if you get out in single figures a third of the time because your temperament sucks and you struggle to read line and length. Play like Stokes or Bairstow then you're a slogger, whether you make runs or not. Boycott even had the temerity to describe Stokes as 'a club cricketer' after he hit his ton at Lord's...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top