• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

Smith not Robinson to keep wicket


MustardAndOnions said:
Yeah fair play, just my view, I never thought he was fit to lace bairstow’s boots meself. But that was the fault of Ed smith who for some reason brought Buttler in the side. Anyway that’s old ground!

Foakes was v good in stokes first summer tbf
Click to expand...
Nothing against Foakes but the game has moved on

There is still a thought process amongst some cricket fans that a specialist great wicketkeeper like Foakes, is more important than a good wicketkeeper who bats very well.

It’s not the way every cricketer nation thinks in the modern cricket world
 
Key and McCullum zany show. Marginally less contraversial than picking 18-20 year old spinners.
Voice of fair play said:
Nothing against Foakes but the game has moved on

There is still a thought process amongst some cricket fans that a specialist great wicketkeeper like Foakes, is more important than a good wicketkeeper who bats very well.

It’s not the way every cricketer nation thinks in the modern cricket world
Click to expand...
Foakes is a good batsman, he isn't Chris Read.
 
Last edited:
smoker said:
Key and McCullum zany show. Marginally less contraversial than picking 18-20 year old spinners.

Foakes is a good batsman, he isn't Chris Read.
Click to expand...

He’s not a test match batsman Like

I wouldn’t have him in my top 3 keeper bats

Crawley and Duckett have worked class, our best partnership since cook n Strauss. That too zany for yah?
 
MustardAndOnions said:
He’s not a test match batsman Like

I wouldn’t have him in my top 3 keeper bats

Crawley and Duckett have worked class, our best partnership since cook n Strauss. That too zany for yah?
Click to expand...
Are Buttler and Bairstow unironically two of them?
MustardAndOnions said:
Crawley and Duckett have worked class, our best partnership since cook n Strauss. That too zany for yah?
Click to expand...
Irrelevant.

If you're going to pick a wicketkeeper batsman on batting form then it's Ollie every day of the week.
 
Last edited:
smoker said:
Are Buttler and Bairstow unironically two of them?

Irrelevant.

If you're going to pick a wicketkeeper batsman on batting form then it's Ollie every day of the week.
Click to expand...

Bairstow is miles better cricketer than foakes like. And Robinson and smith ahead of foakes. He’s not test level

I agree I’d picked Robinson btw just think you’re too easy on the attack against them

Selection has been very good since they took over, a lot better than the root years
 
Plus he’s one dimensional as a test batsman that pathetic innings in India when batting with Bashir 4 dot balls and a single off 5th for over 10 overs.

I also think his overall standard of keeping was giving to much credit good keeper but ti here some people talk about like he was an all time great keeper which he really is not.
 
Durham-Mackem41 said:
Plus he’s one dimensional as a test batsman that pathetic innings in India when batting with Bashir 4 dot balls and a single off 5th for over 10 overs.

I also think his overall standard of keeping was giving to much credit good keeper but ti here some people talk about like he was an all time great keeper which he really is not.
Click to expand...

I agree yeah

Only decence of bairstow I’d give is he’s been away from home for like 6 months. He’s knackered at this point
 
smoker said:
Are Buttler and Bairstow unironically two of them?

Irrelevant.

If you're going to pick a wicketkeeper batsman on batting form then it's Ollie every day of the week.
Click to expand...
That why you have selectors and people who pick sides.

If you just picked them on averages and form alone would need to pay selectors.

I would have picked Robinson but not up to me.

The Crawley, Duckett point was not irrelevant as it proves it’s not as simple as just picking people on form
 
Last edited:
Voice of fair play said:
That why you have selectors and people who pick sides.

If you just picked them on averages and form alone would need to pay selectors.

I would have picked Robinson but not up to me.

The Crawley, Duckett point was not irrelevant as it proves it’s not as simple as just picking people on form
Click to expand...

aye. I still see on twitter people moaning saying how hasn’t so n so not been picked, he averages 60 etc

It’s not just how many, it’s when, where, against who etc

I love CC like, proper love it, but some of it has little relevance to test cricket
 
I’m seeing all over people saying Stokes must be fuming/gutted that Robinson has been overlooked. That’s a load of tosh. As above, if Stokes wanted him he would’ve had him.
I had a look at the numbers yesterday re Smith & Robinson.

Smith’s career average is around 2 higher than Robinson’s. 40.80 v 39.09.

Robinson’s SR is around 9 higher than Smith’s. 67.94 v 58.58

Robinson’s 2024 average is around 32 higher than Smith’s. 82.66 v 50.70

Robinson’s 2024 SR is around 10 higher than Smith’s. 86.81 v 76.93

Keeping stats are a massive difference but probably not fair to compare due to Smith not actually keeping for his county.

I know it’s not always about the stats, and they only tell part of the story, but I’m struggling how you can look at those numbers and still pick Smith over Robinson.
 
Last edited:
scotch said:
If Stokes wanted him, hed be playing, if it is Smith then theyve seen something that they want for the Ashes.
Personally think Bashir if picked over Leach is a view to wanting to mold him at test level like Lyon
Click to expand...

I love Leach, I think is by far best spinner in country, and has been so unlucy with injuries

But TBF to England made some big calls for future here, I respect them
 
Lumley End said:
I’m seeing all over people saying Stokes must be fuming/gutted that Robinson has been overlooked. That’s a load of tosh. As above, if Stokes wanted him he would’ve had him.
I had a look at the numbers yesterday re Smith & Robinson.

Smith’s career average is around 2 higher than Robinson’s. 40.80 v 39.09.

Robinson’s SR is around 9 higher than Smith’s. 67.94 v 58.58

Robinson’s 2024 average is around 32 higher than Smith’s. 82.66 v 50.70

Robinson’s 2024 SR is around 10 higher than Smith’s. 86.81 v 76.93

Keeping stats are a massive difference but probably not fair to compare due to Smith not actually keeping for his county.

I know it’s not always about the stats, and they only tell part of the story, but I’m struggling how you can look at those numbers and still pick Smith over Robinson.
Click to expand...
I think it's more likely it's because Smith has already played for England, they know his character, how he gets on with the squad etc. I don't think it's a slur on Robinson, Smith was just the cab off the rank, Robinson could likely be #2 and on current form might be knocking on the door as a batsman alone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top