• 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.

England v India - Third Test, 10/07

Dexter said:
In fairness to the selectors there’s been plenty of others tried, all of whom have an average lower than Crawley.

Even now the options seem to be to go back to Sibley, Lees, Hameed or a completely unproven Bethell. He’s also the perfect foil for Duckett at the other end and forces bowlers to completely changes their lines and lengths as the two batsmen are chalk and cheese.
Click to expand...
Given Bethell a go then. Sibley, Lees and Hameed are doing the business at County Level in Division 1 (Crawley had several single figure scores in division 2 this year). I really hope Crawley starts and does the business as we all do but on current form I just don't get it and it's very concerning. The Indian and Australian fast bowlers won't be worried about him
 

He will probably get a 80 odd in this test and that’s him selected for the winter

It’s the repetitive and so obvious manner of dismissals with him and if the coaching staff are satisfied seeing that, then imo , they are not doing the job they are well paid to do

Same with Pope over balancing on his front leg and getting bowled and lbw

A top three player should not be getting bowled as much as he does

Having said that , they will only not play , when injured or ill
 
Parkside said:
Depends how you interpret clique i.e. A closely bonded group. It's a fine line between being extremely loyal and hence becoming a clique. Likewise confidence easily creeps into over confidence which becomes arrogance.
Many who have expressed concerns about this have put their head in gear. Perhaps it's those who can't see these shortcomings that need to put their head in gear.
Click to expand...
FFS mate just give owa man :D
 
Dexter said:
In fairness to the selectors there’s been plenty of others tried, all of whom have an average lower than Crawley.

Even now the options seem to be to go back to Sibley, Lees, Hameed or a completely unproven Bethell. He’s also the perfect foil for Duckett at the other end and forces bowlers to completely changes their lines and lengths as the two batsmen are chalk and cheese.
Click to expand...
It's a valid argument to have openers of contrasting stature but that hardly justifies Crawley's inclusion.
 
Parkside said:
It's a valid argument to have openers of contrasting stature but that hardly justifies Crawley's inclusion.
Click to expand...
Might as well have the stature of f***ing Liberty opening the batting. Would at least avoid nicking off outside the line
 
Parkside said:
It's a valid argument to have openers of contrasting stature but that hardly justifies Crawley's inclusion.
Click to expand...
If there was more creditable replacements Crawley would have need dropped months/years ago.

He is incredibly lucky bloke.

He should be dropped imo, but it’s purely down to cricketing reasons and cricket reasons only whether he rightly or wrongly selected.

Furthermore you know that, so stop been a arse you better than that!
 
chunkyshanhawk53 said:
I don’t think there’s a clique personally. I think they genuinely think Crawley is the best man for the job.

And I can see why they thought that. But 56 tests at 31 isn’t good enough. No one else has ever been given that time apart from Hick and Ramprakash (who at least had incredible first class records to fall back on)
Click to expand...
Crawley will play 100 tests barring injury

Undroppable
 
chunkyshanhawk53 said:
I don’t think there’s a clique personally. I think they genuinely think Crawley is the best man for the job.

And I can see why they thought that. But 56 tests at 31 isn’t good enough. No one else has ever been given that time apart from Hick and Ramprakash (who at least had incredible first class records to fall back on)
Click to expand...
Sensible post. Funny it's liked by someone who thinks it's for personal reasons mind :lol:
 
Voice of fair play said:
If there was more creditable replacements Crawley would have need dropped months/years ago.

He is incredibly lucky bloke.

He should be dropped imo, but it’s purely down to cricketing reasons and cricket reasons only whether he rightly or wrongly selected.

Furthermore you know that, so stop been a arse you better than that!
Click to expand...
Mind reader to add to your many talents? I'm simply arguing that imo loyalty is being stretched too far in recent selections. Purely personal opinion.
Thought you were better than to question posters intellect with "put your head in gear" and"stop being an @rse".
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top