• The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state and are still being worked on.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

Ashes first test squad

Status
Not open for further replies.
I would have Root open personally, he has the best technique for test batting in our team by a country mile.
He's virtually opening anyway at 3 so just get him mentally set for it from the off.
In an ideal world he would be at 3 with two quality openers above him....not to be.
What's the difference between opening and coming in at 3 after a couple of overs?

Root
Roy
Bairstow
Curran
Stokes
Butler
Woakes
Ali
Broad
Archer
Anderson

Bollox to the "never will be's" and with that many bowling options there is no need to over work anyone.
Why have an opener who will average around 10? May as well open with bloody Woakes who can at least bowl a bit after losing his wicket.
Bring in a second spinner when the pitch warrants it. Possibly swap Curran and Bairstow if it suits.
 

The Sheepfolds End said:
Stuart Broad wasn’t a batsman at Curran’s age mind. He was opening the bowling for Leics against Durham at the riverside in his late teens IIRC. He was always seen as a bowler who was handy with the bat (with the hope he’d develop into a proper all rounder)
Click to expand...

He was a batsman when he joined Leics - so maybe I am out by a few years, but still.
I'm not having Root at opener mind. No, too much pressure. I think I'm in the keep him at four cap ideally, but needs must. It's a balance though. We need big runs from him.
 
Last edited:
Comeback_Kenwyne said:
He was a batsman when he joined Leics - so maybe I am out by a few years, but still.
I'm not having Root at opener mind. No, too much pressure. I think I'm in the keep him at four cap ideally, but needs must. It's a balance though. We need big runs from him.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't open with Root either. Roy and Bairstow for me. It has its flaws but they've an established understanding from the shorter format of the game and it'd be a signal of intent.
 
We have to make do with what we have but the selection of Denly even going back to the SL tour is one of the worst picks in recent memory. A lazy selection because he had a good T20 year and can turn his arm over in the shorter format. Any selection panel with brain cells should have quickly realised that his bowling would be cannon fodder in test cricket as it proved to be in SL, on spin friendly pitches. The selectors should have been using that tour to put together an Ashes team and pick their best specialist openers and number 3. Roy should have been on that tour in place of Jennings and Denly should have been nowhere near it.
 
The Sheepfolds End said:
I wouldn't open with Root either. Roy and Bairstow for me. It has its flaws but they've an established understanding from the shorter format of the game and it'd be a signal of intent.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I'd pick Bairstow at seven so glaring are his technical deficiencies at the moment. For me, he's a lucky boy that Foakes isn't fully fit.

Would be really unfair to hoy him up the order when he's out of form.
The Breen Machine said:
We have to make do with what we have but the selection of Denly even going back to the SL tour is one of the worst picks in recent memory. A lazy selection because he had a good T20 year and can turn his arm over in the shorter format. Any selection panel with brain cells should have quickly realised that his bowling would be cannon fodder in test cricket as it proved to be in SL, on spin friendly pitches. The selectors should have been using that tour to put together an Ashes team and pick their best specialist openers and number 3. Roy should have been on that tour in place of Jennings and Denly should have been nowhere near it.
Click to expand...

In fairness to Denly he's in-form this year in the County Championship. Not many eligible ahead of him in 1st division averages - Sibley, Northeast, that's about it iirc.

EDIT: just checked and the only other two with more than five innings ahead of him are Ballance and Ravi f***ing Bopara!
 
Last edited:
Comeback_Kenwyne said:
I'm not sure I'd pick Bairstow at seven so glaring are his technical deficiencies at the moment. For me, he's a lucky boy that Foakes isn't fully fit.

Would be really unfair to hoy him up the order when he's out of form.


In fairness to Denly he's in-form this year in the County Championship. Not many eligible ahead of him in 1st division averages - Sibley, Northeast, that's about it iirc.
Click to expand...

I just think it was a completely thoughtless selection without any long-term consideration. The cupboard is pretty bare but to bring in a lad of 32 who's more of a limited overs specialist (And not a fantastic one like Aaron Finch for example), was really poor. Sibley, Northeast, Hain - even Ballance would be better picks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bri
It's interesting that the only player not being suggested to be moved up or down the order is Jos Buttler, the batter who finished top of the averages last summer.
 
Steak Pie said:
It's interesting that the only player not being suggested to be moved up or down the order is Jos Buttler, the batter who finished top of the averages last summer.
Click to expand...

I'd have him at 6, Stokes is more than capable at 5 and that leaves Bairstow at 7 which is probably right on current form and his past record there.
 
Team announced.

Rory Burns, Jason Roy, Joe Root (c), Joe Denly, Jos Buttler, Ben Stokes, Jonny Bairstow, Moeen Ali, Chris Woakes, Stuart Broad, James Anderson.
 
cooky said:
Agreed, especially on Curran. I would just have Roy at 3 and Root 4 then pick 2 openers and back them. Not a huge Burns fan but him and then maybe Sibley - in form and lack of other options. No point moving best player to accomodate shite.
Click to expand...

This, I think, was the most sensible decision. Though you can make a case for Denly being one of the openers given his CC average this year (I know he doesn't play there, but still - he's more in form than Burns and picking two in-form openers doesn't get any easier).

Roy is a three for me and Root a four.
 
Jack Torrance said:
As expected, not sure Archer is 100% fit
Click to expand...

Aye. They'll be managing him and Anderson through this. Think Anderson may miss out at Lords, Archer come back in on a wicket that traditional favours height.

Then they may rest Broad at Headingly (swingers paradise); Woakes at Old Trafford (pace and bounce friendly) and then pick Oval on form.

This is Broady's hurrah I think. Have a feeling Anderson may go on though.
 
Don't like Anderson, Broad and Woakes in the same side. If a Batsman gets in against them or there's no sideways movement they're too similar.
 
I can't get my head around Denley batting at 4. I've advocated him opening as I think he would be a better option than Burns and it's the right decision for Root to bat at 3 but swapping Denley and Root just doesn't make sense to me. Would have liked to see Archer play but I can see why the decision has been made. As has been mentioned earlier, it will be about managing him and Anderson's fitness and keeping Broad's workload down.
 
The Breen Machine said:
I'd have him at 6, Stokes is more than capable at 5 and that leaves Bairstow at 7 which is probably right on current form and his past record there.
Click to expand...

We're told he's a world class batsman, so surely he is the natural choice to move to 3? No?

Maybe with the niggles that Stokes keeps picking up (and some of the superb battling innings he's played recently), his future lies in the Kallis role of no. 3 and occasional seamer.

What a mess we've made of this mind. :mad:
ManBearPig82 said:
Don't like Anderson, Broad and Woakes in the same side. If a Batsman gets in against them or there's no sideways movement they're too similar.
Click to expand...

2017 spec Duke ball in use, it will be moving sideways all day everyday. There's going to be some spells of absolute carnage.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top