Ballance for Number 3?

The Rat

Striker
Ballance isn’t better than Ramprakash . Both Hick and Ramprakash would have fared much better under the central contracts system . Ramprakash was also thrown in as a 21/22 year old and played his first 8 or nine tests against Walsh, Patterson , Marshall , Ambrose, Waqar , Mushtaq and Akram . As good as the game has seen in terms of attacks . I think it probably broke him but he was a superb technician and very brave . Not sure Ballance likes it when it gets really quick
Nah those 2 players get so much excuses, they weren't good enough and never would have been, mentally they didn't have it

The ones who did, Hussain, Thorpe, Atherton etc made success of it

The quality of attacks around the world right now is unbelievable by the way too
 

The Rat

Striker
Ballance should be in the side, as the quaility of batting in England in county cricket is relatively bare.

Just not at number 3
People never look closely at the specifics n just lump his whole career together

He got 2 recent recalls

One he was bang out of form but scraped to a 100 against Middlesex infrom of Strauss, he should never have been recalled n he said himself he was playing poorly

Next recall he was averaging over 100, but they put him in at 3 which he isn’t, he still batted time but broke a finger n couldn’t get back in

That last recall wasn’t a failure he never got a chance

I’d be more up for your shout of root at 3 if it meant Ballance batting 5 as he’d score runs
 
People never look closely at the specifics n just lump his whole career together

He got 2 recent recalls

One he was bang out of form but scraped to a 100 against Middlesex infrom of Strauss, he should never have been recalled n he said himself he was playing poorly

Next recall he was averaging over 100, but they put him in at 3 which he isn’t, he still batted time but broke a finger n couldn’t get back in

That last recall wasn’t a failure he never got a chance

I’d be more up for your shout of root at 3 if it meant Ballance batting 5 as he’d score runs
Ballance at 5 probably wouldn't be a bad shout, are you batting Bairstow at 4?
 
People never look closely at the specifics n just lump his whole career together

He got 2 recent recalls

One he was bang out of form but scraped to a 100 against Middlesex infrom of Strauss, he should never have been recalled n he said himself he was playing poorly

Next recall he was averaging over 100, but they put him in at 3 which he isn’t, he still batted time but broke a finger n couldn’t get back in

That last recall wasn’t a failure he never got a chance

I’d be more up for your shout of root at 3 if it meant Ballance batting 5 as he’d score runs
Yeah to me it's simply unfair to throw people in the deep end, all the time, and with Ballance they is also the clear fact he is in form and scoring runs, so give him the best chance of building his confidence up at test level and that would be 5 for me.
 

The Rat

Striker
Possibly you only have to look at Root who was given his test debut high up the order but struggled against the new ball.

Fortunately for England he was given another chance lower down the order and flourished.
Trott made 100 on debut there in ashes

You probably have a point

But I think it’s more to do with conditions last 2 or 3 years, ball done a lot more.
 
I know everyone seems to hate him, but some interesting stats on his batting from Twitter.

"In first-class cricket, he reaches 50 in 34.9% of his innings. That's better than Cook or Root. " Comparisons below in %

50's
Ballance: 34.9 Root: 34.4 Cook: 33.3 Bell: 31 Burns: 29.9 Bairstow: 29.8 Trott: 29.5 Hildreth: 29 Gubbins: 28.6 Moeen: 27.5 Clarke: 26.7 Pope: 26.3 Malan: 26.1 Denly: 24.9 Bopara: 24.1 Roy: 23.5 Stokes: 23.3 Westley: 23.2 Foakes: 23.1 Vince: 22.7 Buttler: 22.4 Jennings: 18.6

100's
Ballance: 14.6 Cook: 12.4 Clarke: 11.9 Bell: 11 Hildreth: 11 Root: 10.5 Trott: 9.8 Vince: 9.2 Bopara: 8.7 Jennings: 8.6 Bairstow: 8.4 Denly: 8.2 Burns: 7.6 Westley: 7.2 Malan: 7 Roy: 6.8 Gubbins: 6.7 Stokes: 6.5 Moeen: 6.1 Foakes: 6.1 Buttler: 3.3
No thanks. He can put all the numbers up he wants, but it doesn't change anything. He's an outstanding county batsman, but he hasn't got the technique for test level. Basically this generation's Graeme Hick.

Mate, we all know how great Ballance's start to his test career was but as happens in international cricket teams worked out his technique and it quickly became obvious he had to be taken out of the firing line. He went away to work on his game and fix his technical weaknesses but when he came back nothing had changed and until it does I don't see how he can be considered for England in test cricket, unfortunately.

If Clarke keeps up his form he will likely be the next one we try.
Non-cricketing reasons will stop him this season.
 
No thanks. He can put all the numbers up he wants, but it doesn't change anything. He's an outstanding county batsman, but he hasn't got the technique for test level. Basically this generation's Graeme Hick.



Non-cricketing reasons will stop him this season.
Yes,but the problem is we clearly have not got a top 6 who have got the technique for test level.

So it’s got to the stage of who would be the next best and Ballance has to be in that criteria.

It’s more of a question of is he in the top 6 best batsman in the country?
 

Top