India 🇮🇳 v England 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 2nd Test Vizag

Also, people go on about Foakes batting as though he's an absolute rabbit. In a team that have won multiple County Championships over the last few years, he's been consistently Surreys top batter. He's a f***ing good batsman in his own right, and if you add the wicket-keeping element, it's absolutely mental the way he's been consistently fucked around
 


chunkyshanhawk53 said:
Well done for ignoring the facts

This regime?

I clearly said 6 years.

Regardless of whether you think they made sound decisions, he’s largely been given 2 tests in a row. Crawley (now averages ~2 more) gets 37 tests in a row.

You don’t think that’s messed around?
Click to expand...
I think the selectors have each time involving him whether 1, 2 or 10 times they have picked him or not have done it for the right reasons what they thought was for the good of the side at the time.

I don’t see that as messing someone around just as making honest decisions for wining games.

If you do fair play.

Selectors can only pick 11 players for a side, and if they do that with only the best interests of winning games at heart I will take that, sometimes they will get it right sometimes wrong
 
Voice of fair play said:
I think the selectors have each time involving him whether they have picked him or not have done it for the right reasons what they thought was for the good of the side at the time.

I don’t see that as messing someone around just as making honest decisions for wining games.

If you do fair play.

Selectors can only pick 11 players for a side, and if they do that with only the best interests of winning games at heart I will take that, sometimes they will get it right sometimes wrong
Click to expand...
Regardless of what you think their motives were, he has been messed around

Crawley got a free pass for ages, thankfully came good, Foakes got 1-2 tests at a time

That’s messing someone around
 
TheRey said:
@Voice of fair play ignoring facts in blind defence of the indefensible? I'm shocked I tell ya


Foakes gets picked last year, we win the Ashes. It's honestly that simple.
Click to expand...
Like I said mate, I thought he should have been picked for The Ashes, I was actually calling for him to be picked and Bairstow and Crawley to be dropped as was many others.

Just making the point that they did it for what they thought best for the side at the time, as long as selectors do that fair play
chunkyshanhawk53 said:
Regardless of what you think their motives were, he has been messed around

Crawley got a free pass for ages, thankfully came good, Foakes got 1-2 tests at a time

That’s messing someone around
Click to expand...
What to you think, did you think they motives were sound? and if he was messed about it was just unlucky, as they could on only pick 11 players.

I think the difference with Crawley and him, again rightly or wrongly was they thought Bairstow would improve the side, but did not think they had other opening batsman who would
 
Last edited:
Voice of fair play said:
Like I said mate, I thought he should have been picked for The Ashes, I was actually calling for him to be picked and Bairstow and Crawley to be dropped as was many others.

Just making the point that they did it for what they thought best for the side at the time, as long as selectors do that fair play

What to you think, did you think they motives were sound? and if he was messed about it was just unlucky, as they could on only pick 11 players.
Click to expand...
I don’t think it’s some conspiracy no. I don’t think it’s golf.

But I think they made unfair decisions. And didn’t let him build a test career. They got it wrong

Sometimes you have to actually build careers, Warne went for plenty to start. Crawley had longer than anyone.

He got nowt. Despite a decent record. And being the best keeper by far

2-3 tests a year is nonsense
 
In the mccullum and stokes world their gut hunches wanted Bairstow and his attacking possibility with the bat

I think it’s pretty much universal that he is miles behind foakes in the keeping stakes and he did drop a canny few in the first two tests of the summer

However a caveat to that was the ridiculous schedule that saw Australia coming in more ready than England did in a home series

Bairstow took one magnificent catch iirc in the last test which got rid of marsh and helped get us over the line as he also took the final catch of the series

I get the impression ongoing that Foakes has more chance of playing overseas than at home
 
chunkyshanhawk53 said:
I don’t think it’s some conspiracy no. I don’t think it’s golf.

But I think they made unfair decisions. And didn’t let him build a test career. They got it wrong

Sometimes you have to actually build careers, Warne went for plenty to start. Crawley had longer than anyone.

He got nowt. Despite a decent record. And being the best keeper by far

2-3 tests a year is nonsense
Click to expand...
I think that more than fair mate.

He has been very unlucky

In sport when you can only pick 11 players and you have two very good ones in the same position sometimes tough decisions are made and the other one is unlucky.

Shilton and Clemence come to mind

I do think tbf if we had better quality alternatives Crawley would not have lasted as long, he was the opposite, he was lucky opening batsman not real good ones about.
 
Last edited:
Voice of fair play said:
I think that more than fair mate.

He has been very unlucky

In sport when you can only pick 11 players and you have two very good ones in the same position sometimes tough decisions are made and the other one is unlucky.

I do think tbf if we had better quality alternatives Crawley would not have lasted as long, he was the opposite, he was lucky opening batsman not real good ones about.

Ray Clemence and Peter Shilton come to mind
Click to expand...
I get that. But the point is that he has been messed about with the odd test here and there

And not because he isn’t a world class keeper at 7, but because the batting or bowling needs work
 
chunkyshanhawk53 said:
I get that. But the point is that he has been messed about with the odd test here and there

And not because he isn’t a world class keeper at 7, but because the batting or bowling needs work
Click to expand...
Yeah fair point again mate we broadly agreeing here, he has clearly suffered to get the extra bowler in imo, we just have a different interpretation of been messed around :D
 
Last edited:
TheRey said:
Also, people go on about Foakes batting as though he's an absolute rabbit. In a team that have won multiple County Championships over the last few years, he's been consistently Surreys top batter. He's a f***ing good batsman in his own right, and if you add the wicket-keeping element, it's absolutely mental the way he's been consistently fucked around
Click to expand...
People go on about Foakes as a rabbit?!

I’m down south, admittedly, but people go on about Foakes as the 2nd cumming of Bradman in the ‘rey
 
Voice of fair play said:
I think tbf with this regime they seem very loyal to the players and when Bairstow came back before The Ashes last year taking into account the brilliant summer he had the year before it was more than understandable he came back into the side, thought Foakes was unlucky as you can only pick 11 players.

I think each time the selectors have replaced him they have done it for no other reason that what they thought best for the balance of the side at that particular moment.

Hopefully Foakes will now get more of a run, because I agree the more run he gets in the side the better he will be.
Click to expand...
That's fair and you can't argue with most of that.

I will say however that since Foakes has come back in, it's evident that we pose much more of a threat bowling wise.

We have taken 20 wickets in both tests. Something that's usually unheard for us in India. Great bowling? In patches by individuals, sure. Collectively? Above average overall. Indian batters have given their wickets a bit more granted but for me the biggest difference is behind the stumps. Any chance that is created by the spinners especially has been taken, no matter how hard. The difference between taking 20 wickets for me has been Foakes. Superb keeping.

My point is, having a great keeper in the side should be a priority. Their batting would be a bonus.
Turner the Cat said:
Question for everyone - talking about Bairstow and his form being poor....

Root's form has been awful in this series and the ODI WC. He's not looked convincing at all. How much longer does he get?
Click to expand...
Until he retires and gives up cricket.
 
Last edited:
Turner the Cat said:
Question for everyone - talking about Bairstow and his form being poor....

Root's form has been awful in this series and the ODI WC. He's not looked convincing at all. How much longer does he get?
Click to expand...
It's pretty simple what they need to do with Root. Which is go against the philopsphy they have with everyone else.

Ask him to just play the way he should rather than the way he thinks he should in this team. Be stern when everyone else has more freedom.

Because he's got completely muddled in trying to do something he can do(but just not as well). Bloke can score at 70s and 80s playing his normal game, without playing ramp shots and dancing down the wicket.
 
mackembhoy said:
It's pretty simple what they need to do with Root. Which is go against the philopsphy they have with everyone else.

Ask him to just play the way he should rather than the way he thinks he should in this team. Be stern when everyone else has more freedom.

Because he's got completely muddled in trying to do something he can do(but just not as well). Bloke can score at 70s and 80s playing his normal game, without playing ramp shots and dancing down the wicket.
Click to expand...
He does average more under Stokes than over his career mind
 

Back
Top