• The forum upgrades are now largely complete.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

New Zealand v England 3rd test Hamilton

Voice of fair play said:
Aye it’s a real difficult one as I really think just my opinion that they is not many if any better opening options out there, so Crawley a very lucky boy and think that one of the reasons he has been given soo long.

And of course at times he has looked simply superb, one of the days in the fourth test against the Aussies he absolutely destroyed them.

However has to be a point he is dropped if he continues this form.
Click to expand...
Crawley is selected because of his destructive potential. It's a win,win situation; if he comes off,great,if not Bethell has proved he can come in and play the opener role.Stokes endorsed Crawley's role very recently.
 

Parkside said:
Crawley is selected because of his destructive potential. It's a win,win situation; if he comes off,great,if not Bethell has proved he can come in and play the opener role.Stokes endorsed Crawley's role very recently.
Click to expand...
Not sure I'd take batting ideas from someone who averages 28 batting at no.6 personally.
 
mackembhoy said:
I didn't expect Bethell to do as well as he's shown so far. Everything pointed towards young bravado him stepping up at 3, rather than based on ability.

Pope was averaging 80 or something when we debuted him at 4 against India when he'd only ever batted at 6. It showed he wasn't right to bat there at that time.

But yeah Bethell showed plenty, all 4 of his innings at 3 lasted 28 balls or more. Pope has batted 47 times at 3 and 24 of them he was dismissed facing fewer than 28.

Pope has always been a bad starter so for a a guy stepping up in his spot and doing the polar opposite to most of Pope innings is some feather in his cap. Plus he scored two half centuries to boot.
Click to expand...
Was in a boundary of a maiden first class ton too 8-)
 
TheRey said:
Not sure I'd take batting ideas from someone who averages 28 batting at no.6 personally.
Click to expand...
The post was intended to indicate that the captain was confident that Crawley would continue to make valuable contributions. Not sure I'd question his selection judgement given recent England team performances. Stokes' test average is 35.6 so not sure the relevance of the reference to the character who averages 28.
 
TheRey said:
Not sure I'd take batting ideas from someone who averages 28 batting at no.6 personally.
Click to expand...
Seriously why not? Coaching and 'doing it' are two entirely different things and all sport is littered with examples of brilliant coaches and managers who themselves were faairly mediocre players.

Relating this to Stokes, he has been recognised as having one of the best techniques in the team. He can and does score very well but, like Ian Botham he often risks his wicket in a chase for quick runs. (I've always thought Botham was a better batsman than his averages suggest)
 
Bri said:
Seriously why not? Coaching and 'doing it' are two entirely different things and all sport is littered with examples of brilliant coaches and managers who themselves were faairly mediocre players.

Relating this to Stokes, he has been recognised as having one of the best techniques in the team. He can and does score very well but, like Ian Botham he often risks his wicket in a chase for quick runs. (I've always thought Botham was a better batsman than his averages suggest)
Click to expand...
Totally, I still remember an innings from a Natwest cup semi final in 1983 where he patted back each ball of the final over to win by fewer wickets lost:
You must be logged on to see external links
 
We’ve won the series and can’t make the world test championship final. It makes sense to play 1 or 2 fringe players if they are genuine parts of the plans for India this summer and the ashes.

I can see a seamer or two being changed and possibly we should switch out Bashir for a game as well. As much as I’d love to see Robinson get a game behind the stumps given he played so much club cricket here in metropolitan Kent, and I think he was very unlucky to be behind Cox in the original selection, that seems a wasted pick given Smith comes back in, and you could see Pope keeping as a back up again in the future if the time arose.
 
Aidan11 said:
Is Woakes injured?

I'm surprised they've left him out if not but obviously I'm pleased Potts is playing.
Click to expand...
An easy choice, injury or no, imho. He didn't look to contribute much. A good idea to play Potts as it seem he goes on these tour and bearly gets on the field, and he's a better player than that.
 
Bri said:
An easy choice, injury or no, imho. He didn't look to contribute much. A good idea to play Potts as it seem he goes on these tour and bearly gets on the field, and he's a better player than that.
Click to expand...

I like the look of the team. It must be nice being so strong allowing us to carry a young spinner learning his trade.
 
Bri said:
Seriously why not? Coaching and 'doing it' are two entirely different things and all sport is littered with examples of brilliant coaches and managers who themselves were faairly mediocre players.

Relating this to Stokes, he has been recognised as having one of the best techniques in the team. He can and does score very well but, like Ian Botham he often risks his wicket in a chase for quick runs. (I've always thought Botham was a better batsman than his averages suggest)
Click to expand...
Didn't Beefy play on a lot longer than he should have. Wasn't quite the same and tarnished his career to an extent.

Averaged 37 with the bat and 24 with ball by the end of 1982.

Then from then onwards was 28 with bat and 36 with the ball.
 
They binned off Jimmy building for the future, but hasn’t until now Woakes played every test since ?! I can’t see him playing in Australia so it seems a strange strategy. Woakes helps balance the side but I hope we move on from him now we have a lot of young talent competing for spots.
 
Robanner said:
They binned off Jimmy building for the future, but hasn’t until now Woakes played every test since ?! I can’t see him playing in Australia so it seems a strange strategy. Woakes helps balance the side but I hope we move on from him now we have a lot of young talent competing for spots.
Click to expand...
Especially since Atkinson looks a decent bat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top