• 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.

Ollie Pope


Aidan11 said:
The number 3 position has always been something of a poisoned chalice.

I think the sensible option would be to move Root up to 3. Then maybe bring in a player to bat at 4 or 5 if Brook can move up as well.
Click to expand...
Totally agree, I get it not perfect but it’s the best of available options.

Think Root knows his game inside out more than ever before and is in terrific form and looks very confident at the moment.

I think that more of a factor than is overall average at 3 of which some of them innings would have been several years ago.

Would put any new player 5 or 6 and move the likes of Brook and Root up one place
 
Last edited:
He's technically poor against spin and steep bounce as seen in his averages in Australia and the subcontinent. Poor footwork seems to be at the core of it.

I loathe central contracts as they create a cliquey culture where we commit to players for a year at a time regardless of form or ability. We should be taking Jennings, Abell and one or two other good players of spin on any trip to the subcontinent, but no: giving the opposition any respect is negativity which can't be tolerated in the Ben and Baz setup.
Voice of fair play said:
Totally agree, I get it not perfect but it’s the best of available options.

Think Root knows his game inside out more than ever before and is in terrific form and looks very confident at the moment.

I think that more of a factor than is overall average at 3 of which some of them innings would have been several years ago.

Would put any new player 5 or 6 and move the likes of Brook and Root up one place
Click to expand...
Root is plenty capable of playing #3 against a spin bowling attack. His weakness is coming in on a fast wicket against the new ball.
 
Last edited:
smoker said:
He's technically poor against spin and steep bounce as seen in his averages in Australia and the subcontinent. Poor footwork seems to be at the core of it.

I loathe central contracts as they create a cliquey culture where we commit to players for a year at a time regardless of form or ability. We should be taking Jennings, Abell and one or two other good players of spin on any trip to the subcontinent, but no: giving the opposition any respect is negativity which can't be tolerated in the Ben and Baz setup.

Root is plenty capable of playing #3 against a spin bowling attack. His weakness is coming in on a fast wicket against the new ball.
Click to expand...
Yeah that more than fair enough, but he still more equipped than any other option
 
smoker said:
Ironically it's been his best batting position, statistically. I'd have no issue playing him 3 in England but he is dire against spin.
Click to expand...
I think it’s been his best batting position as he’s developed.

He’s a 5 for me. I commend him for going to 3, but it doesn’t work. (Even if his record isn’t that bad)
chunkyshanhawk53 said:
Is there nothing to be said for Bairstow?
Click to expand...
You must be logged on to see media items

Ah shit
 
Last edited:
Do think Stokes at 3 is a good shout given his 2 attempts at opening and he's clearly a better starter again pace then spin.
Frees up a spot at 6/7 to bring a new batter in
 
chunkyshanhawk53 said:
I think it’s been his best batting position as he’s developed.

He’s a 5 for me. I commend him for going to 3, but it doesn’t work. (Even if his record isn’t that bad)

You must be logged on to see media items

Ah shit
Click to expand...
Bairstow's always done a decent enough job for England in a number of batting positions. Doubt it'll happen though
 
If we move Root to 3 and his average drops by 15 runs again, can we move him back to 4 quickly this time?

Can we then leave the number one batter in the world in the position where he became the number one batter in the world.

The player who has proved himself to be fearless against pace and spin, is Ben Duckett. I'd rather give him the poisoned chalice and pick another opener. Seems to have the 'fuck it' personality that it wouldn't bother him.
 
For all the talk of stats and averages at certain positions, Root’s two highest Test scores came at 3.

I like him at 4 but it’s my view the team needs him at 3, and that’s where he should be.

I realise the Bairstow stuff above is “banter”, but for me he is and always has been among the best 6 batsmen in the country, and but for fitness as he’s clearly carrying excess timber since the leg break, he should be in the side.

Vaughan says whoever bats 3 needs to be calm and composed, which I fully agree with, but then suggests Stokes.

I just don’t see how you can have your number 3 come in and not know whether he’s either going to give himself a chance to get in or do something crazy like walking down the wicket to a seamer to ‘put pressure back on the bowler’, or leave a straight one from the spinner.

I agree with the idea of starting against pace in the Ashes rather than Lyon could be to his benefit, but then there’s nothing to stop the convicts bringing Lyon on when Stokes comes out.

I’d love to think he could go to 3, especially if he’s packing in the bowling, and as captain, if it worked, it would only add to his authority. But he’s in awful form with the bat and to me he really needs to be working on getting fit to bowl as he should be in the side as an all rounder, or not at all.

I too think that Pope is not and never will be a number 3. There are better options for the middle order. So for me, he’s done.

Under this regime though, he’s bulletproof.
 
Last edited:
Salem Street South said:
For all the talk of stats and averages at certain positions, Root’s two highest Test scores came at 3.

I like him at 4 but it’s my view the team needs him at 3, and that’s where he should be.

I realise the Bairstow stuff above is “banter”, but for me he is and always has been among the best 6 batsmen in the country, and but for fitness as he’s clearly carrying excess timber since the leg break, he should be in the side.

Vaughan says whoever bats 3 needs to be calm and composed, which I fully agree with, but then suggests Stokes.

I just don’t see how you can have your number 3 come in and not know whether he’s either going to give himself a chance to get in or do something crazy like walking down the wicket to a seamer to ‘put pressure back on the bowler’, or leave a straight one from the spinner.

I agree with the idea of starting against pace in the Ashes rather than Lyon could be to his benefit, but then there’s nothing to stop the convicts bringing Lyon on when Stokes comes out.

I’d love to think he could go to 3, especially if he’s packing in the bowling, and as captain, if it worked, it would only add to his authority. But he’s in awful form with the bat and to me he really needs to be working on getting fit to bowl as he should be in the side as an all rounder, or not at all.

I too think that Pope is not and never will be a number 3. There are better options for the middle order. So for me, he’s done.

Under this regime though, he’s bulletproof.
Click to expand...
Yeah I agree with that, I think still current form, and the fact Root seems to know his game better than he ever has in his career is more important than scores he may have got at 3 that reduced his average that could have been several years ago.

Just my opinion but not sure why people put so much emphasis on a average in a certain position when some of the innings that contributed to that could have been 7/8 years ago.

The team needs a 3 now Root is clearly the most equipped in the team to do that role.

If you drop Pope, you either bring in a brand new player in the role or put Root up one place, and seen as nearly every new player has failed since Trott only one of them options makes sense.

Would not even consider Stokes there, too much other stuff on his plate
 
Last edited:
Voice of fair play said:
Yeah I agree with that, I think still current form, and the fact Root seems to know his game better than he ever has in his career is more important than scores he may have got at 3 that reduced his average that could have been several years ago.

Just my opinion but not sure why people put so much emphasis on a average in a certain position when some of the innings that contributed to that could have been 7/8 years ago.

The team needs a 3 now Root is clearly the most equipped in the team to do that role.

If you drop Pope, you either bring in a brand new player in the role or put Root up one place, and seen as nearly every new player has failed since Trott only one of them options makes sense.

Would not even consider Stokes there, too much other stuff on his plate
Click to expand...
The last time (4th time) was in the West Indies in 2022.

Not sure how many more times it has to be tried and failed before people move on. If we do it for a 5th time, will that then be enough? Can we then stop messing about and restore him to 4 in time for The Ashes?
 
The point is not whether I can’t see a reason why he wouldn’t do it, or whether you can’t see a reason why he wouldn’t do it, but whether he sees a reason why he wouldn’t do it. He’s on fire at the moment. Change that, mess about the number one batter in the world and disrupt his head space a year before the ashes, at your peril. Particularly when it is just to replace Pope with someone who is at best going to be marginally better, and quite possibly worse, since if he was obviously better, he would already be in the side anyway.

If not juggling with the order was keeping the next Harry Brook out, I might just about be tempted. If not juggling with the order is what is stopping you giving Bairstow or Jennings another go, I’d leave it as it is.
 
Steak Pie said:
The last time (4th time) was in the West Indies in 2022.

Not sure how many more times it has to be tried and failed before people move on. If we do it for a 5th time, will that then be enough? Can we then stop messing about and restore him to 4 in time for The Ashes?
Click to expand...
Well that last time you mention 2022 he scored 109 in the first test and 153 in the second test, both at 3, not sure that would be classed as tried and failed?

The question I would ask how many have we tried and failed at 3?

Basically everyone since Trott.

How many to do we try at 3 and fail before we consider it, 4,5,6 or 14, before we move our most equipped person to that position.

The last time he batted there he scored 262 a couple of weeks ago,and the last series he batted there (2022) he scored a hundred in 2 of the 3 tests!

I get what you saying in the fact that if we had a capable number 3 we would obviously not consider moving him, but we clearly haven’t.

Therefore we need to consider options and out of all the not perfect options it’s the best one imo
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top