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

Scott Borthwick as an opener......

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

brandon

Striker
Worth a go??

Wanted to raise the issue separately to the match thread because it could easily be confused I'm bringing thus up as a knee jerk but I'm not - Jennings has performed admirably this season and I certainly wouldn't consider dropping him - but this is something I've been thinking for a while.

My thinking is to do with what I feel is Borthwick being our best (or certainly second best) batsman, with a fantastic technique and temperament and a positive style. I think a Stoneman/Borthwick opening pair could be as good as any in the country.

I'm frustrated with Jennings, he is very defensive, which is by no means a bad thing, but I've always been a fan of the more fluent batsmen. Stoneman is that, as is Borthwick, just like Diva was too and it's usually the case that the best batsmen in world cricket are fluent. It's generally the case that Jennings has a strike rate of well under 35 for around the first hour of his innings'. I don't know if it's pure coincidence but I just associate such slow scoring with never being fully 'in'. You only have to look at the negativeness of England's scoring in the winter and how badly they did.

As I said earlier, not even thinking of leaving Jennings out - he's still young with a lot of time to learn and improve and will hopefully be a big asset in the future of DCCC, he could perhaps go to 3/4 and his obdurate nature may be of use should be find ourselves 20-2. For now though why not give SB a dig?

Could even aid his chances in the national set up.
 

i like borthwicks batting. why not give it a try? i think he plays some beautiful cover drives. why in t20 he comes in behind pringle is beyond me.
 
I know what you are saying, but coming at if from a different angle, should the openers job not be to see off the new ball?

One problem with Stoneman is, he seems to either score big or get out very early, which seems to happen a lot. Once he gets out early, Borthwick is exposed, if he nicks, then we are suddenly exposing our middle order while the ball is too hard.

I'd say there is more argument to move Stoneman down to 3, and to try and find a new opener from somewhere else.
 
Well, before the Yorkshire game I would probably have gone along with your thinking Brandon. However, over the last two days I thought Jennings proved his mettle, whereas Stoneman's shot selection was very poor. Yesterday he was doing his best impersonation of David Gower wafting outside the off stump and having been dismissed early in the first innings he did exactly the same thing again this morning to get himself quickly out without bothering the scorer.

Unfortunately, Scotty did really well early on, but failed miserably in the second innings. whether he would have performed better coming in as No. 1 or 2 is debatable. Our batsmen were lacking in confidence and their bowlers had their tails up - unfortunately only Jennings and Richardson demonstrated the concentration and application required to be opening.

To me, they all need to get back to the drawing board and have some therapy to get them in the right mind frame to get back into form. Too late in the season to make major changes - dropping Stoneman down the order may have negative implications. Would need to know what is actually going on in the dressing room before playing around with the order ....... so, I'm sitting on the fence!!! Sorry ;)
 
johnson said:
I know what you are saying, but coming at if from a different angle, should the openers job not be to see off the new ball?

One problem with Stoneman is, he seems to either score big or get out very early, which seems to happen a lot. Once he gets out early, Borthwick is exposed, if he nicks, then we are suddenly exposing our middle order while the ball is too hard.

I'd say there is more argument to move Stoneman down to 3, and to try and find a new opener from somewhere else.
Click to expand...

Depends how you want to view it. I don't personally see openers as being there purely to see off the new ball - if an opener makes a score you're almost guaranteed the team will make a good score. If - like on a few occasions this season - Stoneman goes big, usually at a fast pace, we have in the main been in a very commanding position (Sussex and Middlesex at home come to mind).

The other thing I find is that an opener who can score quick runs immediately puts the bowlers on the back foot. Opening bowlers like to get settled in with a couple of maidens, few quiet overs, but if they've got some bloke belting the to the fence they're immediately on the back foot and out of their comfort zone.

I look at the success of David Warner in the winter or of Sehwag for years for India and that's generally what I think is the best way to go.

I can see your point regarding Stoneman getting out early and Jennings being the man to steady the ship - but if and when that does occur you have Borthwick in early anyway. I'd personally therefore like to see Jennings at 3, so in the event of an early loss you're getting that same scenario anyway. Trott worked for England for so long in a similar role of patience so I could see it working for us.
 
brandon said:
Depends how you want to view it. I don't personally see openers as being there purely to see off the new ball - if an opener makes a score you're almost guaranteed the team will make a good score. If - like on a few occasions this season - Stoneman goes big, usually at a fast pace, we have in the main been in a very commanding position (Sussex and Middlesex at home come to mind).

The other thing I find is that an opener who can score quick runs immediately puts the bowlers on the back foot. Opening bowlers like to get settled in with a couple of maidens, few quiet overs, but if they've got some bloke belting the to the fence they're immediately on the back foot and out of their comfort zone.

I look at the success of David Warner in the winter or of Sehwag for years for India and that's generally what I think is the best way to go.

I can see your point regarding Stoneman getting out early and Jennings being the man to steady the ship - but if and when that does occur you have Borthwick in early anyway. I'd personally therefore like to see Jennings at 3, so in the event of an early loss you're getting that same scenario anyway. Trott worked for England for so long in a similar role of patience so I could see it working for us.
Click to expand...
I like your logic Brandon - I'm in
 
brandon said:
Depends how you want to view it. I don't personally see openers as being there purely to see off the new ball - if an opener makes a score you're almost guaranteed the team will make a good score. If - like on a few occasions this season - Stoneman goes big, usually at a fast pace, we have in the main been in a very commanding position (Sussex and Middlesex at home come to mind).

The other thing I find is that an opener who can score quick runs immediately puts the bowlers on the back foot. Opening bowlers like to get settled in with a couple of maidens, few quiet overs, but if they've got some bloke belting the to the fence they're immediately on the back foot and out of their comfort zone.

I look at the success of David Warner in the winter or of Sehwag for years for India and that's generally what I think is the best way to go.

I can see your point regarding Stoneman getting out early and Jennings being the man to steady the ship - but if and when that does occur you have Borthwick in early anyway. I'd personally therefore like to see Jennings at 3, so in the event of an early loss you're getting that same scenario anyway. Trott worked for England for so long in a similar role of patience so I could see it working for us.
Click to expand...

Yep can't disagree with any of that to be fair.

I do agree with you really, I like quick runs at the top of the order, its just our middle order is lacking so much, they get blown away very often, with the tail often getting most of the runs, that I'd prefer them not get exposed to soon.

Just wondered if a different approach could be an option.
 
johnson said:
Just wondered if a different approach could be an option.
Click to expand...

By all means. That's what I raised the question for - to have a discussion and see what peoples take on it was.

Thats all it'll be too in fairness. Until Scotty comes on or Rocky and tells us it's a load of bollocks and everyone is happy with where they are now :lol:
 
Happy leaving it as it is. Jennings is just a young lad, he'll learn and the club clearly see him as an opening batsman, so just leave it. Borthwick bats well at number 3, so again leave it at that. Muchall/Collingwood/Mustard batting area is the major concern
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top