A century for Jennings in this innings is detrimental to English cricket IMO.
I don't wish him any harm, I just don't think he's got it. He does seem like a top bloke and I wish him well.
All that said, I don't actually hope he gets a duck. That was tongue in cheek... scratchy 20 off 100 balls would do just fine. :-)
Exraordinary
Fair enough if that's your opinion.
For me, he is quite clearly not good enough and is only playing in this game because we didn't take an extra top order batsman.
If he gets a score here then can they drop him? And then he opens the batting against Starc and co... do you want that?
He's the best choice for this Test. There's another Test before the Ashes, so the selectors can make a decision at that time. For me, he's not good enough. And a big score in this innings doesn't mean he's undroppable, at all. All he can do now, is make a big score in a long innings, to set up a win. And he can then end the series on a high and know that he's contributed to a win, following being dropped. That's the sign of a player with a good temperament.
We don't have a large number of openers banging on the door. So I don't see his selection as meaning someone else who should be chosen, is missing out.
But for now, in this match, he's in position. And I want him to do well, because he's batting for England. He's occupied the crease for longer than any of the West Indies players in this match and all but Burns, Buttler and Stokes.
I am not sure he deserves the chance he's been given in this match. But I am glad to see he's taking it so far.
Dropped, out if reviewed, various other edges and eventually out driving in the first innings. He's 'taken his chance'??? So far in the second innings he's watched the ball go by outside off as WI have bowled too wide - he's also had one miss his off peg by about 3cm. MAYBE we'll talk if he scores big tomorrow but batting with a massive lead is always easier. He failed when it mattered, end of.
A century for Jennings in this innings is detrimental to English cricket IMO.
I don't wish him any harm, I just don't think he's got it. He does seem like a top bloke and I wish him well.
All that said, I don't actually hope he gets a duck. That was tongue in cheek... scratchy 20 off 100 balls would do just fine. :-)
Exraordinary
Fair enough if that's your opinion.
For me, he is quite clearly not good enough and is only playing in this game because we didn't take an extra top order batsman.
If he gets a score here then can they drop him? And then he opens the batting against Starc and co... do you want that?
He's the best choice for this Test. There's another Test before the Ashes, so the selectors can make a decision at that time. For me, he's not good enough. And a big score in this innings doesn't mean he's undroppable, at all. All he can do now, is make a big score in a long innings, to set up a win. And he can then end the series on a high and know that he's contributed to a win, following being dropped. That's the sign of a player with a good temperament.
We don't have a large number of openers banging on the door. So I don't see his selection as meaning someone else who should be chosen, is missing out.
But for now, in this match, he's in position. And I want him to do well, because he's batting for England. He's occupied the crease for longer than any of the West Indies players in this match and all but Burns, Buttler and Stokes.
I am not sure he deserves the chance he's been given in this match. But I am glad to see he's taking it so far.
Dropped, out if reviewed, various other edges and eventually out driving in the first innings. He's 'taken his chance'??? So far in the second innings he's watched the ball go by outside off as WI have bowled too wide - he's also had one miss his off peg by about 3cm. MAYBE we'll talk if he scores big tomorrow but batting with a massive lead is always easier. He failed when it mattered, end of.
"Maybe we'll talk" and "...end of" - your post is almost as incoherent as it is unpleasant.
I wonder which comments in my post have hurt your feelings the most. Is it "I am not sure he deserves the chance he's been given", "for me, he's not good enough", "a big score in this innings doesn't mean he's undroppable", or something else?
Does "I am glad to see he's taking it [the chance] so far" mean exactly the same to you as "he's 'taken his chance'"? Because they are not equivalent. And your use of speech marks is unnecessary and disingenuous. I didn't write that, so don't imagine that I did.
I want him to do well in this match, for England to win and for us to find a better replacement in time for the Ashes.
Incidentally, how "out" are you if the ball misses your stumps by 3cm? By the look of the scoreboard, it seems not out at all.
The notion he's taking his chance is just as laughable. Apologies for the misquote.
England have this game in the bag. Wood has won the game for England - with Buttler and Stokes setting it up. The rest is window-dressing. It's exactly the situation I predicted yesterday (and alluded to before the Test) - soft second-innings runs giving a distorted picture and giving the selectors every excuse they need to retain someone they want in the team despite his constant, repetitive failures. I have never known an England cricketer rewarded for failure like Jennings. It absolutely comes down to who deserves to play, and he does not. Therefore I hope he gets out first ball tomorrow. I mean, Burns is on strike. Straight drive, fingertip onto stumps. I'd really enjoy that
He has 8 runs so far in this innings. 4 of them were from an edge through the slips. How many do you think he needs to score tomorrow to stay in the side? You won't believe how many times he gets dropped as he sails past it
The notion he's taking his chance is just as laughable. Apologies for the misquote.
England have this game in the bag. Wood has won the game for England - with Buttler and Stokes setting it up. The rest is window-dressing. It's exactly the situation I predicted yesterday (and alluded to before the Test) - soft second-innings runs giving a distorted picture and giving the selectors every excuse they need to retain someone they want in the team despite his constant, repetitive failures. I have never known an England cricketer rewarded for failure like Jennings. It absolutely comes down to who deserves to play, and he does not. Therefore I hope he gets out first ball tomorrow. I mean, Burns is on strike. Straight drive, fingertip onto stumps. I'd really enjoy that
He has 8 runs so far in this innings. 4 of them were from an edge through the slips. How many do you think he needs to score tomorrow to stay in the side? You won't believe how many times he gets dropped as he sails past it
The notion he's taking his chance is just as laughable. Apologies for the misquote.
England have this game in the bag. Wood has won the game for England - with Buttler and Stokes setting it up. The rest is window-dressing. It's exactly the situation I predicted yesterday (and alluded to before the Test) - soft second-innings runs giving a distorted picture and giving the selectors every excuse they need to retain someone they want in the team despite his constant, repetitive failures. I have never known an England cricketer rewarded for failure like Jennings. It absolutely comes down to who deserves to play, and he does not. Therefore I hope he gets out first ball tomorrow. I mean, Burns is on strike. Straight drive, fingertip onto stumps. I'd really enjoy that
He has 8 runs so far in this innings. 4 of them were from an edge through the slips. How many do you think he needs to score tomorrow to stay in the side? You won't believe how many times he gets dropped as he sails past it
You really struggle with the idea of reading the posts to which you're responding, clearly.
I have said I hope he does well. I have also said I hope he's replaced before the Ashes. I have no idea and no interest in how many he needs to score to stay in the team. The next Test match for England is against Ireland - I am much more interested in whether we win this Test, than who plays in that one.
I think an England cricket fan wishing ill luck on on an England cricket player is risible.
If he gets runs then he plays in the Ashes. You can't drop someone who gets a big score. So "I have said I hope he does well. I have also said I hope he's replaced before the Ashes." doesn't really work.
Because of that, I hope he doesn't get a big score in this match, which we will win anyway, because I believe that will hurt our chances in The Ashes, which is far more important than a dead rubber.
The Ireland game is inconsequential in my mind - it's not even 5 days ffs!
The notion he's taking his chance is just as laughable. Apologies for the misquote.
England have this game in the bag. Wood has won the game for England - with Buttler and Stokes setting it up. The rest is window-dressing. It's exactly the situation I predicted yesterday (and alluded to before the Test) - soft second-innings runs giving a distorted picture and giving the selectors every excuse they need to retain someone they want in the team despite his constant, repetitive failures. I have never known an England cricketer rewarded for failure like Jennings. It absolutely comes down to who deserves to play, and he does not. Therefore I hope he gets out first ball tomorrow. I mean, Burns is on strike. Straight drive, fingertip onto stumps. I'd really enjoy that
He has 8 runs so far in this innings. 4 of them were from an edge through the slips. How many do you think he needs to score tomorrow to stay in the side? You won't believe how many times he gets dropped as he sails past it
I am much more interested in whether we win this Test, than who plays in that one.
This Test is as won as today's City-Chelsea game was at half-time.
Also, you rather presume I'm an England fan! I do generally support England, in fact, but it's been hard not to root for the WI in this series (NZ are another team that make me waver) - 'fan of the game' is a bit of a cliche but it fairly accurately represents my attitude to Tests. I like to see justice rendered and good play rewarded. Jennings' continuing selection is a crime against cricket.
Wood's bowling in this Test is what I root for, really. That man deserves to walk off with a MOTM award, and an England win is fitting reward for their bowlers as a whole, who have really not bowled too badly at all, and have been more deserving than luck has allowed.
I hope England smash Australia 5-0 this summer, and I hope we (yes, it is sometimes 'we', when I'm in the mood) find the combination that will rightfully allow us to do that. Unfortunately I can't see it happening. But who knows? Perhaps the selectors will make clear-headed decisions, such as...not picking Keaton Jennings ever again
The notion he's taking his chance is just as laughable. Apologies for the misquote.
England have this game in the bag. Wood has won the game for England - with Buttler and Stokes setting it up. The rest is window-dressing. It's exactly the situation I predicted yesterday (and alluded to before the Test) - soft second-innings runs giving a distorted picture and giving the selectors every excuse they need to retain someone they want in the team despite his constant, repetitive failures. I have never known an England cricketer rewarded for failure like Jennings. It absolutely comes down to who deserves to play, and he does not. Therefore I hope he gets out first ball tomorrow. I mean, Burns is on strike. Straight drive, fingertip onto stumps. I'd really enjoy that
He has 8 runs so far in this innings. 4 of them were from an edge through the slips. How many do you think he needs to score tomorrow to stay in the side? You won't believe how many times he gets dropped as he sails past it
I am much more interested in whether we win this Test, than who plays in that one.
Also, you rather presume I'm an England fan! I do generally support England, in fact, but it's been hard not to root for the WI in this series (NZ are another team that make me waver) - 'fan of the game' is a bit of a cliche but it fairly accurately represents my attitude to Tests. I like to see justice rendered and good play rewarded. Jennings' continuing selection is a crime against cricket.
What have I just read.
New Zealand are a classy outfit. We have tough, exciting matches with them that are played in a great spirit - I really enjoy it when we play against them - but it's just that ... "against".
Baffled by that.
Maybe I should reconsider my views on Jennings in this match, after all...
i was with @Chizz anyway, not because I like Jennings - he is a liability. But do not wish him ill will. I do not think he is good enough but ecstatic to be proved wrong.
It's very simple though. When England play India, Australia or South Africa then I am a massive England fan. When England plays Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Zimbabwe or Ireland, I probably want England to win to avoid embarrassment, but if the other team somehow wins, good luck to them. When England plays New Zealand, the West Indies or Pakistan* then I just want thrilling cricket, because England usually have good matches against those teams, and I usually like the players in those teams, and may the best team win.
*On those horrible pitches in the UAE I really do want England to find a way to win though, that'd be nice
I did want England to beat the WI in that T20 final too - but for the last four balls England outplayed them and it would have been such a great victory
I just...I just don't feel tribalism about Test cricket in the same way that I feel about Charlton, or even the England football team. Test cricket is played by only a few countries, mostly former British colonies, and its health depends on the health of cricket in those countries. It is not played as a summative international tournament - it's more of an ongoing dialogue. Obviously, being English, I am concerned that the England team plays the best and most exciting cricket possible, but I don't think total domination should be the aim. Tests cricket requires ebb and flow, give and take. It needs wins, losses, close series, feats of brilliance or cunning, and the Aussies to get stuffed 5-0.
If every nation on earth played Test cricket and took it seriously then winning some sort of international tournament - and therefore as many games as possible - would be more of a priority for me as a supporter.
The notion he's taking his chance is just as laughable. Apologies for the misquote.
England have this game in the bag. Wood has won the game for England - with Buttler and Stokes setting it up. The rest is window-dressing. It's exactly the situation I predicted yesterday (and alluded to before the Test) - soft second-innings runs giving a distorted picture and giving the selectors every excuse they need to retain someone they want in the team despite his constant, repetitive failures. I have never known an England cricketer rewarded for failure like Jennings. It absolutely comes down to who deserves to play, and he does not. Therefore I hope he gets out first ball tomorrow. I mean, Burns is on strike. Straight drive, fingertip onto stumps. I'd really enjoy that
He has 8 runs so far in this innings. 4 of them were from an edge through the slips. How many do you think he needs to score tomorrow to stay in the side? You won't believe how many times he gets dropped as he sails past it
I am much more interested in whether we win this Test, than who plays in that one.
This Test is as won as today's City-Chelsea game was at half-time.
Also, you rather presume I'm an England fan! I do generally support England, in fact, but it's been hard not to root for the WI in this series (NZ are another team that make me waver) - 'fan of the game' is a bit of a cliche but it fairly accurately represents my attitude to Tests. I like to see justice rendered and good play rewarded. Jennings' continuing selection is a crime against cricket.
Wood's bowling in this Test is what I root for, really. That man deserves to walk off with a MOTM award, and an England win is fitting reward for their bowlers as a whole, who have really not bowled too badly at all, and have been more deserving than luck has allowed.
I hope England smash Australia 5-0 this summer, and I hope we (yes, it is sometimes 'we', when I'm in the mood) find the combination that will rightfully allow us to do that. Unfortunately I can't see it happening. But who knows? Perhaps the selectors will make clear-headed decisions, such as...not picking Keaton Jennings ever again
Got it. You're a fan of the game, but you wish ill-luck on one player whose career you'd enjoy seeing ending. No less risible, I'm afraid.
The notion he's taking his chance is just as laughable. Apologies for the misquote.
England have this game in the bag. Wood has won the game for England - with Buttler and Stokes setting it up. The rest is window-dressing. It's exactly the situation I predicted yesterday (and alluded to before the Test) - soft second-innings runs giving a distorted picture and giving the selectors every excuse they need to retain someone they want in the team despite his constant, repetitive failures. I have never known an England cricketer rewarded for failure like Jennings. It absolutely comes down to who deserves to play, and he does not. Therefore I hope he gets out first ball tomorrow. I mean, Burns is on strike. Straight drive, fingertip onto stumps. I'd really enjoy that
He has 8 runs so far in this innings. 4 of them were from an edge through the slips. How many do you think he needs to score tomorrow to stay in the side? You won't believe how many times he gets dropped as he sails past it
I am much more interested in whether we win this Test, than who plays in that one.
This Test is as won as today's City-Chelsea game was at half-time.
Also, you rather presume I'm an England fan! I do generally support England, in fact, but it's been hard not to root for the WI in this series (NZ are another team that make me waver) - 'fan of the game' is a bit of a cliche but it fairly accurately represents my attitude to Tests. I like to see justice rendered and good play rewarded. Jennings' continuing selection is a crime against cricket.
Wood's bowling in this Test is what I root for, really. That man deserves to walk off with a MOTM award, and an England win is fitting reward for their bowlers as a whole, who have really not bowled too badly at all, and have been more deserving than luck has allowed.
I hope England smash Australia 5-0 this summer, and I hope we (yes, it is sometimes 'we', when I'm in the mood) find the combination that will rightfully allow us to do that. Unfortunately I can't see it happening. But who knows? Perhaps the selectors will make clear-headed decisions, such as...not picking Keaton Jennings ever again
Got it. You're a fan of the game, but you wish ill-luck on one player whose career you'd enjoy seeing ending. No less risible, I'm afraid.
It's not so much that I wish him ill luck, it's that I wish he'd stop getting rewarded for his bad cricket, and if that means having one of his wafts connect with a nice thin edge early tomorrow then that is a pretty accurate representation of what he brings to this England team and to Test cricket. I was raised on Marcus goddamn Trescothick, now there was a player who made me want England to win every match
If he gets runs then he plays in the Ashes. You can't drop someone who gets a big score. So "I have said I hope he does well. I have also said I hope he's replaced before the Ashes." doesn't really work.
Because of that, I hope he doesn't get a big score in this match, which we will win anyway, because I believe that will hurt our chances in The Ashes, which is far more important than a dead rubber.
The Ireland game is inconsequential in my mind - it's not even 5 days ffs!
I didn't want Kevin Lisbie in the Charlton team. But I cheered, like everyone else, when he scored a hat-trick against Liverpool. That's not a million miles away from my current position, which is wanting a better player to be found and chosen than Jennings, but wanting Jennings to score a lot of runs while he's in the team. I am sorry if you think that's "having cake and eating it". I disagree, of course. I think wanting England to win, but for one player to suffer misfortune, is closer.
I don't think making a second-innnings big score in this Test makes him a certainty for the Ashes, two Tests from now. A lot can happen between now and the Ashes. I don't think runs in St Lucia in February guarantee selection for Birmingham in August. If the selectors were that wedded to run records, then Root wouldn't even be considered for the Ashes. And we already know he will be tossing the coin on 1 August.
Wanting a player to do badly is ludicrous, in my view. And, as far as wanting him to fall foul of bad luck, as has been suggested, is beyond the pale.
It's completely different in football. If one player does badly then the whole team does badly. Also, supporting Charlton is a matter of tribal identity and victory takes precedence over anything else due to the setup of the competitions Charlton is involved in. I may think Reeco Hackett-Fairchild is a dreadful excuse for a League One footballer at present but if he scores the winner next week I will go berserk. Test cricket is a much more ephemeral, philosophical stage for its actors to play their part upon, and its selectorial nature (choosing freely from a large pool of professionals) rather than league football's monetary, squad-building struggle means that there are no limitations imposed on Team England except injury or selectorial error. Kevin Lisbie played because he had talent and because he's what we had. As football is a fully-integrated team game, it was necessary to cheer for Lisbie no matter how many times he ran into the defender.
I rarely want an England player to fail, but Jennings averages about 25 in Tests, is the former SA U19s captain, keeps getting picked for some unknown reason, and is one of the ugliest Test batsmen I've ever seen - he makes Gary Ballance look like Lara for god's sake. Given that England have this Test in the bag, I don't think it's unreasonable to hope he doesn't give the selectors a chance to retain him.
If he gets runs then he plays in the Ashes. You can't drop someone who gets a big score. So "I have said I hope he does well. I have also said I hope he's replaced before the Ashes." doesn't really work.
Because of that, I hope he doesn't get a big score in this match, which we will win anyway, because I believe that will hurt our chances in The Ashes, which is far more important than a dead rubber.
The Ireland game is inconsequential in my mind - it's not even 5 days ffs!
I didn't want Kevin Lisbie in the Charlton team. But I cheered, like everyone else, when he scored a hat-trick against Liverpool. That's not a million miles away from my current position, which is wanting a better player to be found and chosen than Jennings, but wanting Jennings to score a lot of runs while he's in the team. I am sorry if you think that's "having cake and eating it". I disagree, of course. I think wanting England to win, but for one player to suffer misfortune, is closer.
I don't think making a second-innnings big score in this Test makes him a certainty for the Ashes, two Tests from now. A lot can happen between now and the Ashes. I don't think runs in St Lucia in February guarantee selection for Birmingham in August. If the selectors were that wedded to run records, then Root wouldn't even be considered for the Ashes. And we already know he will be tossing the coin on 1 August.
Wanting a player to do badly is ludicrous, in my view. And, as far as wanting him to fall foul of bad luck, as has been suggested, is beyond the pale.
Fair enough - I do respect the view point and can understand it.
The difference with the Lisbie hat-trick is that it was vital to the outcome of the match. We would win this match if Jennings just said "I can't be bothered" and got on the next plane home.
To me, it seems more similar to a goalkeeper - you could never drop a goalkeeper who just kept a clean sheet. I can't see how Jennings could be dropped if he made a hundred. Is there a precedent for that, ever, in the history of the game?
Using Root as an example doesn't really work - he's having a poor run of form, but we've seen consistently that he's good enough to be in the side so we wait for him to get back into nick.
I do agree with the last sentence though - that is just spiteful because he's not done anything wrong other than not being very good at batting, so he doesn't deserve bad luck in a horrible sense. When Leuth said "I'd enjoy that" then that took it too far.
If he gets runs then he plays in the Ashes. You can't drop someone who gets a big score. So "I have said I hope he does well. I have also said I hope he's replaced before the Ashes." doesn't really work.
Because of that, I hope he doesn't get a big score in this match, which we will win anyway, because I believe that will hurt our chances in The Ashes, which is far more important than a dead rubber.
The Ireland game is inconsequential in my mind - it's not even 5 days ffs!
I didn't want Kevin Lisbie in the Charlton team. But I cheered, like everyone else, when he scored a hat-trick against Liverpool. That's not a million miles away from my current position, which is wanting a better player to be found and chosen than Jennings, but wanting Jennings to score a lot of runs while he's in the team. I am sorry if you think that's "having cake and eating it". I disagree, of course. I think wanting England to win, but for one player to suffer misfortune, is closer.
I don't think making a second-innnings big score in this Test makes him a certainty for the Ashes, two Tests from now. A lot can happen between now and the Ashes. I don't think runs in St Lucia in February guarantee selection for Birmingham in August. If the selectors were that wedded to run records, then Root wouldn't even be considered for the Ashes. And we already know he will be tossing the coin on 1 August.
Wanting a player to do badly is ludicrous, in my view. And, as far as wanting him to fall foul of bad luck, as has been suggested, is beyond the pale.
Fair enough - I do respect the view point and can understand it.
The difference with the Lisbie hat-trick is that it was vital to the outcome of the match. We would win this match if Jennings just said "I can't be bothered" and got on the next plane home.
To me, it seems more similar to a goalkeeper - you could never drop a goalkeeper who just kept a clean sheet. I can't see how Jennings could be dropped if he made a hundred. Is there a precedent for that, ever, in the history of the game?
Using Root as an example doesn't really work - he's having a poor run of form, but we've seen consistently that he's good enough to be in the side so we wait for him to get back into nick.
I do agree with the last sentence though - that is just spiteful because he's not done anything wrong other than not being very good at batting, so he doesn't deserve bad luck in a horrible sense. When Leuth said "I'd enjoy that" then that took it too far.
Boycott got dropped for making a double-hundred once! Too slow, they said. I think they just hated him haha
If he gets runs then he plays in the Ashes. You can't drop someone who gets a big score. So "I have said I hope he does well. I have also said I hope he's replaced before the Ashes." doesn't really work.
Because of that, I hope he doesn't get a big score in this match, which we will win anyway, because I believe that will hurt our chances in The Ashes, which is far more important than a dead rubber.
The Ireland game is inconsequential in my mind - it's not even 5 days ffs!
I didn't want Kevin Lisbie in the Charlton team. But I cheered, like everyone else, when he scored a hat-trick against Liverpool. That's not a million miles away from my current position, which is wanting a better player to be found and chosen than Jennings, but wanting Jennings to score a lot of runs while he's in the team. I am sorry if you think that's "having cake and eating it". I disagree, of course. I think wanting England to win, but for one player to suffer misfortune, is closer.
I don't think making a second-innnings big score in this Test makes him a certainty for the Ashes, two Tests from now. A lot can happen between now and the Ashes. I don't think runs in St Lucia in February guarantee selection for Birmingham in August. If the selectors were that wedded to run records, then Root wouldn't even be considered for the Ashes. And we already know he will be tossing the coin on 1 August.
Wanting a player to do badly is ludicrous, in my view. And, as far as wanting him to fall foul of bad luck, as has been suggested, is beyond the pale.
Fair enough - I do respect the view point and can understand it.
The difference with the Lisbie hat-trick is that it was vital to the outcome of the match. We would win this match if Jennings just said "I can't be bothered" and got on the next plane home.
To me, it seems more similar to a goalkeeper - you could never drop a goalkeeper who just kept a clean sheet. I can't see how Jennings could be dropped if he made a hundred. Is there a precedent for that, ever, in the history of the game?
Using Root as an example doesn't really work - he's having a poor run of form, but we've seen consistently that he's good enough to be in the side so we wait for him to get back into nick.
I do agree with the last sentence though - that is just spiteful because he's not done anything wrong other than not being very good at batting, so he doesn't deserve bad luck in a horrible sense. When Leuth said "I'd enjoy that" then that took it too far.
Plenty.
Shaun Marsh made 182 against the West Indies four years ago and was dropped. Kevin Peitersen was dropped after making 149 against South Africa (although not necessarily for purely cricketing reasons). Jason Gillespie made 201 not out against Bangladesh and was never picked again. Same thing had happened to Aravinda de Silva, who made 206 against Bangladesh - dropped and never picked again. As our resident New Zealand fan has pointed out, Geoff Boycott made 246 against India and was dropped. Karun Nair made 303 not out against England (he has only made 71 runs in the whole of the rest of his career, so far) and was dropped.
My view is this. I want Jennings to make a big score to help the team win and to give the selectors a harder decision. As you can see hundreds, double hundreds and even treble hundreds are no guarantee of being picked in the following Test.
So, I hope he does well; I expect him to be replaced; and I would like the selectors to be given a headache, by Jennings making a big score.
For the record, I wouldn't pick him for the next Test.
Comments
Top bloke, humble and honest
I wonder which comments in my post have hurt your feelings the most. Is it "I am not sure he deserves the chance he's been given", "for me, he's not good enough", "a big score in this innings doesn't mean he's undroppable", or something else?
Does "I am glad to see he's taking it [the chance] so far" mean exactly the same to you as "he's 'taken his chance'"? Because they are not equivalent. And your use of speech marks is unnecessary and disingenuous. I didn't write that, so don't imagine that I did.
I want him to do well in this match, for England to win and for us to find a better replacement in time for the Ashes.
Incidentally, how "out" are you if the ball misses your stumps by 3cm? By the look of the scoreboard, it seems not out at all.
England have this game in the bag. Wood has won the game for England - with Buttler and Stokes setting it up. The rest is window-dressing. It's exactly the situation I predicted yesterday (and alluded to before the Test) - soft second-innings runs giving a distorted picture and giving the selectors every excuse they need to retain someone they want in the team despite his constant, repetitive failures. I have never known an England cricketer rewarded for failure like Jennings. It absolutely comes down to who deserves to play, and he does not. Therefore I hope he gets out first ball tomorrow. I mean, Burns is on strike. Straight drive, fingertip onto stumps. I'd really enjoy that
He has 8 runs so far in this innings. 4 of them were from an edge through the slips. How many do you think he needs to score tomorrow to stay in the side? You won't believe how many times he gets dropped as he sails past it
I have said I hope he does well. I have also said I hope he's replaced before the Ashes. I have no idea and no interest in how many he needs to score to stay in the team. The next Test match for England is against Ireland - I am much more interested in whether we win this Test, than who plays in that one.
I think an England cricket fan wishing ill luck on on an England cricket player is risible.
The Surrey boys will be all over us!
If he gets runs then he plays in the Ashes. You can't drop someone who gets a big score. So "I have said I hope he does well. I have also said I hope he's replaced before the Ashes." doesn't really work.
Because of that, I hope he doesn't get a big score in this match, which we will win anyway, because I believe that will hurt our chances in The Ashes, which is far more important than a dead rubber.
The Ireland game is inconsequential in my mind - it's not even 5 days ffs!
#prayforjennings
Also, you rather presume I'm an England fan! I do generally support England, in fact, but it's been hard not to root for the WI in this series (NZ are another team that make me waver) - 'fan of the game' is a bit of a cliche but it fairly accurately represents my attitude to Tests. I like to see justice rendered and good play rewarded. Jennings' continuing selection is a crime against cricket.
Wood's bowling in this Test is what I root for, really. That man deserves to walk off with a MOTM award, and an England win is fitting reward for their bowlers as a whole, who have really not bowled too badly at all, and have been more deserving than luck has allowed.
I hope England smash Australia 5-0 this summer, and I hope we (yes, it is sometimes 'we', when I'm in the mood) find the combination that will rightfully allow us to do that. Unfortunately I can't see it happening. But who knows? Perhaps the selectors will make clear-headed decisions, such as...not picking Keaton Jennings ever again
What have I just read.
New Zealand are a classy outfit. We have tough, exciting matches with them that are played in a great spirit - I really enjoy it when we play against them - but it's just that ... "against".
Baffled by that.
Maybe I should reconsider my views on Jennings in this match, after all...
i am 100% England always.
i was with @Chizz anyway, not because I like Jennings - he is a liability. But do not wish him ill will. I do not think he is good enough but ecstatic to be proved wrong.
Go and support the Kiwi’s
*On those horrible pitches in the UAE I really do want England to find a way to win though, that'd be nice
I like Peterborough sometimes, as for Blackpool - well - cannot keep me away
But I don't think I'll ever fathom that one, Leuth!
If every nation on earth played Test cricket and took it seriously then winning some sort of international tournament - and therefore as many games as possible - would be more of a priority for me as a supporter.
I don't think making a second-innnings big score in this Test makes him a certainty for the Ashes, two Tests from now. A lot can happen between now and the Ashes. I don't think runs in St Lucia in February guarantee selection for Birmingham in August. If the selectors were that wedded to run records, then Root wouldn't even be considered for the Ashes. And we already know he will be tossing the coin on 1 August.
Wanting a player to do badly is ludicrous, in my view. And, as far as wanting him to fall foul of bad luck, as has been suggested, is beyond the pale.
I rarely want an England player to fail, but Jennings averages about 25 in Tests, is the former SA U19s captain, keeps getting picked for some unknown reason, and is one of the ugliest Test batsmen I've ever seen - he makes Gary Ballance look like Lara for god's sake. Given that England have this Test in the bag, I don't think it's unreasonable to hope he doesn't give the selectors a chance to retain him.
The difference with the Lisbie hat-trick is that it was vital to the outcome of the match. We would win this match if Jennings just said "I can't be bothered" and got on the next plane home.
To me, it seems more similar to a goalkeeper - you could never drop a goalkeeper who just kept a clean sheet. I can't see how Jennings could be dropped if he made a hundred. Is there a precedent for that, ever, in the history of the game?
Using Root as an example doesn't really work - he's having a poor run of form, but we've seen consistently that he's good enough to be in the side so we wait for him to get back into nick.
I do agree with the last sentence though - that is just spiteful because he's not done anything wrong other than not being very good at batting, so he doesn't deserve bad luck in a horrible sense. When Leuth said "I'd enjoy that" then that took it too far.
Risible
Shaun Marsh made 182 against the West Indies four years ago and was dropped. Kevin Peitersen was dropped after making 149 against South Africa (although not necessarily for purely cricketing reasons). Jason Gillespie made 201 not out against Bangladesh and was never picked again. Same thing had happened to Aravinda de Silva, who made 206 against Bangladesh - dropped and never picked again. As our resident New Zealand fan has pointed out, Geoff Boycott made 246 against India and was dropped. Karun Nair made 303 not out against England (he has only made 71 runs in the whole of the rest of his career, so far) and was dropped.
My view is this. I want Jennings to make a big score to help the team win and to give the selectors a harder decision. As you can see hundreds, double hundreds and even treble hundreds are no guarantee of being picked in the following Test.
So, I hope he does well; I expect him to be replaced; and I would like the selectors to be given a headache, by Jennings making a big score.
For the record, I wouldn't pick him for the next Test.