Neil Wagner has a combined Test, First Class, List A and T20 average of over 27. On that basis, should Bumble and Ward really be that surprised that he can bat? He might be batting at number 11 but he's no Jimmy Anderson!
Edit - I'm talking absolute rubbish. That's his bowling average! His lifetime batting average in Test matches is actually 14. Still no number 11
he's now batting his bowling average .. if yer no wot i meen
When you've scored 200 and the rest of the side have managed just 154 between them, you know that you must have batted quite well. When it's your debut that is an absolutely fantastic achievement.
Neil Wagner has a combined Test, First Class, List A and T20 average of over 27. On that basis, should Bumble and Ward really be that surprised that he can bat? He might be batting at number 11 but he's no Jimmy Anderson!
Edit - I'm talking absolute rubbish. That's his bowling average! His lifetime batting average in Test matches is actually 14. Still no number 11
This is actually only the 8th time in 66 Test innings that he has batted at 11
NZ's gain is SA's loss (and Wagner, Watling and de Grandhomme)
I'm tempted to go down the road of Roy, Sam Curran, Tom Curran, Meaker, Dernbach etc etc but would only end up upsetting the Surrey boys. In any event, we got Caddick and Stokes and wouldn't swap the latter for any of those mentioned above
In the last 4 series Sibley has scored 294 runs at an average of 18.38
As I've said before, I am fearful that a front three of Sibley, Burns and Crawley in the Ashes and of these Sibley is the one that I think needs to be sacrificed in order to give Hameed a chance and/or Pope an opportunity to bat at 3 sooner rather than later
In the last 4 series Sibley has scored 294 runs at an average of 18.38
As I've said before, I am fearful that a front three of Sibley, Burns and Crawley in the Ashes and of these Sibley is the one that I think needs to be sacrificed in order to give Hameed a chance and/or Pope to bat at 3 sooner rather than later
In the last 4 series Sibley has scored 294 runs at an average of 18.38
As I've said before, I am fearful that a front three of Sibley, Burns and Crawley in the Ashes and of these Sibley is the one that I think needs to be sacrificed in order to give Hameed a chance and/or Pope to bat at 3 sooner rather than later
Bring Denly back in. :-)
I think that particular ship has sailed a long time ago and won't be coming back
Tell grumpy old Stuart Broad that In shitting on OR's figures there, he's added another reason to be dropped for the 2nd test. Vice captain my arse Root'n'spoons must be shit scared of the wicketless codger to pick him for this one With Bracey in the team there's negligible risk in having 5 bowlers so for Jack Leach to be carrying the drinks is just cowardice - even with Sibley & Crawley not bothering with basic technique, again.
In the last 4 series Sibley has scored 294 runs at an average of 18.38
As I've said before, I am fearful that a front three of Sibley, Burns and Crawley in the Ashes and of these Sibley is the one that I think needs to be sacrificed in order to give Hameed a chance and/or Pope an opportunity to bat at 3 sooner rather than later
Was only a couple of weeks ago you were saying Burns had to go. Now he has made some championship scores whilst Sibbers has been out injured you've switched.
Lets not go back to the selection policy of the 90's. Both Bracey and Hameed are making a claim to be in the top 3 but are either of them there yet? I'm not sure. Lets make changes because we have someone better and ready waiting in the wings rather than for the sake of making changes.
Opening in test cricket is an impossibly hard job to do listen to Sir Ali Cook on the subject - he says the last 5 years of his test career it was 100 times harder than when he started. The game has swung into the bowlers favour, particularly at the start of the innings. I think we need to adjust expectations slightly - we arent gonna have another Cook/Strauss/Trott or Strauss/Tres/Vaughan combination. But if we can have a top 3averaging mid 30's and being incredibly consistent at batting time in that more often than not there is one partnership from those 3 that is enough to set a platform for 4-7 then that should be enough. My hopes are that Crawley as a 3 can be better than that.
NZ's gain is SA's loss (and Wagner, Watling and de Grandhomme)
I'm tempted to go down the road of Roy, Sam Curran, Tom Curran, Meaker, Dernbach etc etc but would only end up upsetting the Surrey boys. In any event, we got Caddick and Stokes and wouldn't swap the latter for any of those mentioned above
Must resist temptation to point out obvious and repeated factual inaccuracies.
In the last 4 series Sibley has scored 294 runs at an average of 18.38
As I've said before, I am fearful that a front three of Sibley, Burns and Crawley in the Ashes and of these Sibley is the one that I think needs to be sacrificed in order to give Hameed a chance and/or Pope an opportunity to bat at 3 sooner rather than later
Was only a couple of weeks ago you were saying Burns had to go. Now he has made some championship scores whilst Sibbers has been out injured you've switched.
Lets not go back to the selection policy of the 90's. Both Bracey and Hameed are making a claim to be in the top 3 but are either of them there yet? I'm not sure. Lets make changes because we have someone better and ready waiting in the wings rather than for the sake of making changes.
Opening in test cricket is an impossibly hard job to do listen to Sir Ali Cook on the subject - he says the last 5 years of his test career it was 100 times harder than when he started. The game has swung into the bowlers favour, particularly at the start of the innings. I think we need to adjust expectations slightly - we arent gonna have another Cook/Strauss/Trott or Strauss/Tres/Vaughan combination. But if we can have a top 3averaging mid 30's and being incredibly consistent at batting time in that more often than not there is one partnership from those 3 that is enough to set a platform for 4-7 then that should be enough. My hopes are that Crawley as a 3 can be better than that.
I've always maintained that the top three isn't good enough as a unit. It might have been Burns previously whereas it is Sibley now. And next week it might be Crawley. But with those three up top we are always likely to lose not one but two wickets early doors especially against the Aussies.
You talk in terns of "the top three averaging mid 30's". But they don't do they as a group or individually:
Sibley averages 29.40 and 18.38 in his last 16 innings Burns averages 31.35 Crawley averages 32.62 but take out that one mammoth innings of 267 out and it drops dramatically to 20.90
Hameed has done it at the highest level and averages 43.80 in Test cricket. How can he "wait in the wings" and prove himself further when we have no County Championship matches for 5 weeks?
You didn't want Pope batting above 6 because you wanted to protect the lad but it did the complete opposite in India. And look at what he's been doing now that he has been moved to 4 for Surrey - averages 61.66. When Stokes comes back presumably you will be happy for him to go back to 6 again?
In the last 4 series Sibley has scored 294 runs at an average of 18.38
As I've said before, I am fearful that a front three of Sibley, Burns and Crawley in the Ashes and of these Sibley is the one that I think needs to be sacrificed in order to give Hameed a chance and/or Pope an opportunity to bat at 3 sooner rather than later
Was only a couple of weeks ago you were saying Burns had to go. Now he has made some championship scores whilst Sibbers has been out injured you've switched.
Lets not go back to the selection policy of the 90's. Both Bracey and Hameed are making a claim to be in the top 3 but are either of them there yet? I'm not sure. Lets make changes because we have someone better and ready waiting in the wings rather than for the sake of making changes.
Opening in test cricket is an impossibly hard job to do listen to Sir Ali Cook on the subject - he says the last 5 years of his test career it was 100 times harder than when he started. The game has swung into the bowlers favour, particularly at the start of the innings. I think we need to adjust expectations slightly - we arent gonna have another Cook/Strauss/Trott or Strauss/Tres/Vaughan combination. But if we can have a top 3averaging mid 30's and being incredibly consistent at batting time in that more often than not there is one partnership from those 3 that is enough to set a platform for 4-7 then that should be enough. My hopes are that Crawley as a 3 can be better than that.
I've always maintained that the top three isn't good enough as a unit. It might have been Burns previously whereas it is Sibley now. And next week it might be Crawley. But with those three up top we are always likely to lose not one but two wickets early doors especially against the Aussies.
You talk in terns of "the top three averaging mid 30's". But they don't do they as a group or individually:
Sibley averages 29.40 and 18.38 in his last 16 innings Burns averages 31.35 Crawley averages 32.62 but take out that one mammoth innings of 267 out and it drops dramatically to 20.90
Hameed has done it at the highest level and averages 43.80 in Test cricket. How can he "wait in the wings" and prove himself further when we have no County Championship matches for 5 weeks?
You didn't want Pope batting above 6 because you wanted to protect the lad but it did the complete opposite in India. And look at what he's been doing now that he has been moved to 4 for Surrey - averages 61.66. When Stokes comes back presumably you will be happy for him to go back to 6 again?
I'm not saying they are there yet but I do think they can get there. Lets frame the question differently - Is this the best top 3 unit we have had since we lost Strauss and Trott? For my mind yes it undoubtedly is. Thats not to say we cant improve on it but I don't yet think Hameed has done enough to warrant dropping one of them.
Your last para is a whole different debate. I think the point you are missing is that in test cricket as it is now there is (and needs to be) broadly 2 types of batsmen. The top 3 and the middle order. They set up differently, different mind sets, have different techniques and different strengths. A middle order player may do a job in the top 3 but does it get the best out of them? no chance - see Joe Root (or before him Ian Bell the man Pope is compared to most). Equally putting a middle order player in the top 3 could be a plain disaster - See Hales or Roy. Pope is a middle order player and a very good one at that. He might be able to do a job at 3 but I dont think that will get the best out of him. He is the heir apparent to Root for the number 4 slot. Until then he should fit in somewhere else in the middle order. For what its worth I would have Pope 5 Stokes 6. If we want a top 3 player we should pick a top 3 player (the best ones in the country) and that's what I believe we have in Burns, Sibley and Crawley with Hameed and Bracey as competition.
Also Pope has batted 4 for Surrey ever since his first England call up in 2018. Batting 4 is hugely different from batting 3. We have discovered a potentially world class middle order player. Its so very English to try and turn him into something he is not.
In the last 4 series Sibley has scored 294 runs at an average of 18.38
As I've said before, I am fearful that a front three of Sibley, Burns and Crawley in the Ashes and of these Sibley is the one that I think needs to be sacrificed in order to give Hameed a chance and/or Pope an opportunity to bat at 3 sooner rather than later
Was only a couple of weeks ago you were saying Burns had to go. Now he has made some championship scores whilst Sibbers has been out injured you've switched.
Lets not go back to the selection policy of the 90's. Both Bracey and Hameed are making a claim to be in the top 3 but are either of them there yet? I'm not sure. Lets make changes because we have someone better and ready waiting in the wings rather than for the sake of making changes.
Opening in test cricket is an impossibly hard job to do listen to Sir Ali Cook on the subject - he says the last 5 years of his test career it was 100 times harder than when he started. The game has swung into the bowlers favour, particularly at the start of the innings. I think we need to adjust expectations slightly - we arent gonna have another Cook/Strauss/Trott or Strauss/Tres/Vaughan combination. But if we can have a top 3averaging mid 30's and being incredibly consistent at batting time in that more often than not there is one partnership from those 3 that is enough to set a platform for 4-7 then that should be enough. My hopes are that Crawley as a 3 can be better than that.
I've always maintained that the top three isn't good enough as a unit. It might have been Burns previously whereas it is Sibley now. And next week it might be Crawley. But with those three up top we are always likely to lose not one but two wickets early doors especially against the Aussies.
You talk in terns of "the top three averaging mid 30's". But they don't do they as a group or individually:
Sibley averages 29.40 and 18.38 in his last 16 innings Burns averages 31.35 Crawley averages 32.62 but take out that one mammoth innings of 267 out and it drops dramatically to 20.90
Hameed has done it at the highest level and averages 43.80 in Test cricket. How can he "wait in the wings" and prove himself further when we have no County Championship matches for 5 weeks?
You didn't want Pope batting above 6 because you wanted to protect the lad but it did the complete opposite in India. And look at what he's been doing now that he has been moved to 4 for Surrey - averages 61.66. When Stokes comes back presumably you will be happy for him to go back to 6 again?
I'm not saying they are there yet but I do think they can get there. Lets frame the question differently - Is this the best top 3 unit we have had since we lost Strauss and Trott? For my mind yes it undoubtedly is. Thats not to say we cant improve on it but I don't yet think Hameed has done enough to warrant dropping one of them.
Your last para is a whole different debate. I think the point you are missing is that in test cricket as it is now there is (and needs to be) broadly 2 types of batsmen. The top 3 and the middle order. They set up differently, different mind sets, have different techniques and different strengths. A middle order player may do a job in the top 3 but does it get the best out of them? no chance - see Joe Root (or before him Ian Bell the man Pope is compared to most). Equally putting a middle order player in the top 3 could be a plain disaster - See Hales or Roy. Pope is a middle order player and a very good one at that. He might be able to do a job at 3 but I dont think that will get the best out of him. He is the heir apparent to Root for the number 4 slot. Until then he should fit in somewhere else in the middle order. For what its worth I would have Pope 5 Stokes 6. If we want a top 3 player we should pick a top 3 player (the best ones in the country) and that's what I believe we have in Burns, Sibley and Crawley with Hameed and Bracey as competition.
Also Pope has batted 4 for Surrey ever since his first England call up in 2018. Batting 4 is hugely different from batting 3. We have discovered a potentially world class middle order player. Its so very English to try and turn him into something he is not.
But with those three up top for England, batting at 4 is batting at 3 and sometimes, like today, when we are two down in under 7 overs, it is the equivalent of opening!
Tell grumpy old Stuart Broad that In shitting on OR's figures there, he's added another reason to be dropped for the 2nd test. Vice captain my arse Root'n'spoons must be shit scared of the wicketless codger to pick him for this one With Bracey in the team there's negligible risk in having 5 bowlers so for Jack Leach to be carrying the drinks is just cowardice - even with Sibley & Crawley not bothering with basic technique, again.
no wickets for Broad in the last FIVE test innings (Simon Wilde) ..
In the last 4 series Sibley has scored 294 runs at an average of 18.38
As I've said before, I am fearful that a front three of Sibley, Burns and Crawley in the Ashes and of these Sibley is the one that I think needs to be sacrificed in order to give Hameed a chance and/or Pope an opportunity to bat at 3 sooner rather than later
Was only a couple of weeks ago you were saying Burns had to go. Now he has made some championship scores whilst Sibbers has been out injured you've switched.
Lets not go back to the selection policy of the 90's. Both Bracey and Hameed are making a claim to be in the top 3 but are either of them there yet? I'm not sure. Lets make changes because we have someone better and ready waiting in the wings rather than for the sake of making changes.
Opening in test cricket is an impossibly hard job to do listen to Sir Ali Cook on the subject - he says the last 5 years of his test career it was 100 times harder than when he started. The game has swung into the bowlers favour, particularly at the start of the innings. I think we need to adjust expectations slightly - we arent gonna have another Cook/Strauss/Trott or Strauss/Tres/Vaughan combination. But if we can have a top 3averaging mid 30's and being incredibly consistent at batting time in that more often than not there is one partnership from those 3 that is enough to set a platform for 4-7 then that should be enough. My hopes are that Crawley as a 3 can be better than that.
I've always maintained that the top three isn't good enough as a unit. It might have been Burns previously whereas it is Sibley now. And next week it might be Crawley. But with those three up top we are always likely to lose not one but two wickets early doors especially against the Aussies.
You talk in terns of "the top three averaging mid 30's". But they don't do they as a group or individually:
Sibley averages 29.40 and 18.38 in his last 16 innings Burns averages 31.35 Crawley averages 32.62 but take out that one mammoth innings of 267 out and it drops dramatically to 20.90
Hameed has done it at the highest level and averages 43.80 in Test cricket. How can he "wait in the wings" and prove himself further when we have no County Championship matches for 5 weeks?
You didn't want Pope batting above 6 because you wanted to protect the lad but it did the complete opposite in India. And look at what he's been doing now that he has been moved to 4 for Surrey - averages 61.66. When Stokes comes back presumably you will be happy for him to go back to 6 again?
I'm not saying they are there yet but I do think they can get there. Lets frame the question differently - Is this the best top 3 unit we have had since we lost Strauss and Trott? For my mind yes it undoubtedly is. Thats not to say we cant improve on it but I don't yet think Hameed has done enough to warrant dropping one of them.
Your last para is a whole different debate. I think the point you are missing is that in test cricket as it is now there is (and needs to be) broadly 2 types of batsmen. The top 3 and the middle order. They set up differently, different mind sets, have different techniques and different strengths. A middle order player may do a job in the top 3 but does it get the best out of them? no chance - see Joe Root (or before him Ian Bell the man Pope is compared to most). Equally putting a middle order player in the top 3 could be a plain disaster - See Hales or Roy. Pope is a middle order player and a very good one at that. He might be able to do a job at 3 but I dont think that will get the best out of him. He is the heir apparent to Root for the number 4 slot. Until then he should fit in somewhere else in the middle order. For what its worth I would have Pope 5 Stokes 6. If we want a top 3 player we should pick a top 3 player (the best ones in the country) and that's what I believe we have in Burns, Sibley and Crawley with Hameed and Bracey as competition.
Also Pope has batted 4 for Surrey ever since his first England call up in 2018. Batting 4 is hugely different from batting 3. We have discovered a potentially world class middle order player. Its so very English to try and turn him into something he is not.
But with those three up top for England, batting at 4 is batting at 3 and sometimes, like today, when we are two down in under 7 overs, it is the equivalent of opening!
So we have a problem with the top 3 (whats new? we have since 2012). The solution is not to shove a middle order player in there. Been there, done that. Doesn't work.
Tell grumpy old Stuart Broad that In shitting on OR's figures there, he's added another reason to be dropped for the 2nd test. Vice captain my arse Root'n'spoons must be shit scared of the wicketless codger to pick him for this one With Bracey in the team there's negligible risk in having 5 bowlers so for Jack Leach to be carrying the drinks is just cowardice - even with Sibley & Crawley not bothering with basic technique, again.
no wickets for Broad in the last FIVE test innings (Simon Wilde) ..
Drop him. Always makes him angry and come back hard
Comments
199 or something would have been harsh.
Another opposition batsman excels at Lords once again.
7-1
Poor shot.
As I've said before, I am fearful that a front three of Sibley, Burns and Crawley in the Ashes and of these Sibley is the one that I think needs to be sacrificed in order to give Hameed a chance and/or Pope an opportunity to bat at 3 sooner rather than later
In shitting on OR's figures there, he's added another reason to be dropped for the 2nd test.
Vice captain my arse
Root'n'spoons must be shit scared of the wicketless codger to pick him for this one
With Bracey in the team there's negligible risk in having 5 bowlers so for Jack Leach to be carrying the drinks is just cowardice - even with Sibley & Crawley not bothering with basic technique, again.
Both out to poor shots.
Lets not go back to the selection policy of the 90's. Both Bracey and Hameed are making a claim to be in the top 3 but are either of them there yet? I'm not sure. Lets make changes because we have someone better and ready waiting in the wings rather than for the sake of making changes.
Opening in test cricket is an impossibly hard job to do listen to Sir Ali Cook on the subject - he says the last 5 years of his test career it was 100 times harder than when he started. The game has swung into the bowlers favour, particularly at the start of the innings. I think we need to adjust expectations slightly - we arent gonna have another Cook/Strauss/Trott or Strauss/Tres/Vaughan combination. But if we can have a top 3averaging mid 30's and being incredibly consistent at batting time in that more often than not there is one partnership from those 3 that is enough to set a platform for 4-7 then that should be enough. My hopes are that Crawley as a 3 can be better than that.
Wasn't aware Northampton had moved to SA
You talk in terns of "the top three averaging mid 30's". But they don't do they as a group or individually:
Sibley averages 29.40 and 18.38 in his last 16 innings
Burns averages 31.35
Crawley averages 32.62 but take out that one mammoth innings of 267 out and it drops dramatically to 20.90
Hameed has done it at the highest level and averages 43.80 in Test cricket. How can he "wait in the wings" and prove himself further when we have no County Championship matches for 5 weeks?
You didn't want Pope batting above 6 because you wanted to protect the lad but it did the complete opposite in India. And look at what he's been doing now that he has been moved to 4 for Surrey - averages 61.66. When Stokes comes back presumably you will be happy for him to go back to 6 again?
Your last para is a whole different debate. I think the point you are missing is that in test cricket as it is now there is (and needs to be) broadly 2 types of batsmen. The top 3 and the middle order. They set up differently, different mind sets, have different techniques and different strengths. A middle order player may do a job in the top 3 but does it get the best out of them? no chance - see Joe Root (or before him Ian Bell the man Pope is compared to most). Equally putting a middle order player in the top 3 could be a plain disaster - See Hales or Roy. Pope is a middle order player and a very good one at that. He might be able to do a job at 3 but I dont think that will get the best out of him. He is the heir apparent to Root for the number 4 slot. Until then he should fit in somewhere else in the middle order. For what its worth I would have Pope 5 Stokes 6. If we want a top 3 player we should pick a top 3 player (the best ones in the country) and that's what I believe we have in Burns, Sibley and Crawley with Hameed and Bracey as competition.
Also Pope has batted 4 for Surrey ever since his first England call up in 2018. Batting 4 is hugely different from batting 3. We have discovered a potentially world class middle order player. Its so very English to try and turn him into something he is not.