Morgan is currently ranked the number 16th best T20 batsman in the world. Oh and the one below him is Buttler!
Which proves the rankings are rubbish. Buttler's my no 1 & Morgan is also right up there for me.
Kane Williamson is ranked 52nd. George Munsey is 21st & Richard Berrington is 22nd (both Scotland). And Malan will be number 1 for another 11 months regardless of his form!!!!
The rankings are clearly worthless but this is how, allegedly, they are calculated:
The MRF Tyres ICC Player Rankings is a table where international cricket players performances are ranked using a points based system which is worked out by doing a series of calculations leading to a sophisticated moving average. Players are rated on a scale of 0 to 1000 points. If a player’s performance is improving on his past record, his points increase; if his performance is declining his points will go down. The value of each player’s performance within a match is calculated using an algorithm, a series of calculations (all pre-programmed) based on various circumstances in the match. There is no human intervention in this calculation process, and no subjective assessment is made. There are slightly different factors for each of the different formats of the game.
The annual updates take place on 1 October each year.
No 2 teams can get more than 8 points & England have a much superior run rate.
Technically we're not through yet.
The Saffers and Aussies can both reach 8 points.
They both have to play Bangladesh, the Aussies also play the Windies, whilst our last game is against SA.
If the Aussies and Saffers had two crushing victories there is a possibility that run rates could get closer.
You'd like to think that we have enough runs on the board, so to speak, to see us through even if we take Leuth's tactical defeat to bugger up the baggy Greens.
No 2 teams can get more than 8 points & England have a much superior run rate.
Technically we're not through yet.
The Saffers and Aussies can both reach 8 points.
They both have to play Bangladesh, the Aussies also play the Windies, whilst our last game is against SA.
If the Aussies and Saffers had two crushing victories there is a possibility that run rates could get closer.
You'd like to think that we have enough runs on the board, so to speak, to see us through even if we take Leuth's tactical defeat to bugger up the baggy Greens.
We'll also know what's needed as Australia's last game is before our game v SA.
Morgan is currently ranked the number 16th best T20 batsman in the world. Oh and the one below him is Buttler!
Which proves the rankings are rubbish. Buttler's my no 1 & Morgan is also right up there for me.
Kane Williamson is ranked 52nd. George Munsey is 21st & Richard Berrington is 22nd (both Scotland). And Malan will be number 1 for another 11 months regardless of his form!!!!
The rankings are clearly worthless but this is how, allegedly, they are calculated:
The MRF Tyres ICC Player Rankings is a table where international cricket players performances are ranked using a points based system which is worked out by doing a series of calculations leading to a sophisticated moving average. Players are rated on a scale of 0 to 1000 points. If a player’s performance is improving on his past record, his points increase; if his performance is declining his points will go down. The value of each player’s performance within a match is calculated using an algorithm, a series of calculations (all pre-programmed) based on various circumstances in the match. There is no human intervention in this calculation process, and no subjective assessment is made. There are slightly different factors for each of the different formats of the game.
The annual updates take place on 1 October each year.
The bottom line is that it is unlikely that a team which wins 4 out of 5 doesn't go through. Yes it is mathematically possible in the same way it is possible for Spurs to win the league.
India are a great side and I can see them winning their last three. We certainly don't want them getting through. It is the NRR that is the issue.
For future World Cups, I would think a good development would be the top team in the group having the choice whether to bat or ball in the semi rather than have a coin toss.
The bottom line is that it is unlikely that a team which wins 4 out of 5 doesn't go through. Yes it is mathematically possible in the same way it is possible for Spurs to win the league.
India are a great side and I can see them winning their last three. We certainly don't want them getting through. It is the NRR that is the issue.
For future World Cups, I would think a good development would be the top team in the group having the choice whether to bat or ball in the semi rather than have a coin toss.
I think it's already been decided that, whichever teams reach the semi-final and final in the next T20 World Cup, India will get to choose who bats first.
Be interested to see what meddling the ICC have in mind, and how India try to influence it... Pity as I used to love the India team... Sehwag, gambhir, dravid, tendulkar, Laxman, ganguly, dhoni, kumble, zaheer, yuvraj (maybe less so harbajan...) But the current lot, less so. Their fans on social media nooo. Always liked the Aussie fans, they dish it out big time but at least they can take it back.
Below is a list of the results of the Super 12 matches and the scores attained by the team batting first.
(1) 4/17 teams won batting first (2) 1/13 teams won with a score of less than 160 - and that was by just 3 runs (3) 3/4 teams won with a score of 160 or more - the one game where this didn't happen was between two qualifiers from the preliminary group stages namely Sri Lanka and Bangladesh (4) All 4 teams that won batting first defeated qualifiers from the preliminary group stages (5) As @Leuth says - aim to get 160 and you have a decent chance (6) As I've been saying - just don't lose the toss!
55 Lost 109 Lost 110 Lost 118 Lost 124 Lost 125 Lost 134 Lost 142 Lost 142 Won (West Indies beat Bangladesh by 3 runs) 143 Lost 147 Lost 151 Lost 154 Lost 160 Won (Afghanistan beat Namibia by 62 runs) 163 Won (England beat Sri Lanka by 26 runs) 171 Lost 190 Won (Afghanistan best Scotland by 130 runs)
Hard to pick second place in our group but Warne is probably right unless South Africa beat the England team or Australia have a slip up against Bangladesh or West Indies.
He’s having a laugh with the other group though. Fully expect Pakistan and New Zealand to qualify out of that one.
Which would set up:
England v New Zealand Pakistan v Australia/South Africa
I deliberately waited until after Buttler got a score to start that debate, I could have posted it after the 2nd match when he'd had 2 failures but didnt want to be accused of pilling on him.
Like I said I get the point that you want him to face the most balls although for me its actually about him facing enough balls to impact the game. That can still be done from over 10 onwards.
His innings yesterday was excellent but we have 4 or 5 others who can play that innings . We dont have anyone else with the experience he has at the highest level of being a finisher, we have no one else who can come in with 10 overs to go and take the game away from the opposition in 30 balls - and this is particularly important if we want to win when batting first as we will invariably have to at the world cup, we arent gonna win every toss. Batting 2nd I agree its less important because you know how you have to pace your innings, but we are already very good at winning by chasing. We need to find a formula that also allows us to win consistently by batting first and for me him as a floating middle order player is best for that.
Like I said before if you get to the 15th over and he's not come in then it means at least 2 of your top 3/4 have gone big in which case you dont really need him.
I can't agree. At least while we have Morgan in the side.
Buttler's best position is as an opener. England's best opener is Buttler. And, for me, that's where the debate should end.
However, some people will point out that Buttler is *also* a great finisher. But that point pales when you also have Morgan as a permanent fixture in the side.
Buttler is our best opener. Morgan is our best finisher. And that is without referencing the fact we have, between them in the order, the world's highest ranked T20 international player.
There are a few things that still need to be fixed before the world cup. I don't think Buttler's batting position is one of them.
See above as to why that's wrong.
You've just said we have one finisher - Morgan. So why have the only other person opening when the ball is at its liveliest and you have plenty of other options to open. The game can't be won in the first six overs but it can be lost if your most destructive batsman is out early doors because he's having to face the new ball.
Buttler needs to be the team floater and come in when the situation demands him to do so.
It's my opinion. You may have a different opinion. That doesn't make either of us 'wrong'. Also, for what it's worth, I didn't say we have one finisher. We have many, the best of which is Morgan. If we had a paucity in that role, then there would be a stronger argument for Buttler not to open. The fact is, we have a surfeit.
My preference is to have our best opener opening and able to bat destructively in the power play. And for our best finisher batting in the final few overs, wherever that means he needs to be in the order.
I also think Buttler benefits greatly for having a settled, agreed, permanent position in the team: that comes from giving him the gloves (despite other wicket keepers being in the eleven) and having him open (despite his efficacy batting later in the innings.
I agree he could also bat effectively lower in the order.
I also agree that the game can't be won, but can be lost, by the batting side, in the first six overs. But I would also posit that the game can be won by the batting side in the first twelve overs. A dozen overs of Roy and Buttler batting at full throttle would likely take the game away from any side in the world. But twelve overs of careful, considered, defensive batting by players protecting Buttler (and Stokes and Morgan) will cost more games than it wins.
I think Buttler should open the batting for England. I think he would be a certainty to open for any other side in the world. We should look for improvements in every aspect for the game, but not make changes for the sake of it.
My last word on this (you'll be pleased to hear). If Buttler were to drop down the order, I don't think there is anyone you could promote that would make opposition bowlers more fearful. Sometimes you have to do what the opposition least want you to do. And oppositions do not want Buttler batting with 120 balls still to face.
You have your opinion and it seems that the England selectors have made up their mind and are going with it. As I've said all along i can see the argument its just not what I would do.
You make some valid points but 2 frankly ridiculous points which I've bolded above.
1) no one is suggesting that. No one wants to protect Buttler or Morgan. You're not stupid enough to think Roy/Bairstow/Hales/Banton would open a T20 with "careful considered defensive batting" so I assume you are on one of your idiotic wind ups.
2) Thats why he is used as a finisher in the IPL rather than opening? There is a worldwide shortage of finishers. Each team would be lucky to have 1 decent player. Its because generally at domestic level each team only has 2 or 3 good T20 batsmen so they are trained to bat in the top 3. This problem is even worse in county cricket, Bopara and Moeen are the only ones who have successfully played that role in the blast consistently over the last few years. Here we have someone who has come through and spent the majority of his career as a finisher in domestic and international cricket. He was used as an opener for a period in the IPL before returning to his finisher role. He always batted as a finisher for England until the last year or so when they've had an eye on the world cup. Morgan and Stokes bat lower in the order but arent really considered finishers.
You're opinion isnt wrong but those 2 points you made are.
Are you, @canteraddict and @Addick_Addict coming round to the general consensus that Buttler should, after all, be opening the batting?
I deliberately waited until after Buttler got a score to start that debate, I could have posted it after the 2nd match when he'd had 2 failures but didnt want to be accused of pilling on him.
Like I said I get the point that you want him to face the most balls although for me its actually about him facing enough balls to impact the game. That can still be done from over 10 onwards.
His innings yesterday was excellent but we have 4 or 5 others who can play that innings . We dont have anyone else with the experience he has at the highest level of being a finisher, we have no one else who can come in with 10 overs to go and take the game away from the opposition in 30 balls - and this is particularly important if we want to win when batting first as we will invariably have to at the world cup, we arent gonna win every toss. Batting 2nd I agree its less important because you know how you have to pace your innings, but we are already very good at winning by chasing. We need to find a formula that also allows us to win consistently by batting first and for me him as a floating middle order player is best for that.
Like I said before if you get to the 15th over and he's not come in then it means at least 2 of your top 3/4 have gone big in which case you dont really need him.
I can't agree. At least while we have Morgan in the side.
Buttler's best position is as an opener. England's best opener is Buttler. And, for me, that's where the debate should end.
However, some people will point out that Buttler is *also* a great finisher. But that point pales when you also have Morgan as a permanent fixture in the side.
Buttler is our best opener. Morgan is our best finisher. And that is without referencing the fact we have, between them in the order, the world's highest ranked T20 international player.
There are a few things that still need to be fixed before the world cup. I don't think Buttler's batting position is one of them.
See above as to why that's wrong.
You've just said we have one finisher - Morgan. So why have the only other person opening when the ball is at its liveliest and you have plenty of other options to open. The game can't be won in the first six overs but it can be lost if your most destructive batsman is out early doors because he's having to face the new ball.
Buttler needs to be the team floater and come in when the situation demands him to do so.
It's my opinion. You may have a different opinion. That doesn't make either of us 'wrong'. Also, for what it's worth, I didn't say we have one finisher. We have many, the best of which is Morgan. If we had a paucity in that role, then there would be a stronger argument for Buttler not to open. The fact is, we have a surfeit.
My preference is to have our best opener opening and able to bat destructively in the power play. And for our best finisher batting in the final few overs, wherever that means he needs to be in the order.
I also think Buttler benefits greatly for having a settled, agreed, permanent position in the team: that comes from giving him the gloves (despite other wicket keepers being in the eleven) and having him open (despite his efficacy batting later in the innings.
I agree he could also bat effectively lower in the order.
I also agree that the game can't be won, but can be lost, by the batting side, in the first six overs. But I would also posit that the game can be won by the batting side in the first twelve overs. A dozen overs of Roy and Buttler batting at full throttle would likely take the game away from any side in the world. But twelve overs of careful, considered, defensive batting by players protecting Buttler (and Stokes and Morgan) will cost more games than it wins.
I think Buttler should open the batting for England. I think he would be a certainty to open for any other side in the world. We should look for improvements in every aspect for the game, but not make changes for the sake of it.
My last word on this (you'll be pleased to hear). If Buttler were to drop down the order, I don't think there is anyone you could promote that would make opposition bowlers more fearful. Sometimes you have to do what the opposition least want you to do. And oppositions do not want Buttler batting with 120 balls still to face.
You have your opinion and it seems that the England selectors have made up their mind and are going with it. As I've said all along i can see the argument its just not what I would do.
You make some valid points but 2 frankly ridiculous points which I've bolded above.
1) no one is suggesting that. No one wants to protect Buttler or Morgan. You're not stupid enough to think Roy/Bairstow/Hales/Banton would open a T20 with "careful considered defensive batting" so I assume you are on one of your idiotic wind ups.
2) Thats why he is used as a finisher in the IPL rather than opening? There is a worldwide shortage of finishers. Each team would be lucky to have 1 decent player. Its because generally at domestic level each team only has 2 or 3 good T20 batsmen so they are trained to bat in the top 3. This problem is even worse in county cricket, Bopara and Moeen are the only ones who have successfully played that role in the blast consistently over the last few years. Here we have someone who has come through and spent the majority of his career as a finisher in domestic and international cricket. He was used as an opener for a period in the IPL before returning to his finisher role. He always batted as a finisher for England until the last year or so when they've had an eye on the world cup. Morgan and Stokes bat lower in the order but arent really considered finishers.
You're opinion isnt wrong but those 2 points you made are.
Are you, @canteraddict and @Addick_Addict coming round to the general consensus that Buttler should, after all, be opening the batting?
In these conditions as we've both suggested. If and when he fails here, it will be interesting to see who actually steps up. By his own admission, it is because he's batted down the order that he has gained the ability to bat throughout the innings and manage any given situation.
On a road, Roy and Bairstow are as good an opening pair as anywhere. Whereas Buttler is the best we have at finishing an innings and taking the game away from the opposition.
Whilst Buttler is incredible opening the batting I do think Bairstow is a bit wasted at 4.
I would have Bairstow opening with Buttler. But that's because I don't have as much patience with Roy as the selectors seem to have.
Having said that, the selectors have got pretty much everything right so far, and, on that basis, if they think Roy should open and Bairstow should bat at four, it's almost certainly the right decision.
I deliberately waited until after Buttler got a score to start that debate, I could have posted it after the 2nd match when he'd had 2 failures but didnt want to be accused of pilling on him.
Like I said I get the point that you want him to face the most balls although for me its actually about him facing enough balls to impact the game. That can still be done from over 10 onwards.
His innings yesterday was excellent but we have 4 or 5 others who can play that innings . We dont have anyone else with the experience he has at the highest level of being a finisher, we have no one else who can come in with 10 overs to go and take the game away from the opposition in 30 balls - and this is particularly important if we want to win when batting first as we will invariably have to at the world cup, we arent gonna win every toss. Batting 2nd I agree its less important because you know how you have to pace your innings, but we are already very good at winning by chasing. We need to find a formula that also allows us to win consistently by batting first and for me him as a floating middle order player is best for that.
Like I said before if you get to the 15th over and he's not come in then it means at least 2 of your top 3/4 have gone big in which case you dont really need him.
I can't agree. At least while we have Morgan in the side.
Buttler's best position is as an opener. England's best opener is Buttler. And, for me, that's where the debate should end.
However, some people will point out that Buttler is *also* a great finisher. But that point pales when you also have Morgan as a permanent fixture in the side.
Buttler is our best opener. Morgan is our best finisher. And that is without referencing the fact we have, between them in the order, the world's highest ranked T20 international player.
There are a few things that still need to be fixed before the world cup. I don't think Buttler's batting position is one of them.
See above as to why that's wrong.
You've just said we have one finisher - Morgan. So why have the only other person opening when the ball is at its liveliest and you have plenty of other options to open. The game can't be won in the first six overs but it can be lost if your most destructive batsman is out early doors because he's having to face the new ball.
Buttler needs to be the team floater and come in when the situation demands him to do so.
It's my opinion. You may have a different opinion. That doesn't make either of us 'wrong'. Also, for what it's worth, I didn't say we have one finisher. We have many, the best of which is Morgan. If we had a paucity in that role, then there would be a stronger argument for Buttler not to open. The fact is, we have a surfeit.
My preference is to have our best opener opening and able to bat destructively in the power play. And for our best finisher batting in the final few overs, wherever that means he needs to be in the order.
I also think Buttler benefits greatly for having a settled, agreed, permanent position in the team: that comes from giving him the gloves (despite other wicket keepers being in the eleven) and having him open (despite his efficacy batting later in the innings.
I agree he could also bat effectively lower in the order.
I also agree that the game can't be won, but can be lost, by the batting side, in the first six overs. But I would also posit that the game can be won by the batting side in the first twelve overs. A dozen overs of Roy and Buttler batting at full throttle would likely take the game away from any side in the world. But twelve overs of careful, considered, defensive batting by players protecting Buttler (and Stokes and Morgan) will cost more games than it wins.
I think Buttler should open the batting for England. I think he would be a certainty to open for any other side in the world. We should look for improvements in every aspect for the game, but not make changes for the sake of it.
My last word on this (you'll be pleased to hear). If Buttler were to drop down the order, I don't think there is anyone you could promote that would make opposition bowlers more fearful. Sometimes you have to do what the opposition least want you to do. And oppositions do not want Buttler batting with 120 balls still to face.
You have your opinion and it seems that the England selectors have made up their mind and are going with it. As I've said all along i can see the argument its just not what I would do.
You make some valid points but 2 frankly ridiculous points which I've bolded above.
1) no one is suggesting that. No one wants to protect Buttler or Morgan. You're not stupid enough to think Roy/Bairstow/Hales/Banton would open a T20 with "careful considered defensive batting" so I assume you are on one of your idiotic wind ups.
2) Thats why he is used as a finisher in the IPL rather than opening? There is a worldwide shortage of finishers. Each team would be lucky to have 1 decent player. Its because generally at domestic level each team only has 2 or 3 good T20 batsmen so they are trained to bat in the top 3. This problem is even worse in county cricket, Bopara and Moeen are the only ones who have successfully played that role in the blast consistently over the last few years. Here we have someone who has come through and spent the majority of his career as a finisher in domestic and international cricket. He was used as an opener for a period in the IPL before returning to his finisher role. He always batted as a finisher for England until the last year or so when they've had an eye on the world cup. Morgan and Stokes bat lower in the order but arent really considered finishers.
You're opinion isnt wrong but those 2 points you made are.
Are you, @canteraddict and @Addick_Addict coming round to the general consensus that Buttler should, after all, be opening the batting?
As I said on the previous page, in this tournament, in these conditions where the opening powerplay is proving to be so important, it was absolutely the right call to have him opening.
I still maintain on good pitches say perhaps in English conditions here you would be looking for 200 each time. I would argue our best side would have him as the finisher. We have openers who in those conditions are almost as good as him. The marginal gain of him opening there would be small. We have no one who can finish like him. The marginal gain of him finishing would be huge.
This is painful to watch especially as this particular wicket appears to have a bit of "spite" about it and facing Rabada and Nortje in those conditions really can't be fun
Comments
The rankings are clearly worthless but this is how, allegedly, they are calculated:
The MRF Tyres ICC Player Rankings is a table where international cricket players performances are ranked using a points based system which is worked out by doing a series of calculations leading to a sophisticated moving average. Players are rated on a scale of 0 to 1000 points. If a player’s performance is improving on his past record, his points increase; if his performance is declining his points will go down. The value of each player’s performance within a match is calculated using an algorithm, a series of calculations (all pre-programmed) based on various circumstances in the match. There is no human intervention in this calculation process, and no subjective assessment is made. There are slightly different factors for each of the different formats of the game.
The annual updates take place on 1 October each year.
The Saffers and Aussies can both reach 8 points.
They both have to play Bangladesh, the Aussies also play the Windies, whilst our last game is against SA.
If the Aussies and Saffers had two crushing victories there is a possibility that run rates could get closer.
You'd like to think that we have enough runs on the board, so to speak, to see us through even if we take Leuth's tactical defeat to bugger up the baggy Greens.
India are a great side and I can see them winning their last three. We certainly don't want them getting through. It is the NRR that is the issue.
For future World Cups, I would think a good development would be the top team in the group having the choice whether to bat or ball in the semi rather than have a coin toss.
(1) 4/17 teams won batting first
(2) 1/13 teams won with a score of less than 160 - and that was by just 3 runs
(3) 3/4 teams won with a score of 160 or more - the one game where this didn't happen was between two qualifiers from the preliminary group stages namely Sri Lanka and Bangladesh
(4) All 4 teams that won batting first defeated qualifiers from the preliminary group stages
(5) As @Leuth says - aim to get 160 and you have a decent chance
(6) As I've been saying - just don't lose the toss!
55 Lost
109 Lost
110 Lost
118 Lost
124 Lost
125 Lost
134 Lost
142 Lost
142 Won (West Indies beat Bangladesh by 3 runs)
143 Lost
147 Lost
151 Lost
154 Lost
160 Won (Afghanistan beat Namibia by 62 runs)
163 Won (England beat Sri Lanka by 26 runs)
171 Lost
190 Won (Afghanistan best Scotland by 130 runs)
He’s having a laugh with the other group though. Fully expect Pakistan and New Zealand to qualify out of that one.
Which would set up:
England v New Zealand
Pakistan v Australia/South Africa
Are you, @canteraddict and @Addick_Addict coming round to the general consensus that Buttler should, after all, be opening the batting?
On a road, Roy and Bairstow are as good an opening pair as anywhere. Whereas Buttler is the best we have at finishing an innings and taking the game away from the opposition.
Having said that, the selectors have got pretty much everything right so far, and, on that basis, if they think Roy should open and Bairstow should bat at four, it's almost certainly the right decision.
I still maintain on good pitches say perhaps in English conditions here you would be looking for 200 each time. I would argue our best side would have him as the finisher. We have openers who in those conditions are almost as good as him. The marginal gain of him opening there would be small. We have no one who can finish like him. The marginal gain of him finishing would be huge.
Rabada 3-10
34-4 off 8