Although I agree with the Crawley to be dropped comments, who would come in though?
It's the Johnson question!
McCullum and Stokes have got a problem here. They should drop Crawley. But there are two reasons I think they might decide against doing so. First, on balance, they probably shouldn't bring in a new, untried batsman to face India in a must-win Test. And, secondly, I think the new management might want to give Crawley - a player who perfectly fits their attacking ethos - as long as it takes to get him back into form.
Ultimately, it might come down to whether they think Crawly's more likely to be a certainty to open next Summer by playing for Kent or for England. And the new Managing Director of England cricket might have some advice for them in that regard.
I'm also not sure that they will drop him even though they absolutely should because he is mentally shot to pieces - those early balls when he didn't know whether to stick or twist and then ultimately he chose to twist once too often.
No batsman's career can be based on one big innings. Since that 267, now almost two years ago, he has had 32 innings and scored 593 runs at an average of 18.53. I cannot recall an English batsman getting that many opportunities over such a long period of time and being in such poor form for the duration - Crawley's lifetime average in First Class cricket is 30.54 and this season for Kent it is an almost identical 30.20.
Sam Robson is rumoured to be ripe for a recall but there is one person who people are saying might be a one season wonder and who needs another year of the same to prove himself - Ben Compton, the top run scorer in the country with 988 runs at an average of 98.80 in Division 1 too. Where I think Compton is a bit different is his age (28) and the fact that he is purely a red ball player - the reason Counties were so reluctant to give him a chance previously. He knows his game and rather like Cook, his limited number of scoring strokes is a positive here. We have plenty of players in the shape of Pope, Root, Bairstow and Stokes who can up the tempo if needed but what we are lacking is a couple up top who will consistently take the shine off the ball and afford those stroke makers the opportunity to do so when the ball has gone soft.
What do we have to lose? It's something that they would do in Australia or dare I say New Zealand. If only we had a coach from one of those countries who likes a gamble!
Although I agree with the Crawley to be dropped comments, who would come in though?
It's the Johnson question!
McCullum and Stokes have got a problem here. They should drop Crawley. But there are two reasons I think they might decide against doing so. First, on balance, they probably shouldn't bring in a new, untried batsman to face India in a must-win Test. And, secondly, I think the new management might want to give Crawley - a player who perfectly fits their attacking ethos - as long as it takes to get him back into form.
Ultimately, it might come down to whether they think Crawly's more likely to be a certainty to open next Summer by playing for Kent or for England. And the new Managing Director of England cricket might have some advice for them in that regard.
I'm also not sure that they will drop him even though they absolutely should because he is mentally shot to pieces - those early balls when he didn't know whether to stick or twist and then ultimately he chose to twist once too often.
No batsman's career can be based on one big innings. Since that 267, now almost two years ago, he has had 32 innings and scored 593 runs at an average of 18.53. I cannot recall an English batsman getting that many opportunities over such a long period of time and being in such poor form for the duration - Crawley's lifetime average in First Class cricket is 30.54 and this season for Kent it is an almost identical 30.20.
Sam Robson is rumoured to be ripe for a recall but there is one person who people are saying might be a one season wonder and who needs another year of the same to prove himself - Ben Compton, the top run scorer in the country with 988 runs at an average of 98.80 in Division 1 too. Where I think Compton is a bit different is his age (28) and the fact that he is purely a white ball player - the reason Counties were so reluctant to give him a chance previously. He knows his game and rather like Cook, his limited number of scoring strokes is a positive here. We have plenty of players in the shape of Pope, Root, Bairstow and Stokes who can up the tempo if needed but what we are lacking is a couple up top who will consistently take the shine off the ball and afford those stroke makers the opportunity to do so when the ball has gone soft.
What do we have to lose? It's something that they would do in Australia or dare I say New Zealand. If only we had a coach from one of those countries who likes a gamble!
Agree other than you mean red ball not white ball. Compton reminds me slightly of a considerably less experienced Brian Luckhurst. He wasn't generally thought of as a test cricketer when he came in yet didn't let England down when selected.
Although I agree with the Crawley to be dropped comments, who would come in though?
It's the Johnson question!
McCullum and Stokes have got a problem here. They should drop Crawley. But there are two reasons I think they might decide against doing so. First, on balance, they probably shouldn't bring in a new, untried batsman to face India in a must-win Test. And, secondly, I think the new management might want to give Crawley - a player who perfectly fits their attacking ethos - as long as it takes to get him back into form.
Ultimately, it might come down to whether they think Crawly's more likely to be a certainty to open next Summer by playing for Kent or for England. And the new Managing Director of England cricket might have some advice for them in that regard.
I'm also not sure that they will drop him even though they absolutely should because he is mentally shot to pieces - those early balls when he didn't know whether to stick or twist and then ultimately he chose to twist once too often.
No batsman's career can be based on one big innings. Since that 267, now almost two years ago, he has had 32 innings and scored 593 runs at an average of 18.53. I cannot recall an English batsman getting that many opportunities over such a long period of time and being in such poor form for the duration - Crawley's lifetime average in First Class cricket is 30.54 and this season for Kent it is an almost identical 30.20.
Sam Robson is rumoured to be ripe for a recall but there is one person who people are saying might be a one season wonder and who needs another year of the same to prove himself - Ben Compton, the top run scorer in the country with 988 runs at an average of 98.80 in Division 1 too. Where I think Compton is a bit different is his age (28) and the fact that he is purely a white ball player - the reason Counties were so reluctant to give him a chance previously. He knows his game and rather like Cook, his limited number of scoring strokes is a positive here. We have plenty of players in the shape of Pope, Root, Bairstow and Stokes who can up the tempo if needed but what we are lacking is a couple up top who will consistently take the shine off the ball and afford those stroke makers the opportunity to do so when the ball has gone soft.
What do we have to lose? It's something that they would do in Australia or dare I say New Zealand. If only we had a coach from one of those countries who likes a gamble!
Agree other than you mean red ball not white ball. Compton reminds me slightly of a considerably less experienced Brian Luckhurst. He wasn't generally thought of as a test cricketer when he came in yet didn't let England down when selected.
Not that much seems to work against this rampaging England, but picking Bracewell over Patel for this game has been absolute idiocy imo, an all-time bad selection
Although I agree with the Crawley to be dropped comments, who would come in though?
It's the Johnson question!
McCullum and Stokes have got a problem here. They should drop Crawley. But there are two reasons I think they might decide against doing so. First, on balance, they probably shouldn't bring in a new, untried batsman to face India in a must-win Test. And, secondly, I think the new management might want to give Crawley - a player who perfectly fits their attacking ethos - as long as it takes to get him back into form.
Ultimately, it might come down to whether they think Crawly's more likely to be a certainty to open next Summer by playing for Kent or for England. And the new Managing Director of England cricket might have some advice for them in that regard.
I'm also not sure that they will drop him even though they absolutely should because he is mentally shot to pieces - those early balls when he didn't know whether to stick or twist and then ultimately he chose to twist once too often.
No batsman's career can be based on one big innings. Since that 267, now almost two years ago, he has had 32 innings and scored 593 runs at an average of 18.53. I cannot recall an English batsman getting that many opportunities over such a long period of time and being in such poor form for the duration - Crawley's lifetime average in First Class cricket is 30.54 and this season for Kent it is an almost identical 30.20.
Sam Robson is rumoured to be ripe for a recall but there is one person who people are saying might be a one season wonder and who needs another year of the same to prove himself - Ben Compton, the top run scorer in the country with 988 runs at an average of 98.80 in Division 1 too. Where I think Compton is a bit different is his age (28) and the fact that he is purely a red ball player - the reason Counties were so reluctant to give him a chance previously. He knows his game and rather like Cook, his limited number of scoring strokes is a positive here. We have plenty of players in the shape of Pope, Root, Bairstow and Stokes who can up the tempo if needed but what we are lacking is a couple up top who will consistently take the shine off the ball and afford those stroke makers the opportunity to do so when the ball has gone soft.
What do we have to lose? It's something that they would do in Australia or dare I say New Zealand. If only we had a coach from one of those countries who likes a gamble!
All of that is utterly logical..on reflection I felt a bit sorry for Crawley but he does have so many obvious issues to correct
But maybe the idea of the new order is to have one anchor ( Lees) and another dasher?
Whatever happens this has been so refreshing to watch and a fantastic advert for cricket
Not that much seems to work against this rampaging England, but picking Bracewell over Patel for this game has been absolute idiocy imo, an all-time bad selection
Agreed..they have 3 very good bowlers ,1 county standard dobbler and a 2nd team off spinner..that selection has been a major factor and will probably lose them the match
Given that Foakes is out with Covid (I know he also has a bad back) can Billings as a 'Covid' replacement bat if required does anyone know?
The bad back was a symptom of his Covid and it was as a result of other symptoms developing that he took a lateral flow test.
The rules are below, but suffice to say, the replacement has to be a "like for like" hence Billings, as a keeper/batsman fitted the bill so will be able to bat.
7.6 Following the formal notification, if the Covid Player’s Team wishes to activate the Covid Replacement, it must have its captain (or coach where the captain cannot
reasonably practicably do so) formally nominate a player to the Match Referee and/or umpire(s) for approval (such approval not to be unreasonably withheld) as the Covid
Replacement for that Covid Player for the remainder of the Match concerned. Save in exceptional circumstances only a ‘like for like’ player (or close as possible) shall be
permitted as a Covid Replacement, subject also to the following:
7.6.1 In circumstances where a Covid Replacement is required for an all-rounder the Match Referee and/or umpires(s) may take into account the role that the Covid Player
would have been likely to play in the remainder of the Match.
7.6.2 The Match Referee and/or umpires(s) may accept a Covid Replacement on a conditional basis, for example an all-rounder replacing a batsman on the condition that the
Covid Replacement does not bowl spin or does not bowl at all. A signed written undertaking detailing any conditions, or stating that there no conditions, shall be submitted by
the Captain of the team or his nominee to the Match Referee and/or umpires(s) prior to a Covid Replacement being permitted.
And typical cheating Surrey. Their keeper goes down with COVID, meaning that Kent's keeper and captain gets called up as an England replacement, just as they were about to play Surrey!
Comments
No batsman's career can be based on one big innings. Since that 267, now almost two years ago, he has had 32 innings and scored 593 runs at an average of 18.53. I cannot recall an English batsman getting that many opportunities over such a long period of time and being in such poor form for the duration - Crawley's lifetime average in First Class cricket is 30.54 and this season for Kent it is an almost identical 30.20.
Sam Robson is rumoured to be ripe for a recall but there is one person who people are saying might be a one season wonder and who needs another year of the same to prove himself - Ben Compton, the top run scorer in the country with 988 runs at an average of 98.80 in Division 1 too. Where I think Compton is a bit different is his age (28) and the fact that he is purely a red ball player - the reason Counties were so reluctant to give him a chance previously. He knows his game and rather like Cook, his limited number of scoring strokes is a positive here. We have plenty of players in the shape of Pope, Root, Bairstow and Stokes who can up the tempo if needed but what we are lacking is a couple up top who will consistently take the shine off the ball and afford those stroke makers the opportunity to do so when the ball has gone soft.
What do we have to lose? It's something that they would do in Australia or dare I say New Zealand. If only we had a coach from one of those countries who likes a gamble!
But maybe the idea of the new order is to have one anchor ( Lees) and another dasher?
Whatever happens this has been so refreshing to watch and a fantastic advert for cricket
The second new ball won't come into play. It could happen, of course it could, I honestly don't think it will though.
The rules are below, but suffice to say, the replacement has to be a "like for like" hence Billings, as a keeper/batsman fitted the bill so will be able to bat.
7.6 Following the formal notification, if the Covid Player’s Team wishes to activate the Covid Replacement, it must have its captain (or coach where the captain cannot reasonably practicably do so) formally nominate a player to the Match Referee and/or umpire(s) for approval (such approval not to be unreasonably withheld) as the Covid Replacement for that Covid Player for the remainder of the Match concerned. Save in exceptional circumstances only a ‘like for like’ player (or close as possible) shall be permitted as a Covid Replacement, subject also to the following:
7.6.1 In circumstances where a Covid Replacement is required for an all-rounder the Match Referee and/or umpires(s) may take into account the role that the Covid Player would have been likely to play in the remainder of the Match.
7.6.2 The Match Referee and/or umpires(s) may accept a Covid Replacement on a conditional basis, for example an all-rounder replacing a batsman on the condition that the Covid Replacement does not bowl spin or does not bowl at all. A signed written undertaking detailing any conditions, or stating that there no conditions, shall be submitted by the Captain of the team or his nominee to the Match Referee and/or umpires(s) prior to a Covid Replacement being permitted.
All very suspicious