The way Roy has always played is to smash it from Ball 1 - Brook can do that. Indeed at the moment if he wanted to emulate Roy , he would just get out really cheaply most time he bats.
Of all of the Selections , Roy is one that perplexes me the most. Brooke or Crawley would have been my replacement.
I think this means I can turn pro?
Definitely.
When Ruiz beat Anthony Joshua I claimed to have the physique of a world champion boxer - no one will take that away from me
You don't post like a larger sort of gentleman , more a slight beer belly sort of fella
The curse of the injured fast bowler - John Turner is out of the NZ series as a result of an injury sustained playing mickey mouse cricket. Another South African born quick, Brydon Carse, replaces him. Poor Sam Cook(e) must be thinking that this isn't such a Wonderful World!
I see Brook scored a 41 ball ton tonight, the fastest 100 in the history of The Hundred - second top score was 15 and only Buttler has more runs in the competition. Some of the other England players to appear in The Hundred (WC squad members in bold):
Brook 47.60 Av - 196.69 SR Buttler 42.16 Av - 152.40 SR Billings 31.50 Av - 170.27 SR Lawrence 29.00 Av - 170.58 SR Root 28.40 Av - 154.34 SR Jacks 26.62 Av - 160.15 SR Duckett 24.60 Av - 136.66 SR Bairstow 21.75 Av - 96.66 SR Banton 20.71 Av - 135.51 SR Salt 20.42 Av - 183.33 SR Roy 19.25 Av - 131.62 SR Livingstone 18.40 Av - 102.22 SR Vince 17.00 Av - 118.60 SR Crawley 15.75 Av - 106.77 SR Curran (S) 15.00 Av - 123.71 SR Smeed 13.83 Av - 123.88 SR Hales 12.57 Av - 133.33 SR Moeen 11.20 Av - 101.81 SR Malan 7.00 Av - 87.50 SR
Answers on a postcard to the blatantly obvious question!
I see Brook scored a 41 ball ton tonight, the fastest 100 in the history of The Hundred - second top score was 15 and only Buttler has more runs in the competition. Some of the other England players to appear in The Hundred (WC squad members in bold):
Brook 47.60 Av - 196.69 SR Buttler 42.16 Av - 152.40 SR Billings 31.50 Av - 170.27 SR Lawrence 29.00 Av - 170.58 SR Root 28.40 Av - 154.34 SR Jacks 26.62 Av - 160.15 SR Duckett 24.60 Av - 136.66 SR Bairstow 21.75 Av - 96.66 SR Banton 20.71 Av - 135.51 SR Salt 20.42 Av - 183.33 SR Roy 19.25 Av - 131.62 SR Livingstone 18.40 Av - 102.22 SR Vince 17.00 Av - 118.60 SR Crawley 15.75 Av - 106.77 SR Curran (S) 15.00 Av - 123.71 SR Smeed 13.83 Av - 123.88 SR Hales 12.57 Av - 133.33 SR Moeen 11.20 Av - 101.81 SR Malan 7.00 Av - 87.50 SR
Answers on a postcard to the blatantly obvious question!
Because you can't pick everybody? It's 50 overs, not 100 balls. You need 6 bowling options and a wicket keeper which means he is effectively playing for one of 4 spots, 2 of which will open so it's really 2. One of which Stokes will take.
Personally I would have picked him ahead of Roy or Malan but then your dropping a world cup winner who averages 40 or a bloke that averages 55. This is also, clearly, the end of an 8 year cycle and Brook has only played 3 ODIs.
Like I said I would have picked him but I understand why they haven't. He will be a shoe in after the world cup, it's probably come a year too soon for him, unfortunately.
I see Brook scored a 41 ball ton tonight, the fastest 100 in the history of The Hundred - second top score was 15 and only Buttler has more runs in the competition. Some of the other England players to appear in The Hundred (WC squad members in bold):
Brook 47.60 Av - 196.69 SR Buttler 42.16 Av - 152.40 SR Billings 31.50 Av - 170.27 SR Lawrence 29.00 Av - 170.58 SR Root 28.40 Av - 154.34 SR Jacks 26.62 Av - 160.15 SR Duckett 24.60 Av - 136.66 SR Bairstow 21.75 Av - 96.66 SR Banton 20.71 Av - 135.51 SR Salt 20.42 Av - 183.33 SR Roy 19.25 Av - 131.62 SR Livingstone 18.40 Av - 102.22 SR Vince 17.00 Av - 118.60 SR Crawley 15.75 Av - 106.77 SR Curran (S) 15.00 Av - 123.71 SR Smeed 13.83 Av - 123.88 SR Hales 12.57 Av - 133.33 SR Moeen 11.20 Av - 101.81 SR Malan 7.00 Av - 87.50 SR
Answers on a postcard to the blatantly obvious question!
Because you can't pick everybody? It's 50 overs, not 100 balls. You need 6 bowling options and a wicket keeper which means he is effectively playing for one of 4 spots, 2 of which will open so it's really 2. One of which Stokes will take.
Personally I would have picked him ahead of Roy or Malan but then your dropping a world cup winner who averages 40 or a bloke that averages 55. This is also, clearly, the end of an 8 year cycle and Brook has only played 3 ODIs.
Like I said I would have picked him but I understand why they haven't. He will be a shoe in after the world cup, it's probably come a year too soon for him, unfortunately.
I wouldn't have had Roy or Stokes (even if he could bowl which seems unlikely) but I too understand their reasoning even if I struggle with the logic. Roy has been in woeful form and chose to relinquish his central contract and I would have had Duckett instead or even Malan opening. Stokes is a talisman but one that has been fighting one one leg in the last couple of years - the ability to be able to field to the best of ones ability is far more relevant in white ball internationals than Test cricket. He hasn't played a 50 over game for over a year either and since the last WC, four years ago, has made just 10 appearances during which time he has averaged 26.89 with the bat and taken 4 wickets (1-183 in his last 9 matches).
Equally, it's very difficult for Brook prove himself over 50 overs though when there are no matches you can play in though because the ECB have chosen to run their flagship event alongside the domestic competition. And if Brook can score quickly in 100 ball, T20 and Test cricket then I'm sure he can do so in a 50 over competition as he showed with his 80 off 75 balls against a South African attack containing Ngidi, Parnell, Nortje, Jansen and Maharaj.
As for Brook being a fixture in the England team post this WC, that is subject to him being available but his non selection for a WC might well be a nail in the coffin given the franchise opportunities that might become available due to his lucrative IPL (and associated teams in other T20 comps) contract as the message that England have sent is that it doesn't matter about form and talent. I'm not sure that he would go down that road at this stage of his career but we really shouldn't complain if he chooses to do so - more guaranteed worldwide exposure than any central contract will afford him. A central contract that meant nothing to Roy who has been selected ahead of Brook nevertheless.
In closing, I hope that Roy and Stokes both prove me wrong and that Brook makes himself available at every opportunity for England for the next decade.
I've been his biggest fan over the last 10 or so years but Roy's time is up I'm afraid. time to make hay on the franchise circuit as his career draws to a close.
i do worry this team is trading on past glories and the likes of roy, stokes, rashid and moeen will flop. All either passed their best either from performances or just physically.
i do worry this team is trading on past glories and the likes of roy, stokes, rashid and moeen will flop. All either passed their best either from performances or just physically.
I said this on the previous page. Feels like they are focusing on the "legacy" of this group of players - which dont get me wrong has been an incredible era of white ball cricket - but should be focusing on evolving and managing the transition rather than one last hurrah!
Morgan, Plunkett and Archer (assuming he doesn't play) are the only ones missing from the Final four years ago but that certainly won't be the case next time round - there is every possibility that over half of this squad will have retired from international cricket given that no less than 11 of the 15 will be 36 or older at that point
It has a little bit a feel of sticking with the old guard that did it last time rather than bringing in the new exciting generation of Brook, Jacks etc. Not saying we should have chucked out a whole load of senior players but manage the transition.
Feels a little like the 2013/14 away ashes. Flower bringing in all those who did it in 2010/11 rather than those who were preforming at the time (picking Tremlett because he had done the job 3 years before rather than Plunkett who was very similar but performing much better at the time as one example, Carberry ahead of Root as another) because he was focused on his legacy rather than on the team evolving and it all went wrong.
Listening to the Brook interview after the game last night when asked about the world cup he said "lets see what happens" or something like that. To me it sounded like he thought that he could still be going - but i could have got that completely wrong.
Listening to the Brook interview after the game last night when asked about the world cup he said "lets see what happens" or something like that. To me it sounded like he thought that he could still be going - but i could have got that completely wrong.
Listening to the Brook interview after the game last night when asked about the world cup he said "lets see what happens" or something like that. To me it sounded like he thought that he could still be going - but i could have got that completely wrong.
Isn't he a travelling reserve?
Yup with Jofra - i may have been reading too much into it but i wouldnt be surprised if he ends up in the playing squad sooner rather than later
The rest of the world must be laughing at our decision to omit Brook. As we would if he were playing for another nation and that country were to leave him out.
The squad is a provisional one but there has to be an injury or they have to now find, or invent, a reason for leaving one of those selected out. I would be very surprised if, for example, someone fails in the ODI series and they use that as the reason for leaving that person out as it would go against the rationale for selecting that individual in the first place.
Comments
Brook 47.60 Av - 196.69 SR
Buttler 42.16 Av - 152.40 SR
Billings 31.50 Av - 170.27 SR
Lawrence 29.00 Av - 170.58 SR
Root 28.40 Av - 154.34 SR
Jacks 26.62 Av - 160.15 SR
Duckett 24.60 Av - 136.66 SR
Bairstow 21.75 Av - 96.66 SR
Banton 20.71 Av - 135.51 SR
Salt 20.42 Av - 183.33 SR
Roy 19.25 Av - 131.62 SR
Livingstone 18.40 Av - 102.22 SR
Vince 17.00 Av - 118.60 SR
Crawley 15.75 Av - 106.77 SR
Curran (S) 15.00 Av - 123.71 SR
Smeed 13.83 Av - 123.88 SR
Hales 12.57 Av - 133.33 SR
Moeen 11.20 Av - 101.81 SR
Malan 7.00 Av - 87.50 SR
Answers on a postcard to the blatantly obvious question!
It's 50 overs, not 100 balls.
You need 6 bowling options and a wicket keeper which means he is effectively playing for one of 4 spots, 2 of which will open so it's really 2. One of which Stokes will take.
Personally I would have picked him ahead of Roy or Malan but then your dropping a world cup winner who averages 40 or a bloke that averages 55. This is also, clearly, the end of an 8 year cycle and Brook has only played 3 ODIs.
Like I said I would have picked him but I understand why they haven't. He will be a shoe in after the world cup, it's probably come a year too soon for him, unfortunately.
Equally, it's very difficult for Brook prove himself over 50 overs though when there are no matches you can play in though because the ECB have chosen to run their flagship event alongside the domestic competition. And if Brook can score quickly in 100 ball, T20 and Test cricket then I'm sure he can do so in a 50 over competition as he showed with his 80 off 75 balls against a South African attack containing Ngidi, Parnell, Nortje, Jansen and Maharaj.
As for Brook being a fixture in the England team post this WC, that is subject to him being available but his non selection for a WC might well be a nail in the coffin given the franchise opportunities that might become available due to his lucrative IPL (and associated teams in other T20 comps) contract as the message that England have sent is that it doesn't matter about form and talent. I'm not sure that he would go down that road at this stage of his career but we really shouldn't complain if he chooses to do so - more guaranteed worldwide exposure than any central contract will afford him. A central contract that meant nothing to Roy who has been selected ahead of Brook nevertheless.
In closing, I hope that Roy and Stokes both prove me wrong and that Brook makes himself available at every opportunity for England for the next decade.
Game live now on SKY Sports cricket.
" What injury?"
"Hamstring, shoulder, ankle, back, whatever. Take your pick."