I think we should stick with Roy. You can't judge him on one summer against a swinging ball and a fine seam attack. Christ. I was just going to look up where we were going this winter - it's New Zealand and South Africa. Two fine seam attacks and two swinging balls. Was hoping it was the Subcontinent or Windies- then we'd see the best of him. My solution? Christ knows. Anyone got Sir Alistair's number?
Lol, that’s the best gibberish rubbish I’ve witnessed. And in so doing you proved my point. Bravo, absolutely bravo. He’s not a great batsmen, he isn’t a great bowler. He hasn’t won us a significant game until this, and he’s in an era of average players so it compounds his averageness all the more. So thank you for finally agreeing he isn’t a great batsmen or bowler. I knew you’d get there eventually, even amid the gibberish. I’m sure someone will resurrect the thread when he next gets a sketchy score, and will no doubt ignore his numerous flawed pointless dismissals. But bravo, proper made me chuckle that.
Laughable that. Completely laughable. You've offered no counter point to back up your flimsy and paper thin argument - and you've just accused me of everything you were in tears about earlier regarding different "opinions". Every single statistic that people have mentioned in this thread disprove your "opinion". Actual, real life, grown up facts disprove your "opinion". But you've gone all Hemsworth on us. He hasn't won us a significant game until this, apart from that little old World Cup Final about a month ago. Have you actually looked at his record this summer in both formats of the game? Of course you haven't, silly me. That would involve looking at statistics and facts. Not just a "that's my opinion lol". I don't think I've come across anyone with less cricket knowledge pretending they know what they're on about. And I've played against Thurgoland 2nds.
Who's going to open though? My money's on Pope, with Buttler making way. They'll also probably try to move things round to get Anderson in if he does well for Lancs 2nds, probably take Woakes out. Personally think that'll be harsh on Woakes.
If I were giving Roy a go down the order, I'd drop Buttler for Sibley. Play Sibley at 2, and Roy at 5. Then I would have a line up of: 1) Burns 2) . Sibley 3) . Root 4) . Denly 5) . Roy 6) . Stokes 7) . Bairstow 8) . Woakes 9) . Archer 10) Broad/Anderson(i would honesty only play one now Archer is on the scene) 11) Leach Think that's pretty well balanced. If The openers can learn to dig in against the new ball it will allow Root down to Woakes enough freedom to play their natural games without as much pressure. Then You have 4 seamers that are all different enough to provide plenty of variation and can cover most eventualities they might face except Smith, as I've no idea how we're going to get him out cheaply. Maybe you don't and just try and skittle the other 10 out?
Suppose it depends on fitness. Archer struggled in the 2nd innings and Broad has played every game this summer - which is a fair ask for a 33 year old, playing basically weekly tests. Buttler is Root's best mate - so even though this shouldn't matter, I think it'll count for something in the dressing room and around the team. My gut is that it'll be Anderson for Woakes.
Possibly just switch Roy and Denly. I don't know, as much as we were lucky at Headingley i wouldn't change a winning team, I'd just make a few adjustments.
You’re truly a comedian. Flies on the wall must be having a proper loony toons giggle at you. A World Cup final isn’t cricket, it’s pyjamas, hence why this bunch can’t bat very well. But then considering your cricket background you’ve cited, I can’t say I’m surprised now. So no, he hasn’t won us the ashes has he, he might yet do, but that’s an outlier. As his averageness attests to. And you admitted he wasn’t great. Why you’ve got your panties in a bunch I’m not sure. I’d say it’s amusing, but sadly you’ve entered the tedious and moronic pile. You have a different opinion, you’ve quoted lots of average stats at me, and for some reason, you want me to change my mind? It’s a bit bizarre no? That you can’t let someone have another opinion? I’d hate to be there when you unravel, gosh that can’t be a pretty sight at all. But never mind. Amusing you think stats arent open to interpretation. You interpret them differently. I don’t judge you for that at all. So just go about your average day with your average stats and thinking it’s all beyond great, and I’ll kindly park you in the moron pile. Au revoir!
Root has to go back to 4. You can throw any top 3 in at the minute and hope for the best cos we ain't got any decent openers. It's always going to be 20-2.
So going on Ashes stats this summer and the 6 batting innings England have faced here are the 6 scores and averages of Roy and Buttler Roy 10,28,0,2,9,8 and a batting average of 9.5 Buttler 5,1,12,31,5,1 and a batting average of 9.16 Not good enough.
Well that's incredible. Yet again you've replied with basically more white noise, based on absolutely nothing. I won't be engaging further with you in this thread, because you've been a complete moron with regards to Stokes. You say I can't let someone else have a different opinion? Of course you can - just not when it's factually wrong. Which you are on this occasion. One hundred percent wrong. As for my cricket background? Without giving it the big 'I am', I would suggest that I've played a higher level than you. However, as we all know, playing the game at a high level doesn't make you a great watcher or commentator - so that shouldn't be a factor. I Presume you'll reply to this, because you seem to want the last word against everyone in this thread who is trying to talk a little sense. But I've done with you.
This whole conversation is bizarre. Stokes is an all-rounder and by any barometer he is a world class all-rounder. I'd bet he'd walk into any other test side as an all-rounder. People forget the role of an all-rounder. They're not world class at either discipline. They may favor one over the other but they are not frontline batsmen or bowlers so why should they be judged against those that are. Flintoff was a decidedly average batsmen who developed into a world class bowler late into his career. He was still capable of the occasional destructive, match winning innings as a batter but those were not often. Stokes is the same. The all-rounder is supposed to relieve the new ball attack while they rest, hold down an end and if you are lucky, take a few wickets. Does he do that? Yes. Is he inconsistent, yes because he's not a front line new ball bowler. As a batsmen he is supposed to prolong the innings, get some useful middle order runs and marshall the tail to milk every last run they can. Does he do that? Yes. He is guilty of some poor decisions, Yes, because he's not a top order batsmen. Asking him to do the job of a front line batsmen or bowler is reflective of a poor team and not his fault. This is where he is shown up to not be world class at either. It's not his fault he bats at 5. He should be 6 or 7. But there's not much above him. Root should not be at 3 for the same reason. Needs must. To average mid 30s with the bat and low 30s with the ball are excellent figures and stack up against the best that have ever played the game in history - AS AN ALL-ROUNDER. Show me an All-rounder with world class bowling or batting figures and I'll show you someone who is not an all-rounder. It's also not Stoke's fault he's in an era with less world class opposition. The way the test game is going we will never reach the heights of the 80s, 90s. We are a poorer side without Stokes. Most experts in the game will same he is England's shining light. And along with Jimmy, Root, Broad no brainers.
and the comment that you have to be average 50+ to be considered a top class test batsmen is ludicrous. England have never had someone finish their career with a 50+ average. Cook, Athers, Stewart, Thorpe, Hussein, Strausse, KP, Smith, Gooch, Gower - never averaged 50 when they called it quits. Would they be considered test class? Of course. only a small handful average 50+. Cook and KP flirted with it a little but dropped away. To judge Stokes by this is insane. Hell, Athers, Hussein and Lamb were under 40 when they called it quits And Stewart was border line 40 his whole career!
