bluestevei
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 30 Aug 2008
- Messages
- 4,417
we wont win nowt while we have a hole for a arse
Agreed, Plunkett shouldve gone to the wcBigOscar said:I saw on Sky that since Trott left, our number 3's have averaged something like 22 runs, with only Taylor batting above 25 (with a pretty impressive 45 from his 8 games). So why the fuck is he not batting at 3? Not that it matters with our bowling attack, who would struggle to get 10 wickets if the other team didn't turn up. Tredwell is our only bowler capable of at least making it tough for the opposition to score, so why doesn't he play? He's like Vettori, though obviously not as good, but he so rarely goes for more than 5 an over. Broad should never play again, he's utter shite and has been for years
England stuck in the old ways, as always, in my opinion we have the players on the county circuit who could easily fire England near 300/350 every time. But that's not the England way. How many other teams have nearly the same test and ODI side? Stokes, Roy, Vince, Dunn, Billings, Rashid, Lees, Kieswetter etc. should all come in as soon as possible when available and no test players like Balance or players out of form like Morgan.JoeMercer'sWay said:now that's an ass kicking, that's how far England are behind, when a pitch is worth 350/400 England score 300, when it's worth 300 they score 200/250.
Miles behind.
Ell-ano said:England stuck in the old ways, as always, in my opinion we have the players on the county circuit who could easily fire England near 300/350 every time. But that's not the England way. How many other teams have nearly the same test and ODI side? Stokes, Roy, Vince, Dunn, Billings, Rashid, Lees, Kieswetter etc. should all come in as soon as possible when available and no test players like Balance or players out of form like Morgan.JoeMercer'sWay said:now that's an ass kicking, that's how far England are behind, when a pitch is worth 350/400 England score 300, when it's worth 300 they score 200/250.
Miles behind.
Making it all the more baffling that we forced our only succesful number 3 in years down to number 6 to accomodate him in a position he can't play. You do wonder about what on earth the ECB are thinking when they make decisions like that.without a dream said:Ell-ano said:England stuck in the old ways, as always, in my opinion we have the players on the county circuit who could easily fire England near 300/350 every time. But that's not the England way. How many other teams have nearly the same test and ODI side? Stokes, Roy, Vince, Dunn, Billings, Rashid, Lees, Kieswetter etc. should all come in as soon as possible when available and no test players like Balance or players out of form like Morgan.JoeMercer'sWay said:now that's an ass kicking, that's how far England are behind, when a pitch is worth 350/400 England score 300, when it's worth 300 they score 200/250.
Miles behind.
Ballance is a very good one day player, at 5 or 6. He's never played 3 for Yorkshire, he was given no prep and has been asked to do that for England. I'd happily keep him in the side but not at 3.
BigOscar said:Making it all the more baffling that we forced our only succesful number 3 in years down to number 6 to accomodate him in a position he can't play. You do wonder about what on earth the ECB are thinking when they make decisions like that.without a dream said:Ell-ano said:England stuck in the old ways, as always, in my opinion we have the players on the county circuit who could easily fire England near 300/350 every time. But that's not the England way. How many other teams have nearly the same test and ODI side? Stokes, Roy, Vince, Dunn, Billings, Rashid, Lees, Kieswetter etc. should all come in as soon as possible when available and no test players like Balance or players out of form like Morgan.
Ballance is a very good one day player, at 5 or 6. He's never played 3 for Yorkshire, he was given no prep and has been asked to do that for England. I'd happily keep him in the side but not at 3.
waspish said:BigOscar said:Making it all the more baffling that we forced our only succesful number 3 in years down to number 6 to accomodate him in a position he can't play. You do wonder about what on earth the ECB are thinking when they make decisions like that.without a dream said:Ballance is a very good one day player, at 5 or 6. He's never played 3 for Yorkshire, he was given no prep and has been asked to do that for England. I'd happily keep him in the side but not at 3.
It's not baffling it's what the ECB and the management have done for years! They think playing Ballance at 3 he would hold down the end stay in to the innings ends and the likes Morgan Buttler smash it later in the innings! That for me is cricket from 20 years ago...
I reckon the idea was that Ballance would play the same role Trott did, get a run a ball 100/50 or whatever and everyone else goes nuts around him. Doesn't work though when your middle order collapses at every in-convenient moment possible.waspish said:BigOscar said:Making it all the more baffling that we forced our only succesful number 3 in years down to number 6 to accomodate him in a position he can't play. You do wonder about what on earth the ECB are thinking when they make decisions like that.without a dream said:Ballance is a very good one day player, at 5 or 6. He's never played 3 for Yorkshire, he was given no prep and has been asked to do that for England. I'd happily keep him in the side but not at 3.
It's not baffling it's what the ECB and the management have done for years! They think playing Ballance at 3 he would hold down the end stay in to the innings ends and the likes Morgan Buttler smash it later in the innings! That for me is cricket from 20 years ago...
JoeMercer'sWay said:guarantee we won't score 400+ and beat Afghanistan by 275 runs.
crooky said:JoeMercer'sWay said:guarantee we won't score 400+ and beat Afghanistan by 275 runs.
Well that is a World Cup record and we're an average team so what would you expect?
foetus said:Warner and Smith taking the absolute piss atm
edit. warner just out for 178.