Don't really understand what we are doing here. The new ball is due in 8 overs - and it will be bouncing far more for the spinners. Surely scoring 30 more in that time and taking us to 300 will absolutely take the game away from Bangladesh.
Good score in the end - brilliant batting by Stokes and Bairstow in very testing conditions .agree with AA in that Bairstow has come along leaps and bounds - I saw a stat which said that he had scored most Test runs ever in a calendar year by a keeper yet he has still got 5? Tests to go !
Good score in the end - brilliant batting by Stokes and Bairstow in very testing conditions .agree with AA in that Bairstow has come along leaps and bounds - I saw a stat which said that he had scored most Test runs ever in a calendar year by a keeper yet he has still got 5? Tests to go !
I'm sure you're right prez, but that's really surprising when you think of some of the outstanding keeper/batsmen in recent years. Gilchrist springs immediately to mind.
Good score in the end - brilliant batting by Stokes and Bairstow in very testing conditions .agree with AA in that Bairstow has come along leaps and bounds - I saw a stat which said that he had scored most Test runs ever in a calendar year by a keeper yet he has still got 5? Tests to go !
I'm sure you're right prez, but that's really surprising when you think of some of the outstanding keeper/batsmen in recent years. Gilchrist springs immediately to mind.
Perhaps it's down to the fact that whilst Gilchrist dug the Aussies out of a hole on occasions he probably wasn't required to bat as many times as Bairstow e.g. their top six consistently got big scores and the Aussies, with their supreme bowling attack, probably didn't even to bat a second time in a Test - and if they did have to Gilchrist wasn't required to bat anyway.
Good score in the end - brilliant batting by Stokes and Bairstow in very testing conditions .agree with AA in that Bairstow has come along leaps and bounds - I saw a stat which said that he had scored most Test runs ever in a calendar year by a keeper yet he has still got 5? Tests to go !
I'm sure you're right prez, but that's really surprising when you think of some of the outstanding keeper/batsmen in recent years. Gilchrist springs immediately to mind.
Perhaps it's down to the fact that whilst Gilchrist dug the Aussies out of a hole on occasions he probably wasn't required to bat as many times as Bairstow e.g. their top six consistently got big scores and the Aussies, with their supreme bowling attack, probably didn't even to bat a second time in a Test - and if they did have to Gilchrist wasn't required to bat anyway.
Great response regarding Gilchrist AA. Makes absolute sense. Still a very surprising stat though. Even disregarding AG, what about Dhoni, McCullum, Boucher, Andy Flower or even Alec Stewart? Flower in particular - he was pretty much Zimbabwe's only good player!
Good score in the end - brilliant batting by Stokes and Bairstow in very testing conditions .agree with AA in that Bairstow has come along leaps and bounds - I saw a stat which said that he had scored most Test runs ever in a calendar year by a keeper yet he has still got 5? Tests to go !
Bairstow has been brilliant, but England have also played an enormous number of Tests this year. Indeed have we ever played so many in a calendar year?
Good score in the end - brilliant batting by Stokes and Bairstow in very testing conditions .agree with AA in that Bairstow has come along leaps and bounds - I saw a stat which said that he had scored most Test runs ever in a calendar year by a keeper yet he has still got 5? Tests to go !
Bairstow has been brilliant, but England have also played an enormous number of Tests this year. Indeed have we ever played so many in a calendar year?
Also a good point.
I just can't get over this as a stat though. Take nothing away from JB, but it's pretty astonishing!
Agree with Buttler coming in but think Moeen will be massively exposed and targeted that high up against the short ball.
One too many quicks in my view. Also strongly disagree with Buttler being there. Hasn't played enough first class cricket to even be considered... and not one of the best 2 keepers in the country.
Well foster is an exceptional keeper but I accept he is not going to be picked by England.
Foakes is the one really. Best keeper we have and whilst maybe not capable of batting in the top 5 at test level he would be more than good enough at 7 which with our all rounders is fine.
Widely thought of as the best young keeper on the circuit. That extra talent behind the stumps will save us more runs than his batting will cost.
I guess it comes back to that question. Do you want a keeper that bats or a batsman that keeps? For me at test level whilst you need to be able to bat well (Foakes certainly can and he has a good tecord) you are a keeper first and foremost.
Given the strength of all rounders and the bowlers, I would choose a wicket keeper who can bat a bit.
Exactly and that would be Foakes over Buttler. Bairstow at the moment holds the gloves and it would probably be a little unfair to take them away from him...
Bairstow is the best wicket-keeper batsman in the world. He's one of six certainties for his place in the XI (assuming no dramatic falls in form or fitness). And he'll keep wicket.
For what it's worth, the other five are Cook, Root, Stokes, Broad and Anderson.
That leaves five places up for grabs. An opener, a middle order batsman, a spinner (probably Moeen), a seamer (almost certainly Woakes) and one other player.
That other player will depend on conditions and series scoreline. On turning tracks it will be a spinner. And if we're ahead with just the Oval Test to play, it will be another batsman.
I don't see Stokes playing as a fifth seamer if we also have a spinner. That's a waste.
cant believe that anyone would consider that Foakes should be a better option than Buttler- especially as a batter.
Buttler is a mediocre keeper though, England pushed him to leave Somerset as he wasn't playing as a keeper there, but since then he's done done nothing to disprove the feeling that he's a brilliant white ball batsman and adequate white ball keeper, bit nowhere near good enough to keep wicket in red ball cricket
cant believe that anyone would consider that Foakes should be a better option than Buttler- especially as a batter.
Buttler is a mediocre keeper though, England pushed him to leave Somerset as he wasn't playing as a keeper there, but since then he's done done nothing to disprove the feeling that he's a brilliant white ball batsman and adequate white ball keeper, bit nowhere near good enough to keep wicket in red ball cricket
Im not asking him to keep wicket, JB's got the job- but to suggest that Foakes is a better Test batter...nah- not even close.
cant believe that anyone would consider that Foakes should be a better option than Buttler- especially as a batter.
Buttler is a mediocre keeper though, England pushed him to leave Somerset as he wasn't playing as a keeper there, but since then he's done done nothing to disprove the feeling that he's a brilliant white ball batsman and adequate white ball keeper, bit nowhere near good enough to keep wicket in red ball cricket
Im not asking him to keep wicket, JB's got the job- but to suggest that Foakes is a better Test batter...nah- not even close.
I don't know enough about Foakes abilities as a keeper, but with the number of all rounders England have there is some justification to picking someone on the basis of his keeping alone (as long as he can bit reasonably), rather than just going with the batsman who keeps a bit.
cant believe that anyone would consider that Foakes should be a better option than Buttler- especially as a batter.
Buttler is a mediocre keeper though, England pushed him to leave Somerset as he wasn't playing as a keeper there, but since then he's done done nothing to disprove the feeling that he's a brilliant white ball batsman and adequate white ball keeper, bit nowhere near good enough to keep wicket in red ball cricket
Im not asking him to keep wicket, JB's got the job- but to suggest that Foakes is a better Test batter...nah- not even close.
I don't know enough about Foakes abilities as a keeper, but with the number of all rounders England have there is some justification to picking someone on the basis of his keeping alone (as long as he can bit reasonably), rather than just going with the batsman who keeps a bit.
This - we are very forgiving these days and in Bairstow's case it is because he has scored so many runs. For example, Bairstow missed six chances in the four-Test series in South Africa and dropped three catches and missed one stumping against Sri Lanka. He has cemented his place in the side as a top five bat but not in my opinion as a keeper.
Buttler is the better keeper but I can't help thinking that England see him purely as a one day player now. As much as I am, albeit with my Kent hat on, an advocate of Billings, Foakes is generally recognised as the up and coming stumper. And he is anything but a bunny with the bat - in fact, Buttler's first class average is 32.07 whereas Foakes has an average of 39.42.
Comments
Bairstow chops on for 47
189-6 and a lead of 234
197-7 and 242 ahead
213-8 and a lead of 258
Gilchrist springs immediately to mind.
Still a very surprising stat though. Even disregarding AG, what about Dhoni, McCullum, Boucher, Andy Flower or even Alec Stewart?
Flower in particular - he was pretty much Zimbabwe's only good player!
I just can't get over this as a stat though. Take nothing away from JB, but it's pretty astonishing!
Cook,
Duckett,
Root,
Bairstow.
Stokes
Moeen
Butler WK
Woakes
Broad,
Wood,
Anderson
As to wicki, I don't know really. Playing Bairstow gives options but maybe wrecks his batting.
Who are the best two @cantersaddick?
Foakes is the one really. Best keeper we have and whilst maybe not capable of batting in the top 5 at test level he would be more than good enough at 7 which with our all rounders is fine.
Widely thought of as the best young keeper on the circuit. That extra talent behind the stumps will save us more runs than his batting will cost.
I guess it comes back to that question. Do you want a keeper that bats or a batsman that keeps? For me at test level whilst you need to be able to bat well (Foakes certainly can and he has a good tecord) you are a keeper first and foremost.
For what it's worth, the other five are Cook, Root, Stokes, Broad and Anderson.
That leaves five places up for grabs. An opener, a middle order batsman, a spinner (probably Moeen), a seamer (almost certainly Woakes) and one other player.
That other player will depend on conditions and series scoreline. On turning tracks it will be a spinner. And if we're ahead with just the Oval Test to play, it will be another batsman.
I don't see Stokes playing as a fifth seamer if we also have a spinner. That's a waste.
Buttler is the better keeper but I can't help thinking that England see him purely as a one day player now. As much as I am, albeit with my Kent hat on, an advocate of Billings, Foakes is generally recognised as the up and coming stumper. And he is anything but a bunny with the bat - in fact, Buttler's first class average is 32.07 whereas Foakes has an average of 39.42.