I deliberately waited until after Buttler got a score to start that debate, I could have posted it after the 2nd match when he'd had 2 failures but didnt want to be accused of pilling on him.
Like I said I get the point that you want him to face the most balls although for me its actually about him facing enough balls to impact the game. That can still be done from over 10 onwards.
His innings yesterday was excellent but we have 4 or 5 others who can play that innings . We dont have anyone else with the experience he has at the highest level of being a finisher, we have no one else who can come in with 10 overs to go and take the game away from the opposition in 30 balls - and this is particularly important if we want to win when batting first as we will invariably have to at the world cup, we arent gonna win every toss. Batting 2nd I agree its less important because you know how you have to pace your innings, but we are already very good at winning by chasing. We need to find a formula that also allows us to win consistently by batting first and for me him as a floating middle order player is best for that.
Like I said before if you get to the 15th over and he's not come in then it means at least 2 of your top 3/4 have gone big in which case you dont really need him.
I can't agree. At least while we have Morgan in the side.
Buttler's best position is as an opener. England's best opener is Buttler. And, for me, that's where the debate should end.
However, some people will point out that Buttler is *also* a great finisher. But that point pales when you also have Morgan as a permanent fixture in the side.
Buttler is our best opener. Morgan is our best finisher. And that is without referencing the fact we have, between them in the order, the world's highest ranked T20 international player.
There are a few things that still need to be fixed before the world cup. I don't think Buttler's batting position is one of them.
See above as to why that's wrong.
You've just said we have one finisher - Morgan. So why have the only other person opening when the ball is at its liveliest and you have plenty of other options to open. The game can't be won in the first six overs but it can be lost if your most destructive batsman is out early doors because he's having to face the new ball.
Buttler needs to be the team floater and come in when the situation demands him to do so.
It's my opinion. You may have a different opinion. That doesn't make either of us 'wrong'. Also, for what it's worth, I didn't say we have one finisher. We have many, the best of which is Morgan. If we had a paucity in that role, then there would be a stronger argument for Buttler not to open. The fact is, we have a surfeit.
My preference is to have our best opener opening and able to bat destructively in the power play. And for our best finisher batting in the final few overs, wherever that means he needs to be in the order.
I also think Buttler benefits greatly for having a settled, agreed, permanent position in the team: that comes from giving him the gloves (despite other wicket keepers being in the eleven) and having him open (despite his efficacy batting later in the innings.
I agree he could also bat effectively lower in the order.
I also agree that the game can't be won, but can be lost, by the batting side, in the first six overs. But I would also posit that the game can be won by the batting side in the first twelve overs. A dozen overs of Roy and Buttler batting at full throttle would likely take the game away from any side in the world. But twelve overs of careful, considered, defensive batting by players protecting Buttler (and Stokes and Morgan) will cost more games than it wins.
I think Buttler should open the batting for England. I think he would be a certainty to open for any other side in the world. We should look for improvements in every aspect for the game, but not make changes for the sake of it.
My last word on this (you'll be pleased to hear). If Buttler were to drop down the order, I don't think there is anyone you could promote that would make opposition bowlers more fearful. Sometimes you have to do what the opposition least want you to do. And oppositions do not want Buttler batting with 120 balls still to face.
You have your opinion and it seems that the England selectors have made up their mind and are going with it. As I've said all along i can see the argument its just not what I would do.
You make some valid points but 2 frankly ridiculous points which I've bolded above.
1) no one is suggesting that. No one wants to protect Buttler or Morgan. You're not stupid enough to think Roy/Bairstow/Hales/Banton would open a T20 with "careful considered defensive batting" so I assume you are on one of your idiotic wind ups.
2) Thats why he is used as a finisher in the IPL rather than opening? There is a worldwide shortage of finishers. Each team would be lucky to have 1 decent player. Its because generally at domestic level each team only has 2 or 3 good T20 batsmen so they are trained to bat in the top 3. This problem is even worse in county cricket, Bopara and Moeen are the only ones who have successfully played that role in the blast consistently over the last few years. Here we have someone who has come through and spent the majority of his career as a finisher in domestic and international cricket. He was used as an opener for a period in the IPL before returning to his finisher role. He always batted as a finisher for England until the last year or so when they've had an eye on the world cup. Morgan and Stokes bat lower in the order but arent really considered finishers.
You're opinion isnt wrong but those 2 points you made are.
I deliberately waited until after Buttler got a score to start that debate, I could have posted it after the 2nd match when he'd had 2 failures but didnt want to be accused of pilling on him.
Like I said I get the point that you want him to face the most balls although for me its actually about him facing enough balls to impact the game. That can still be done from over 10 onwards.
His innings yesterday was excellent but we have 4 or 5 others who can play that innings . We dont have anyone else with the experience he has at the highest level of being a finisher, we have no one else who can come in with 10 overs to go and take the game away from the opposition in 30 balls - and this is particularly important if we want to win when batting first as we will invariably have to at the world cup, we arent gonna win every toss. Batting 2nd I agree its less important because you know how you have to pace your innings, but we are already very good at winning by chasing. We need to find a formula that also allows us to win consistently by batting first and for me him as a floating middle order player is best for that.
Like I said before if you get to the 15th over and he's not come in then it means at least 2 of your top 3/4 have gone big in which case you dont really need him.
I'm with you on this one Canters. I would prefer to see any two from Roy/Bairstow/Hales/Banton opening and then Root and Buttler as floaters depending on the match situation.
Those openers hit over the top and even their mishits will go for four because there are only two out in the Power Play. Both Root and Buttler, in very different ways, have the ability to find gaps or, in the latter's case, clear the ropes during the non Power Play overs when there are five waiting for that catch. Because he is a consistent clean hitter.
Stokes isn't as good at T20 as people think he is. His average is actually only 19 and he's never even hit an international 50 - he's a much better 50 over player because, like Malan, he needs overs to get himself in, assess the pitch and kick on from there. Once he has that base he is absolutely destructive but T20 doesn't afford him that luxury. Of course Stokes has to be in the T20 side as the all rounder but it's a misconception that he has been a regular match winner with the bat in this form of the game.
I mentioned before that I am a bit concerned about Roy and specifically his ability to play quality spin in the Power Play especially on a deck that is turning. This series has done little to alleviate that doubt because I must have seen him try to play a reverse sweep at least half a dozen times and either miss it completely or make a poor connection. He's there on merit but really needs to work on it if it's going to be a go to shot. Or he has to take the single and give the bowling to someone who can play the shot. Someone like Root for example!
Looking at the ICC rankings for T20, Stokes is ranked 157th as a batsman, 94th as a bowler and 24th as an allrounder. While rankings don't tell the whole story, it does raise doubts in my mind whether he should be an automatic pick for the T20 side at all. Even at his peak, he's not been effective in the format, his bang it in bowling is far more suited to other forms of cricket.
Stokes hasnt played a lot of IT20 though. Being an all format player he has tended to be rested for those series. Its only because of the upcoming world cup that he has started to be selected regularly. With a run in the side his record will improve.
It's an irony that we bemoan the fact that we don't have a world class spinner. Because of course we do. I recall getting a shed load of criticism years ago from a certain forum member that no longer posts on here when I defended the fact that whilst Rashid would bowl bad balls he had that priceless ability to get wickets because he had all the variations.
I know he doesn't have a contract in the IPL but we know the reasons for that. A spinner is in least demand of all the disciplines because they have so many to call on. They want quickies, all rounders and world class batsmen who preferably keep too.
You don't get someone like Kohli out seven times without being able to bowl. Four of those came in Tests too. It's a shame that he has fallen out of love with red ball cricket but I just wonder whether we could persuade him to give it one last go. We have enough bowlers in the shape of Archer/Broad/Anderson etc etc who have the ability to "hang the bowl out there" at the other end when he's bowling to not worry if he goes for a few. And he doesn't bowl that many bad balls these days anyway.
Really difficult decision for the third umpire. He tried as hard as he possibly could to find a reason not to give it out. In effect, he didn't make a decision.
Nothing should disguise the fact it was an awful way to end a great innings. Clip one over the fielder's head. Captain sticks fielder onto the boundary. Clips the next one straight to him.
Third umpire has totally given us one there! #notallIndianthirdumpires
That was one where foreshortening of the lense had a real impact. Pictures were inconclusive. Could well have been shown to be a genuine catch if they had the right angles.
This is exactly the situation where Buttler opening doesn't work. Tough conditions but chasing a big total you have to make the most of the fielding restrictions so he played a shot where the percentages are against him and gets out.
I really don't know what to make of Malan at the moment. He is, after all, meant to be the number one ranked T20 batsman in the world.
Malan typically takes his time before launching late on. But he's not getting to "late on". This is his last 10 innings for England and the Hobart Hurricanes in the Big Bash:
18 off 17 24 off 23 24* off 20 34 off 36 11 off 8 3 off 6 42 off 28 0 off 6 20 off 23 26 off 22
So that's 202 runs at an average of 22.44 and a strike rate of just 107. I got the impression in the Big Bash that he was very much playing within himself and suspected that the reason was down to him wanting to get an IPL contract.
The reason that Joe Root has been left out of this squad is because the T20 side has a way of taking the game to the opposition. What Root does do, however, is rotate and gets the big hitter at the other end on strike. Malan doesn't and the scores above tend to be made up of "feast or famine" boundaries or dots.
There are two other advantages that Root offers - he has proven that he can score on Indian wickets when they aren't roads and it would be very handy to have that second or third spin bowling option. Root's average in international T20s is hardly shabby either - 35.72 at a strike rate of 126.30.
The run continues. I'm afraid Malan does not have the skillset necessary to play in these conditions. 14 off 17 that included a maximum and 9 dot balls
I really don't know what to make of Malan at the moment. He is, after all, meant to be the number one ranked T20 batsman in the world.
Malan typically takes his time before launching late on. But he's not getting to "late on". This is his last 10 innings for England and the Hobart Hurricanes in the Big Bash:
18 off 17 24 off 23 24* off 20 34 off 36 11 off 8 3 off 6 42 off 28 0 off 6 20 off 23 26 off 22
So that's 202 runs at an average of 22.44 and a strike rate of just 107. I got the impression in the Big Bash that he was very much playing within himself and suspected that the reason was down to him wanting to get an IPL contract.
The reason that Joe Root has been left out of this squad is because the T20 side has a way of taking the game to the opposition. What Root does do, however, is rotate and gets the big hitter at the other end on strike. Malan doesn't and the scores above tend to be made up of "feast or famine" boundaries or dots.
There are two other advantages that Root offers - he has proven that he can score on Indian wickets when they aren't roads and it would be very handy to have that second or third spin bowling option. Root's average in international T20s is hardly shabby either - 35.72 at a strike rate of 126.30.
The run continues. I'm afraid Malan does not have the skillset necessary to play in these conditions. 14 off 17 that included a maximum and 9 dot balls
Yep. Root back in for me. In a world cup year you can't afford to give him too much time.
Disastrous bowling and rubbish batting. Don't want to see Curran anywhere near our T20 world cup team.
Sam Curran is a good T20 player but is completely pointless in this side. He's a swing bowler so needs to bowl with the new ball. He doesn't do that with Wood and Archer in the side so there is no point in picking him Stokes is bowling before him in the middle overs. I would have him in the squad as reserve new ball bowler. Moeen would bring more to the side with bat and as a different option with the ball.
Comments
You make some valid points but 2 frankly ridiculous points which I've bolded above.
1) no one is suggesting that. No one wants to protect Buttler or Morgan. You're not stupid enough to think Roy/Bairstow/Hales/Banton would open a T20 with "careful considered defensive batting" so I assume you are on one of your idiotic wind ups.
2) Thats why he is used as a finisher in the IPL rather than opening? There is a worldwide shortage of finishers. Each team would be lucky to have 1 decent player. Its because generally at domestic level each team only has 2 or 3 good T20 batsmen so they are trained to bat in the top 3. This problem is even worse in county cricket, Bopara and Moeen are the only ones who have successfully played that role in the blast consistently over the last few years. Here we have someone who has come through and spent the majority of his career as a finisher in domestic and international cricket. He was used as an opener for a period in the IPL before returning to his finisher role. He always batted as a finisher for England until the last year or so when they've had an eye on the world cup. Morgan and Stokes bat lower in the order but arent really considered finishers.
You're opinion isnt wrong but those 2 points you made are.
Nothing should disguise the fact it was an awful way to end a great innings. Clip one over the fielder's head. Captain sticks fielder onto the boundary. Clips the next one straight to him.
I've never seen so many TV replays.
Predict we will be 11 short