England Cricket 2025

cantersaddick said:

Addick Addict said:

blackpool72 said:

Addick Addict said:

blackpool72 said:

fenaddick said:

Seen some suggest that Stokes and Smith should swap places on the batting line up, think it's becoming harder to argue against that. Also saw someone advocating for replacing Bashir with Bethell and putting him up the order. Both interesting suggestions

And I would disagree strongly with both.
Smith is averaging in the high 40s and he's batting at 7.
That's priceless. 
Leave him where he is as it's working perfectly. 

But he didn't really bat at 7 today unless one says that the one ball Stokes faced makes all the difference between 6 and 7 and it's only "working perfectly" if the tail can bat too. Stokes at 7 strengthens that tail  because he can stick around if that is what is required whereas Stokes at 6 (no hundreds in the last two years) is currently worse than Smith there.  

We are arguing over nothing really 
Stokes at 6 Smith at 7
Or 
Smith at 6 Stokes at 7
Makes no real difference 
My point is that Smith should bat  no higher than 6 or 7.

It is a minimal change but it also helps in that being a natural progression to where he might eventually end up rather than a sudden jump say, for example, England opt to go down the James Rew pathway with the gloves. The only thing I do find strange is that, as a Kent supporter I'm arguing with two Surrey supporters (Canters wanted him to stay at 7) that he should move up one place when he bats at 4 in the CC for Surrey. 

He doesn't keep for Surrey. Important distinction that. 

Since he broke through there has been a school of thought at Surrey (led by Alec Stewart) that he'd make an excellent 3 if the keeping didnt get in the way of his development. 

It's similar to what Alec said about Sam Curran when he first came through at 17. That he would actually bat 4 and bowl a bit. Which is what we aremnow seeing. His early success stopped him developing into that role as quickly. The same could happen with Smith with time. 

But back in the now. Today wasn't the best example but ultimately batting with the tail is a specialist skill. They dropped Foakes in no small part because he was no good at it. Smith has done it well and should continue to do so. Unless they find someone else who can keep and do the same. And want him to fill a role further up the order. But that would be a stupid amount of tinkering to do in the run up to an away ashes series.

cantersaddick said:

Addick Addict said:

blackpool72 said:

Addick Addict said:

blackpool72 said:

fenaddick said:

Seen some suggest that Stokes and Smith should swap places on the batting line up, think it's becoming harder to argue against that. Also saw someone advocating for replacing Bashir with Bethell and putting him up the order. Both interesting suggestions

And I would disagree strongly with both.
Smith is averaging in the high 40s and he's batting at 7.
That's priceless. 
Leave him where he is as it's working perfectly. 

But he didn't really bat at 7 today unless one says that the one ball Stokes faced makes all the difference between 6 and 7 and it's only "working perfectly" if the tail can bat too. Stokes at 7 strengthens that tail  because he can stick around if that is what is required whereas Stokes at 6 (no hundreds in the last two years) is currently worse than Smith there.  

We are arguing over nothing really 
Stokes at 6 Smith at 7
Or 
Smith at 6 Stokes at 7
Makes no real difference 
My point is that Smith should bat  no higher than 6 or 7.

It is a minimal change but it also helps in that being a natural progression to where he might eventually end up rather than a sudden jump say, for example, England opt to go down the James Rew pathway with the gloves. The only thing I do find strange is that, as a Kent supporter I'm arguing with two Surrey supporters (Canters wanted him to stay at 7) that he should move up one place when he bats at 4 in the CC for Surrey. 

He doesn't keep for Surrey. Important distinction that. 

Since he broke through there has been a school of thought at Surrey (led by Alec Stewart) that he'd make an excellent 3 if the keeping didnt get in the way of his development. 

It's similar to what Alec said about Sam Curran when he first came through at 17. That he would actually bat 4 and bowl a bit. Which is what we aremnow seeing. His early success stopped him developing into that role as quickly. The same could happen with Smith with time. 

But back in the now. Today wasn't the best example but ultimately batting with the tail is a specialist skill. They dropped Foakes in no small part because he was no good at it. Smith has done it well and should continue to do so. Unless they find someone else who can keep and do the same. And want him to fill a role further up the order. But that would be a stupid amount of tinkering to do in the run up to an away ashes series.

Some more "important distinctions":

(1) I am advocating right now he moves to 6 for England and not 4

(2) There is no meaningful difference for a keeper, in terms of rest, batting at 6 as opposed to 7. In fact, batting at 7 and nursing the tail means that the keeper is more likely to have to go straight back out and keep

(3) Batting at 6 means that Smith can cement that relationship batting with Brook which, in time to come, could be a seamless transition and maintained if/when he moves to 4. Why deprive him of the opportunity to make Root/Brook/Smith the best middle order in the world that might, eventually, morph into Smith/Brook/a. n. other

(4) Stokes has proven that he can bat with the tail

(5) A long time before Stewart ever moved Pope up the order at Surrey I got called out on here by the Surrey boys for suggesting he should bat at 3 for England. Batting at 3 Pope averages 42.76. Batting anywhere else he averages 27.76

We beg to differ. All part of CL's great tapestry!