blockerdave
ICC Chairman
Plenty of batsmen survive good uns. The state of the game it was imperative he survived the new ball... Bell has done this time and again.
England tour of West Indies 2015
- Thread starter Aislabie
- Start date
Plenty of batsmen survive good uns. The state of the game it was imperative he survived the new ball... Bell has done this time and again.
I know. An absolutely ridiculous statement. Also disrespectful to the bowler who bowled a beauty.
Santander
County Cricketer
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2015
- Location
- United States
- Profile Flag
- England
- Online Cricket Games Owned
- Don Bradman Cricket 14 - Steam PC
Having Trott opening is doing him (or England) no favours... you can't throw a #3/4 into a Test as an opener against Jerome Taylor and Kemar Roach with the new ball after an extended absence from Tests and expect him to do just fine. I'd drop Ballance, give Lyth a shot at opening and put Trott in at 3 or 4. Of course, being at #3 may not help much with Cook obviously still struggling, but it couldn't get any worse than it is now...
Why does Trott deserve to bat at 3 ahead of Ballance? Do people really not remember Ballance's last 6 test matches? He could continue his excellent run of form if he gets runs in the second innings.
blockerdave
ICC Chairman
See Bell bottled it again 2nd inns...
Santander
County Cricketer
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2015
- Location
- United States
- Profile Flag
- England
- Online Cricket Games Owned
- Don Bradman Cricket 14 - Steam PC
Well, Root and Bell won't be dropped, and if you move Trott down the order, either one of Root/Bell/Ballance have to open or one of them have to sit out. I fully appreciate what Ballance did in last summer's Tests, but if Trott's going to bat at 3 or 4, someone else has to be displaced. Ballance has had to play as essentially an opener several times because of Cook getting out early and generally played very well, so perhaps swapping him with Trott could work instead of bringing in Lyth. I'm just saying that I think changing the batting order is worth a try, regardless of who specifically are in/out of the playing XI.
But why does the guy who has scored all of the runs recently in a certain spot have to move to accommodate somebody who has been out of the team for 18 months, and on their return, makes 0 and 4? That doesn't make sense.
blockerdave
ICC Chairman
I personally would have put Lyth in over Trott, but having picked Trott I feel they should give him the whole series.
Real problems with both openers.
Real problems with both openers.
Skater
ICC Chairman
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2004
- Profile Flag
- England
People on Twitter have been infuriating me for weeks with the 'why is Ballance in the team? He's useless' stuff. They have very short memories, he's been superb in Test cricket. Yes, he had a bad time in the World Cup (who didn't?) but this is back to Test match mode and he's now got 4 hundreds in 9 Tests. He is our number three - which will make it difficult for Trott to ever regain his natural place in the side.
It's an absolute joke to say that Trott should bat at 3. Yes he'd probably prefer it, but you don't get rid of the guy who's scoring hundreds for fun.
Santander
County Cricketer
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2015
- Location
- United States
- Profile Flag
- England
- Online Cricket Games Owned
- Don Bradman Cricket 14 - Steam PC
Cricket is a team game and individual statistics are irrelevant compared to the result. If Ballance averages a bit less as an opener but Trott does better batting at 3 (it wouldn't take much...), how is that a bad thing? Of course, there is no certainty that this will work, but when will England get a better opportunity to give it a try other than against a weak WI team? If it becomes clear that Trott is just not quite there right now, he can be dropped until there's an opportunity to play him again. There is no point in digging up Trott and bringing him on tour if they don't intend to find a way to get performances out of him.
blockerdave
ICC Chairman
Very pleased for Ballance. He was put in a very difficult performance in the World Cup but is a class act.
Really our middle order is set, especially given Bell's hundred in the first innings... Bell would have been under pressure after a poor 18 months at Test level but even I can admit that 100 makes him safe for a while.
If Trott will play anywhere it's really only opener with a position available; our openers are a real problem - since Strauss' retirement actually Joe Root has the best average of England openers since Strauss retired but it'd be madness to put him back now given how well he's doing at 5.
Really our middle order is set, especially given Bell's hundred in the first innings... Bell would have been under pressure after a poor 18 months at Test level but even I can admit that 100 makes him safe for a while.
If Trott will play anywhere it's really only opener with a position available; our openers are a real problem - since Strauss' retirement actually Joe Root has the best average of England openers since Strauss retired but it'd be madness to put him back now given how well he's doing at 5.
Similar threads
