I don't think Viljeon would've caught that.
England tour to South Africa December 2015/February 2016
- Thread starter stefan
- Start date
I don't think Viljeon would've caught that.
This is the kind of situation where Compton doesn't have to stoically block and see off the shine for the other batters. Cook and Hales made a decent start, and it's a really flat pitch. Needs to push on.
3 from 32. I'm sorry but that's not good enough on this pitch.
3 from 32. I'm sorry but that's not good enough on this pitch.
Last edited:
Eng will be happy with 76/1. Once again I see people being harsh on Compton for slow scoring ... its a test match for crying out loud. Whats the hurry. Even if Compton had score say 22 off 32, then are those extra 19 runs really that big a deal. Is 95/1, really that much better than 76/1 right now.
richowebbo
County Cricketer
I'm all for not giving your wicket away, and I thought Compton did very well in the last Test, but 3 off 32 is abysmal for a number 3 on the first day of a Test.
Pretty silly question. Yes 95-1 is better. England will want to score 450/500 as quickly as they can so that they can take 20 wickets.
Nearly all the time in the lunch break is being taken up by 'Compton talk' from the ex pros. If he ends up scoring a ton then it's fine. However, if he plays like this and gets 20 then he's got issues.
The thing that annoys me about this situation, is that people have compared Compton to Cook and Trott. Neither of those two play/played like this. Cook has limited attacking strokes, but he ticks the scoreboard over. Compton just doesn't seem to get many singles.
If you read what I wrote, I didn't say that 76/1 was better than 95/1. Of course 95/1 is better. What I asked was is 95/1 really that much better? Is it worth the risk of opening out and playing shots and thereby exposing yourself to the risk of getting out, just to have scored 19 more runs at lunch. Big difference between the two sentences, and of course 19 extra runs, in the opening session of a test match, is not worth risking losing a wicket for.
If England need quick runs for declaration they have plenty of batsmen lower down who can score freely, Root, Taylor, Bairstow, Stokes can all score fast if that is what the situation requires. With so many options lower down to push up the scoring why slate a guy for playing solid and trying to set up a platform for the lower order to do exactly that.
blockerdave
ICC Chairman
I think he was playing for lunch. One hopes he'll expand once back in after the break
And I'm saying, yes it is that much better. It's a difference of 57 a day.
And if you read my posts (not just the last one), I don't want Compton to get out 'playing shots'. What I want him to do is work the ball into gaps. Especially off Piedt, who he seems just to block. 16 from 32 balls would be adequate.
^ Okay I guess we will have to disagree on that. Maybe you will realise the difference when England have a no. 3 who scores a run a ball 33, and gets out regularly. More often than not, that kind of an innings will leave the side in trouble.
EDIT - Also when you say that its okay to take a more aggressive route as 95/1 is better than 76/1, you are completely ignoring the trade-off that it also increases the risk of getting out. You are taking it for a given that playing shots will always get the score to 95/1. What if he gets out playing a shot, then you are looking at 81/2. Are you going to say that is also that much better than 76/1. Now the bowling team has the #5 batsman walking into bat, and they have a chance to get him dismissed.
Often going for the shots wouldn't lead to always 95/1 it could 83/2, or perhaps even 85/3. Then 76/1 doesn't look so bad does it.
EDIT - Also when you say that its okay to take a more aggressive route as 95/1 is better than 76/1, you are completely ignoring the trade-off that it also increases the risk of getting out. You are taking it for a given that playing shots will always get the score to 95/1. What if he gets out playing a shot, then you are looking at 81/2. Are you going to say that is also that much better than 76/1. Now the bowling team has the #5 batsman walking into bat, and they have a chance to get him dismissed.
Often going for the shots wouldn't lead to always 95/1 it could 83/2, or perhaps even 85/3. Then 76/1 doesn't look so bad does it.
Last edited:
Is 16 from 32 a run a ball?
Also, I don't think anyone wants someone to come in who scores at a run a ball. Even AB doesn't do that. What people want is somebody to play the situation.
Compton's first innings in Durban = appropriate playing of the situations
Compton's second innings in Durban and short innings here (until the paddle sweep) = inappropriate playing of the situation[DOUBLEPOST=1451734083][/DOUBLEPOST]Compton clearly got my lunch time email.
On a more serious note, I reckon Bayliss would've said something.
Also, I don't think anyone wants someone to come in who scores at a run a ball. Even AB doesn't do that. What people want is somebody to play the situation.
Compton's first innings in Durban = appropriate playing of the situations
Compton's second innings in Durban and short innings here (until the paddle sweep) = inappropriate playing of the situation[DOUBLEPOST=1451734083][/DOUBLEPOST]Compton clearly got my lunch time email.
On a more serious note, I reckon Bayliss would've said something.
Bayliss wouldn't have said anything. Compton played the situation well. Made sure he didn't get out early in his innings, especially before lunch, now he'll look to push on. Like I said before, the more comfortable he gets, the more expansive he'll become. And a lot of people seem to be confused. Just because Compton has played quite safely in his Test career so far, it doesn't mean that he doesn't have the shots. I've seen him reverse sweep Brett Lee for crying out loud. People get too panicky over a part of an innings. At least let him get out before you moan about him.
The main point is, he's looking a hell of a lot better than Bell did.
The main point is, he's looking a hell of a lot better than Bell did.
richowebbo
County Cricketer
Whilst I don't mind slow scoring at all, 3 - 32 was a very poor rate to be scoring at. He has come out and played some shots, so I think someone might have had a word at lunch!
I agree with you, that in the context of the match it isn't important, but you still want to see a guy scoring some runs. It's what the game is about, after all!
I am a big fan of Compton though.[DOUBLEPOST=1451735579][/DOUBLEPOST]
Obviously after you posted that, he would go and sweep him for four and bash him for six!
cooks1st100
Panel of Selectors
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2009
- Location
- L'Ampolla, Spain
Completely agree. It's absolutely ridiculous that people are trying to pick holes regarding his S/R during the first session of a Test. England have suffered from collapses repeatedly in recent times and now we finally have someone who actually steadies the ship coming in at 3, rather than adding to the collapse. Takes a lot of pressure off Root too. There isn't much for the bowlers atm, the longer England are out there, the better.
I think everyone is reading too much into those 32 balls. A batsman doesn't have to score at the same rate all the time. There will be phases when the scoring will be slow, and there will be pockets when the batsman will seem to move on briskly. Its the overall innings that counts, and not small pockets of play. I would understand the haste if England were looking to declare or something, but I don't understand the call for faster scoring, this early in the innings, with the trade-off being losing a wicket. Right now preserving a wicket is surely more important than scoring 25 quick runs.
I think most people will be delighted with Comton for having stuck in there and ensure that #4 was not out there before lunch. SA would then have had the chance to have a go at #4, and work him over to get through then to #5. What he scored is utterly insignificant in comparison to that fact that he ensured England didn't lose another wicket before lunch.
Run rate can always be made up for later, but losing a wicket can't be. Even now Compton post lunch has moved on to 25 rather briskly if you ask me, and sudden;y 25 off 66 doesn't look so bad does it.
People need to back off Compton, even if he scores slowly, as long as he scores, and ensures that he is hard to get out, he is worth his weight in gold. A batsman smashing bowlers to the boundary keeps bowlers interested, they know their is room to get a wicket there. However a batsman who looks solid just kills bowlers. They run into to bowl, thinking I can't get this guy out. Its much more damaging to the bowler's morale.
Completely disagree. I think if you asked any bowler, 9 out of 10 of them would prefer to bowl at Compton than David Warner any day of the week.
Similar threads
