England tour to South Africa December 2015/February 2016
- Thread starter stefan
- Start date
Because the rest of the bowlers look so threatening on this pitch in comparison? He hasn't bowled a ball for about a month, he's not going to come back in and look like Glenn McGrath. Especially on this road.
stefan
International Coach
Great to see qdk get a 100. Great knock. Good support from abbot and piedt as well.
I'm basing it on about 20 international matches I've seen him in. I like his batting and think he should really work on that, so he becomes a Shane Watson-like all rounder.
Woakes bowled in partnership with Stokes this morning. The difference in skill level between the two of them is glaringly obvious. Stokes actually moves the ball.
Right, England fans. Do you want Hales to play the 1st test against Sri Lanka? Yes or No?
I'm going yes.
I only say yes as I think players need 6/7 games to establish themselves. Particularly batsmen. However, I did say before the Durban test that his technique didn't fill me with confidence, and that opinion hasn't changed. Therefore, my prediction is that after the Sri Lanka, I'll be wanting Hales out of the side. Hope I'm wrong.
Just to add to that, I sincerely hope that this series doesn't effect his white ball game. He's such a good one day and t20 player.
I'm going yes.
I only say yes as I think players need 6/7 games to establish themselves. Particularly batsmen. However, I did say before the Durban test that his technique didn't fill me with confidence, and that opinion hasn't changed. Therefore, my prediction is that after the Sri Lanka, I'll be wanting Hales out of the side. Hope I'm wrong.
Just to add to that, I sincerely hope that this series doesn't effect his white ball game. He's such a good one day and t20 player.
Last edited:
stefan
International Coach
Ok one tour he was good the rest he has been dreadfull there. a career average of 38 with a strikerate of 69 in aus.
stefan
International Coach
Morkel again very disappointing. He is suppose to be leading the young and inexperience instead he has been consistently out bowled by the likes of radaba. Felt all 3 of radaba,piedt and abbot were good today but morkel very disappointing.
Absolutely, players need a run of games to be judged upon.
Oh wait, this doesn't apply to bowlers like Woakes? That's crazy. I don't see why the rules are different depending on what your main skill is? Hales has looked poor so far and keeps on getting out in the same way, but I agree, he deserves to have the first home series to see what he can do. That's why I feel the same way about bowlers too. It would be crazy to pick a batsman for odd games and then judge them on those performances, as you rightly said in your post. Yet for bowlers, it's ok?
Woakes has played 6 test matches. His bowling average is 55. He's been dreadful. The sooner Plunkett, Wood and Finn the better. I think Craig Overton and Tom Curran will be going past him soon.
He's played 5 and a half games, spread over 3 years. You're telling me we'd ever pick a batsman like that and expect him to prove that he belongs? James Taylor is averaging mid 20s after 6 games, should he be dropped too?
To be honest, I just pulled out those stats to make a point but usually I don't care about stats.
You're right. Taylor and Woakes have similarly average stats. However, in Taylor, I can see a good talent. His technique is solid and he's a superb player of spin. I think there are lots of runs in him.
When I watch Woakes play I think, very average bowler. Not moving the ball at mid 80s isn't going to succeed at test level. I do think he's a good batsman. Lovely technique and enjoy watching him bat. I reckon he could eventually bat at 6. But right now he's in there to take wickets, and it's pretty obvious that there are at least two or three blokes not in the side that would do better than him.
It's not a video game. Players aren't all going to come into the side and look World Class from their very first innings. You need to put time into them, in order to get the best out of them. That's been the good thing about the openers in the last few years. After Compton the first time, we've given a decent run of games to the likes of Robson and Lyth, to see what they can do. It's now only fair that the same applies to Hales. And why is that? Because all players take a while to settle into the side.
Onto Woakes 'Not moving the ball', so Anderson (who swings it as much as anyone in our attack) and Broad (probably in the form of his life right now) don't get much, if anything out the pitch, but Woakes should do? Woakes playing after sitting on his backside since the first Test? He's performed well in County Cricket and deserves a chance. But a chance is not the odd game and then dumped. Hence why the England coaches are picking him, even though "it's obvious that other people would do better than him" apparently. Would love to know the theory on that.
Onto Woakes 'Not moving the ball', so Anderson (who swings it as much as anyone in our attack) and Broad (probably in the form of his life right now) don't get much, if anything out the pitch, but Woakes should do? Woakes playing after sitting on his backside since the first Test? He's performed well in County Cricket and deserves a chance. But a chance is not the odd game and then dumped. Hence why the England coaches are picking him, even though "it's obvious that other people would do better than him" apparently. Would love to know the theory on that.
Who's saying they need to be world class? Taylor certainly isn't. He just shows a lot of potential. To me anyway.
Woakes 'not moving the ball' isn't just a problem I've noticed in this test match, but since you are adamant we discuss this one then yes- it wasn't a great bowling performance from the team as a whole. However on the morning of day two, Anderson and Stokes both looked threatening. They bowled nice line and length and consistently swung the ball. Woakes ran in and tried hard, but it was just up and down stuff.
Anderson and Broad are world class and very experienced, so perhaps I shouldn't base my expectations in them. But Ben Stokes is at around the same stage in his career, and it's so obvious how much better he is with the ball.
Moeen Ali frustrates me just as much as Woakes, and doesn't look threatening the majority of the time. However there's nobody better to come in, so I don't care as much. Wood, Finn, Plunkett and probably Footitt would've looked more threatening than Woakes in this test, or any test for that matter. I would say that Woakes is as good as Jordan and so is therefore about 7/8 in the pecking order. I've seen a lot of Jack Brooks also, and he should count himself unlucky that he doesn't have a cap given the stuff he's seeing Woakes throw down.
blockerdave
ICC Chairman
I'd rate Jordan above Woakes. Woakes reminds of the Allan Igglesden types England used to pick: sure they might make it wobble on a county green top and pick up wickets there, put them in the international arena and they're just fodder.
If Woakes could only bat as well as say Finn, he wouldn't get a look in.
If Woakes could only bat as well as say Finn, he wouldn't get a look in.
blockerdave
ICC Chairman
Very poor from Taylor there: needed a score, England behind in the game & lunch imminent - you have to play better than that.
Similar threads
