Print

[jonny77]

Foakes is incredibly unfortunate, but if it's a choice between the two I'd go Bairstow as it effectively makes him your all-rounder. Stokes won't be bowling too much, if at all. If you pick Foakes the batting isn't as strong imo, so going with Bairstow enables you to pick 4 bowlers and 7 true top order batters (as they're obviously sticking with Crawley).

Not saying it would be my choice, as I'd probably try and pick them both with Bairstow batting higher. However, I can see the logic and you can't ignore Bairstows value in recent years.

[Buzz]

Bairstow's record as a batter is much better when he doesn't keep.

[jonny77]

Bairstow's record as a batter is much better when he doesn't keep.

Like I said, is probably try and play them both. But if it's a straight decision between the two, (which it seems to be) I'm picking Bairstow personally.  Foakes is incredibly unlucky though.