Topic: England v Sri lanka (Read 45349 times)

t2ylo · « **Reply #285 on:** January 19, 2021, 04:02:05 PM »

Jos Buttler seems like a very nice bloke

Most of the cricketing world sees him as a freakishly talented with the bat regardless of format

Pant has just demonstrated with aplomb that it is not always the best gloveman that gets the gig in Test Cricket and EXACTLY why batting strength matters.
In fact I would argue it is rarely the best pure keeper that gets the gloves in modern cricket, even at County level, perhaps BJ Watling as the exception, but he's also pretty handy with a stick to be fair.

So why the incessant criticism?

Manormanic · « **Reply #286 on:** January 19, 2021, 04:09:57 PM »

Quote from: t2ylo on January 19, 2021, 04:02:05 PM

Jos Buttler seems like a very nice bloke

So why the incessant criticism?

Interesting question. The two JBs are the most polarising players in discussions on this forum, and amongst cubbies in general. Yet you hear the experts who played test cricket both on Sky and in the print media and the almost unanimous opinion is that both are in our top seven batsmen and should be locked in certs.

Jeff Navarro · « **Reply #287 on:** January 19, 2021, 04:22:30 PM »

Don�t think you can compare Buttler vs Pant in red ball cricket. The Indian chap averages over 50 in first class cricket and he�s the fifth youngest to score a red ball 300.
Buttler is a one day master but he�s a work in progress against the red ball.

t2ylo · « **Reply #288 on:** January 19, 2021, 04:37:22 PM »

Quote from: Jeff Navarro on January 19, 2021, 04:22:30 PM

Don�t think you can compare Buttler vs Pant in red ball cricket. The Indian chap averages over 50 in first class cricket and he�s the fifth youngest to score a red ball 300.
Buttler is a one day master but he�s a work in progress against the red ball.

And yet Saha got the gloves in the first test.

Jeff Navarro · « **Reply #289 on:** January 19, 2021, 04:46:36 PM »

Quote from: t2ylo on January 19, 2021, 04:37:22 PM

And yet Saha got the gloves in the first test.

Being a better keeper went out the window when they got rolled for 30 odd.

A-Swing-And-A-Miss · « **Reply #290 on:** January 19, 2021, 04:56:25 PM »

Quote from: jonny77 on January 19, 2021, 01:32:53 PM

You could well be right mate. I'd stick with Bairstow though, I'm a fan and hopefully he's sorted a few technical issues. If not, then I'd go with Pope at 6 I think.

Is it a technical issue he can fix? Or is it such an ingrained part of his game from white ball cricket that he'll never be able to fix it? I would say he's incredibly comparable to Shane Watson in that regard. They both love/d to plant the front foot and really drive hard at the ball, it meant for both you always felt if the bowler went full and straight they would either go for a boundary or they'd get a wicket. What is their strength, particularly in white ball cricket, is also their weakness, particularly in red ball cricket. The only difference is that Watson shuffled across more and played much closer to his front pad which is why he was always out LBW whereas Bairstow prefers to play with more of a gap to allow a better swing through the ball which is why he gets bowled instead.

Don't get me wrong, I like Bairstow a lot. The energy he brings to the team is fantastic and he's always someone that seems to turn up in a chase. Stokes is ofcourse remembered for that famous chase at Headingley but it was Bairstow who provided the energy and willingness to be bold that swung the momentum in the morning after the Aussies had been all over Root and Stokes. But he will never change, he'll drive England to some real highs and will be a big factor in England falling to some real lows just like he has throughout his test career. The question is, as it has always been, is there finally someone more consistent who can take England to the same highs without having the serious lows? And I think Pope has earned the chance to have a long go at proving he can, and if Lawrence keeps playing well I think he will also have earned that too.

Manormanic · « **Reply #291 on:** January 19, 2021, 05:24:04 PM »

Quote from: A-Swing-And-A-Miss on January 19, 2021, 04:56:25 PM

Is it a technical issue he can fix? Or is it such an ingrained part of his game from white ball cricket that he'll never be able to fix it? I would say he's incredibly comparable to Shane Watson in that regard. They both love/d to plant the front foot and really drive hard at the ball, it meant for both you always felt if the bowler went full and straight they would either go for a boundary or they'd get a wicket. What is their strength, particularly in white ball cricket, is also their weakness, particularly in red ball cricket. The only difference is that Watson shuffled across more and played much closer to his front pad which is why he was always out LBW whereas Bairstow prefers to play with more of a gap to allow a better swing through the ball which is why he gets bowled instead.

Don't get me wrong, I like Bairstow a lot. The energy he brings to the team is fantastic and he's always someone that seems to turn up in a chase. Stokes is ofcourse remembered for that famous chase at Headingley but it was Bairstow who provided the energy and willingness to be bold that swung the momentum in the morning after the Aussies had been all over Root and Stokes. But he will never change, he'll drive England to some real highs and will be a big factor in England falling to some real lows just like he has throughout his test career. The question is, as it has always been, is there finally someone more consistent who can take England to the same highs without having the serious lows? And I think Pope has earned the chance to have a long go at proving he can, and if Lawrence keeps playing well I think he will also have earned that too.

I think Watson is a bad example here, sorry - he had a technical issue that was the same throughout his entire career. Bairstow is a different beast - his issue is/has been (TBC) actually as much mental as it is technical, and is not even really about his defensive technique. The issue has been that in becoming the white ball player that he has, his mindset moved and he lost the selectivity as to which ball to attack and which to defend, and what you ended up seeing a lot in 2019 was him playing a full blooded drive to a ball that he would previously have checked out into the offside - a problem exacerbated by his having moved to the leg side by a whole stump.

He did a lot of work on it last Summer, and made a couple of good contributions on paper in FC cricket for Yorkshire. That said, he looked bloody awful even when making the best part of a ton (and I say that as a confirmed advocate). He has looked better since - both his defensive technique in the white ball stuff, and here. It will only really be stress tested when he gets back to English conditions, I suspect.

Bats_Entertainment · « **Reply #292 on:** January 19, 2021, 07:12:44 PM »

Quote from: Manormanic on January 19, 2021, 04:09:57 PM

Interesting question. The two JBs are the most polarising players in discussions on this forum, and amongst cubbies in general. Yet you hear the experts who played test cricket both on Sky and in the print media and the almost unanimous opinion is that both are in our top seven batsmen and should be locked in certs.

Amateur pundits like big 'look at me' opinions. Which usually means deliberately having an opinion different to that of the selectors.

The Ben Foakes thing currently seems a easy way of looking like you really know your cricket.

Jimbo · « **Reply #293 on:** January 19, 2021, 08:12:59 PM »

Quote from: Bats_Entertainment on January 19, 2021, 07:12:44 PM

Amateur pundits like big 'look at me' opinions. Which usually means deliberately having an opinion different to that of the selectors.

The Ben Foakes thing currently seems a easy way of looking like you really know your cricket.

Don't think you need to know a great deal, just had to have watched the last SL series and wondered how the bloke got binned after keeping immaculately and getting runs.

ppccopener · « **Reply #294 on:** January 19, 2021, 08:43:46 PM »

Quote from: Bats_Entertainment on January 19, 2021, 07:12:44 PM

Amateur pundits like big 'look at me' opinions. Which usually means deliberately having an opinion different to that of the selectors.

The Ben Foakes thing currently seems a easy way of looking like you really know your cricket.

To be fair you don't need to know much to see out of the 3 keepers who is the best.

The argument/debate/discussion on this forum is more to do with if you believe England should play the best keeper on the basis(in the sub continent especially) he will contribute more by taking more chances and also get runs.
As opposed to the better batsman who will miss chances behind the stumps standing up or back but make up for it with more runs with the bat(than the specialist).

That's a constant debate as people have different opinions of what keeper would be best for England.

I'd give the forum a lot more credit, there's no one I've read on here saying Bairstow or Butler is a better keeper than Foakes...absolutely no one.

It's more tactics. Those that think a batter/keeper is better can pat themselves on the back England currently think the same.
The fact Foakes is a more than decent batsman at FC level and the limited tests he has played makes it a closer argument than has been previously...like Matt Prior v Chris Read for example.

More Glue Than Wood · « **Reply #295 on:** January 19, 2021, 09:00:53 PM »

the issue has been around for years:
-knott & taylor (both were fabulous keepers - but taylor was the purest)
in the 1980s downton and richards were used as they were better batters when they were not great keepers - taylor and french were better keepers
-russell and stewart in the 1990s
-chris read being binned for geriant jones in the west indies 2004

-colin metson (sp) for glamorgan was a brilliant keeper and better and the best in the uk for years - but was not great with the bat (av 18 in fc) - jack russell was prefer to him as russell could bat more - then stewart usurped him as we needed more runs!!!

standard issue as @ppccopener said - i think the selectors would agree - if they didn;t they would never have picked foakes in the first place - if he wasn;t a better keeper he would never have played unless bairstow and butler were injured

Bats_Entertainment · « **Reply #296 on:** January 19, 2021, 09:02:57 PM »

I've seen a lot of Ben Foakes and agree he's the best keeper. They are preferring Buttler because of his ability to change a game quickly as a batsman.

More Glue Than Wood · « **Reply #297 on:** January 19, 2021, 09:06:38 PM »

Quote from: Bats_Entertainment on January 19, 2021, 09:02:57 PM

I've seen a lot of Ben Foakes and agree he's the best keeper. They are preferring Buttler because of his ability to change a game quickly as a batsman.

totally agree

alba caerulea · « **Reply #298 on:** January 19, 2021, 09:07:49 PM »

Quote from: ppccopener on January 19, 2021, 08:43:46 PM

To be fair you don't need to know much to see out of the 3 keepers who is the best.

The argument/debate/discussion on this forum is more to do with if you believe England should play the best keeper on the basis(in the sub continent especially) he will contribute more by taking more chances and also get runs.
As opposed to the better batsman who will miss chances behind the stumps standing up or back but make up for it with more runs with the bat(than the specialist).

That's a constant debate as people have different opinions of what keeper would be best for England.

I'd give the forum a lot more credit, there's no one I've read on here saying Bairstow or Butler is a better keeper than Foakes...absolutely no one.

It's more tactics. Those that think a batter/keeper is better can pat themselves on the back England currently think the same.
The fact Foakes is a more than decent batsman at FC level and the limited tests he has played makes it a closer argument than has been previously...like Matt Prior v Chris Read for example.

Prior won that face off and was part of the best England side for a long while. I think we know how this will play out and it doesnt look good for Foakes!

Buttler is the man in possession and unless he has injuries I expect him play against India this summer and to tour Australia next winter. If Foakes couldnt keep his place after the debut series he had I cant see him ever being first choice with these selectors

ppccopener · « **Reply #299 on:** January 19, 2021, 09:15:12 PM »

Quote from: alba caerulea on January 19, 2021, 09:07:49 PM

Prior won that face off and was part of the best England side for a long while. I think we know how this will play out and it doesnt look good for Foakes!

Buttler is the man in possession and unless he has injuries I expect him play against India this summer and to tour Australia next winter. If Foakes couldnt keep his place after the debut series he had I cant see him ever being first choice with these selectors

Agree I think the planning I read on line is Butler is schedule to miss the last 2 India tests(the away tour) and Foakes will play when he is rested.So just in when Butler is missing.

Author Topic: England v Sri lanka (Read 45349 times)

t2ylo

Re: England v Sri lanka

Manormanic

Re: England v Sri lanka

Jeff Navarro

Re: England v Sri lanka

t2ylo

Re: England v Sri lanka

Jeff Navarro

Re: England v Sri lanka

A-Swing-And-A-Miss

Re: England v Sri lanka

Manormanic

Re: England v Sri lanka

Bats_Entertainment

Re: England v Sri lanka

Jimbo

Re: England v Sri lanka

ppccopener

Re: England v Sri lanka

More Glue Than Wood

Re: England v Sri lanka

Bats_Entertainment

Re: England v Sri lanka

More Glue Than Wood

Re: England v Sri lanka

alba caerulea

Re: England v Sri lanka

ppccopener

Re: England v Sri lanka