comment by Bennyville (U8058)
posted 1 hour, 3 minutes ago
Does burns go straight back in?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
100%

Even with that 66 Crawley's only averaging 28. I know he's only had 5 innings and he's improving, but that's his first half century and he's only really got two decent scores (44 last time out, 66 now). He's also facing a pretty mediocre attack.

Burns has much more credit built up - more runs, more tons and against much tougher opposition. If it were between Burns and Crawley it would be Burns 10 times out of 10.

The toss-up is between Crawley and Denly, and to be honest I'm still siding with Denly unless Crawley gets consistent big scores in the next innings and through the Sri Lanka series. But Crawley will be at 3 by the time the next Ashes rolls around, I should think.

comment by Amanda Hugginkiss (U11574)
posted 24 seconds ago
comment by Bennyville (U8058)
posted 1 hour, 3 minutes ago
Does burns go straight back in?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
100%

Even with that 66 Crawley's only averaging 28. I know he's only had 5 innings and he's improving, but that's his first half century and he's only really got two decent scores (44 last time out, 66 now). He's also facing a pretty mediocre attack.

Burns has much more credit built up - more runs, more tons and against much tougher opposition. If it were between Burns and Crawley it would be Burns 10 times out of 10.

The toss-up is between Crawley and Denly, and to be honest I'm still siding with Denly unless Crawley gets consistent big scores in the next innings and through the Sri Lanka series. But Crawley will be at 3 by the time the next Ashes rolls around, I should think.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not Pope at 3?

Not Pope at 3?




Shut up

comment by Bennyville (U8058)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Amanda Hugginkiss (U11574)
posted 24 seconds ago
comment by Bennyville (U8058)
posted 1 hour, 3 minutes ago
Does burns go straight back in?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
100%

Even with that 66 Crawley's only averaging 28. I know he's only had 5 innings and he's improving, but that's his first half century and he's only really got two decent scores (44 last time out, 66 now). He's also facing a pretty mediocre attack.

Burns has much more credit built up - more runs, more tons and against much tougher opposition. If it were between Burns and Crawley it would be Burns 10 times out of 10.

The toss-up is between Crawley and Denly, and to be honest I'm still siding with Denly unless Crawley gets consistent big scores in the next innings and through the Sri Lanka series. But Crawley will be at 3 by the time the next Ashes rolls around, I should think.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not Pope at 3?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
x100

What

Ian Bell averaged well over 40 because he was allowed to bat in his natural position - 5 or 6 - for the vast bulk of his test career. He averaged 60 batting at 6.

Let's leave Pope where he is, eh.

Fack me if a batsmen which his quality is still at 3 by the next ashes I’d start supporting Bangladesh.

Pope's a class player but he's not a 3 and I'd never want him at 3. The highest he should bat is at 4, and I wouldn't put him there until Root's out of the side.

Denly has been doing a good job at in this series, other than today when he was a bit all over the place. Would happily see him carry on there, even if his average stays in the low 30s.

comment by Bennyville (U8058)
posted 13 minutes ago
Fack me if a batsmen which his quality is still at 3 by the next ashes I’d start supporting Bangladesh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
what is this supposed to mean sorry?

comment by Phendombele (U20037)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Bennyville (U8058)
posted 13 minutes ago
Fack me if a batsmen which his quality is still at 3 by the next ashes I’d start supporting Bangladesh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
what is this supposed to mean sorry?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I assume he meant 6 not 3

comment by Phendombele (U20037)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Bennyville (U8058)
posted 13 minutes ago
Fack me if a batsmen which his quality is still at 3 by the next ashes I’d start supporting Bangladesh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
what is this supposed to mean sorry?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wouldn’t want a batsmen with his much quality and patience batting as low down as no.6. I think it’s a waste.

Fack sake of course I meant 6, my apologies

The beauty of our current situation is that, regardless of whether Crawley or Denly bats at 3, we will have a scenario where:

- our top 3 bats are all top order bats suited to batting 1, 2 or 3
- our next 3 bats are all middle order bats suited to batting at 4, 5 or 6

In other words - round pegs, round holes.

No point forcing anyone into a higher position when they're already in their best suited role, especially when forcing someone like Pope in at 3 would mean forcing someone else in at 6 too.

1. Burns
2. Sibley
3. Crawley/Denly
4. Root
5. Stokes
6. Pope


That's a top class top 6. The only change I'd be remotely tempted to make would be swapping Stokes and Pope, but even then I don't really think there's any point.

nightmareville

Not a lot I disagree with there, but there will come a tome and point where Pope will be wondering why he isn’t being given at least a shot at a bigger position. I understand his position is middle order but the kid is 22 and just played one of the classiest innings from an Englishmen. I don’t see any harm in promoting him at some point.

I thought you meant you'd start supporting Bangladesh if a batsman of Denly's quality (or lack thereof) is still batting at 3 for us by the next Ashes series

It also seems I can’t type on my phone.

1. Burns
2. Sibley
3. Crawley/Denly
4. Root
5. Stokes
6. Pope


picks itself now which is refreshing

England have scored 500,000 test runs official...

This was brought to you by random stats r us

comment by Bennyville (U8058)
posted 1 minute ago
Not a lot I disagree with there, but there will come a tome and point where Pope will be wondering why he isn’t being given at least a shot at a bigger position. I understand his position is middle order but the kid is 22 and just played one of the classiest innings from an Englishmen. I don’t see any harm in promoting him at some point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, maybe so. I think it's just the way it is though, cos he's a 4-6 bat - he's never batted higher than that in first-class cricket, in fact he'd never batted higher than 6 in FC cricket until he was first called up to the Test side at 4, and he's batted 4 since for Surrey. And he's got Stokes and Root with him in the middle order, both of whom are also top class players so it's not like one of them should be dropping to 6 to make room for Pope either.

If Crawley or Denly (or one of the openers) falls apart and a new #3 is needed, I would rather give the opportunity to an actual top order bat. With players like Livingstone, Hain and Northeast on the scene I think it should be possible to find someone who's a natural fit rather than having to remodel Pope.

comment by Bennyville (U8058)
posted 2 minutes ago
Not a lot I disagree with there, but there will come a tome and point where Pope will be wondering why he isn’t being given at least a shot at a bigger position. I understand his position is middle order but the kid is 22 and just played one of the classiest innings from an Englishmen. I don’t see any harm in promoting him at some point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I really don't think that thought would cross his mind. If he scores a ton of runs over the next couple of years at 6, why would he want to go up the order?

I'd swap Stokes and Pope round in 12-18 months once Pope is fully settled. Stokes has said before he prefers batting 6 and would take a bit of the pressure off him. Pope also has the ability to be our best batsman alongside Root.

Sounds like they're going off for light

I think Pope showed all the makings of a high class top order batsmen in the last test. He’s only just turned 22, let’s not pigeon-hole him as a middle order batsmen just yet. Denly is only getting older and is yet to reach 3 figures. Nothing set in stone.

I think he'd rather be forced to bat at 6 because he's in a top class team where the bats at 4 and 5 are great players, than forced to bat at 3 because the team is struggling and needs him to convert to a new position, put it that way.

Same reason Ian Bell was always happiest at 6 in the team with Strauss, Cook, Trott, Pietersen, Collingwood above him.

Side note: GOD that 2010/11 Ashes side was glorious