Cricket 24/7

Cricket 24/7 (http://www.cricket247.org/community/index.php)
-   England (http://www.cricket247.org/community/forumdisplay.php?f=10)
-   -   The Future is Bright, the future is ginger: official Ben Stokes thread (http://www.cricket247.org/community/showthread.php?t=17013)

Ali TT 17th January 2014 09:02

The Future is Bright, the future is ginger: official Ben Stokes thread
 
Got a weird kink in his run up, feel this might lose him some momentum at the crease. Needs coaching out, methinks.

Chin Music 17th January 2014 10:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ali TT (Post 612460)
Got a weird kink in his run up, feel this might lose him some momentum at the crease. Needs coaching out, methinks.

It's unreasonable to expect him to be the finished article with either bat or ball. He's only in his first few months of international cricket despite being picked before his time for ODIs a couple of years ago for a couple of games here and there. Lets hope whatever coaching he does receive doesn't send him backwards like some of his colleagues appear to have done.

Minor Maggie 17th January 2014 21:19

An adopted Cumbrian gets his own thread. Excellent!

Michelle Fivefer 19th January 2014 22:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chin Music (Post 612476)
It's unreasonable to expect him to be the finished article with either bat or ball. He's only in his first few months of international cricket despite being picked before his time for ODIs a couple of years ago for a couple of games here and there. Lets hope whatever coaching he does receive doesn't send him backwards like some of his colleagues appear to have done.

Exactly what I was thinking. He was the only bright spot in the Ashes and as a result England are using him as if he is an experienced senior player. Giving him too many overs to bowl and promoting him to #3.

There has been an over-reaction to new players doing well at the beginning of their England careers. High praise from coach and captain, too much hype in the media. Look what's happened to Root; over-promoted and ultimately dropped, although in his case possibly only temporarily. They mustn't ruin Stokes as well.

Chin Music 20th January 2014 08:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michelle Fivefer (Post 612798)
Exactly what I was thinking. He was the only bright spot in the Ashes and as a result England are using him as if he is an experienced senior player. Giving him too many overs to bowl and promoting him to #3.

There has been an over-reaction to new players doing well at the beginning of their England careers. High praise from coach and captain, too much hype in the media. Look what's happened to Root; over-promoted and ultimately dropped, although in his case possibly only temporarily. They mustn't ruin Stokes as well.

I don't blame the media for what has happened to Root, that is ridiculous. What I do blame is the way England have used him in the last few months or so. He's shown fatigue given that he's barely missed a mtach and has of course been shunted around at the wrong times. That is the fault of the England management.

Stokes shouldn't have been bowling at the death nor been at no.3. That was muddled thinking too.

geoff_boycotts_grandmother 20th January 2014 12:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chin Music (Post 612825)
I don't blame the media for what has happened to Root, that is ridiculous. What I do blame is the way England have used him in the last few months or so. He's shown fatigue given that he's barely missed a mtach and has of course been shunted around at the wrong times. That is the fault of the England management.

Stokes shouldn't have been bowling at the death nor been at no.3. That was muddled thinking too.

Was it? England are trying to develop him for the next world cup.

Ali TT 20th January 2014 12:24

Its a tough one for Stokes. I don't think he justifies a place currently, and England's side are weaker for his presence. But England are clearly banking on him for the future, so he needs as many opportunities as possible. I'd rather Bopara was moved up to 3, or we drop Cook and bring in someone else with some more re-jiggling. As stated elsewhere, we have plenty of batsmen for the mid-order, but not enough to play in the top-order, which leaves us with this awkward situation of jumping Stokes up and down.

However, he's not likely to ever bat at 3 in a major tournament for England, so putting him there yesterday was just weird.

JG_ 20th January 2014 12:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ali TT (Post 612860)
Its a tough one for Stokes. I don't think he justifies a place currently, and England's side are weaker for his presence. But England are clearly banking on him for the future, so he needs as many opportunities as possible. I'd rather Bopara was moved up to 3, or we drop Cook and bring in someone else with some more re-jiggling. As stated elsewhere, we have plenty of batsmen for the mid-order, but not enough to play in the top-order, which leaves us with this awkward situation of jumping Stokes up and down.

However, he's not likely to ever bat at 3 in a major tournament for England, so putting him there yesterday was just weird.

I agree with your point, but I wouldn't move Bopara, he's one whose career has been badly affected by constantly being moved up and down but now he seems to have finally settled into a role and is doing it well. Leave him there.

England in general don't seem to have a clue where they're going with regards one-day cricket at the moment. The reaction to Trott not being available for this series is a good example; instead of simply bringing Carberry in to open and moving Bell from 2 to 3, we decide that moving Root up to 3, bringing in an extra batsman in Ballance at 4 and then dropping our spinner is the best solution. Does anyone really think we should go into the World Cup with Root as the lone spinner? No, so why are we doing it now?

Michelle Fivefer 20th January 2014 13:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chin Music (Post 612825)
I don't blame the media for what has happened to Root, that is ridiculous. What I do blame is the way England have used him in the last few months or so. He's shown fatigue given that he's barely missed a mtach and has of course been shunted around at the wrong times. That is the fault of the England management.

Stokes shouldn't have been bowling at the death nor been at no.3. That was muddled thinking too.

I'm not blaming the media but the management for seemingly being influenced by the media hype.

geoff_boycotts_grandmother 20th January 2014 14:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by JG_ (Post 612872)
I agree with your point, but I wouldn't move Bopara, he's one whose career has been badly affected by constantly being moved up and down but now he seems to have finally settled into a role and is doing it well. Leave him there.

England in general don't seem to have a clue where they're going with regards one-day cricket at the moment. The reaction to Trott not being available for this series is a good example; instead of simply bringing Carberry in to open and moving Bell from 2 to 3, we decide that moving Root up to 3, bringing in an extra batsman in Ballance at 4 and then dropping our spinner is the best solution. Does anyone really think we should go into the World Cup with Root as the lone spinner? No, so why are we doing it now?

So that he can be a 6th bowling option in the world cup because there may be games when it turns out we want spin both ends for a stint in the middle overs and he needs to bowl 6 overs.

He needs the experience of bowling more than Tredwell and now he's in the test side (well he was) he's not going to get it at Yorkshire.

sanskritsimon 22nd January 2014 15:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by geoff_boycotts_grandmother (Post 612895)
So that he can be a 6th bowling option in the world cup because there may be games when it turns out we want spin both ends for a stint in the middle overs and he needs to bowl 6 overs.

He needs the experience of bowling more than Tredwell and now he's in the test side (well he was) he's not going to get it at Yorkshire.

I don't think that's why Tredwell wasn't playing.

In the scenario you paint, England would be far better off picking a second specialist spinner instead of one of their seamers. He's going to be a whole lot better than Root, regardless of how much bowling Root does for England between now and the world cup.

JG_ 22nd January 2014 15:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by geoff_boycotts_grandmother (Post 612895)
So that he can be a 6th bowling option in the world cup because there may be games when it turns out we want spin both ends for a stint in the middle overs and he needs to bowl 6 overs.

He needs the experience of bowling more than Tredwell and now he's in the test side (well he was) he's not going to get it at Yorkshire.

Missed this at the time, sorry- I don't buy it anyway, based on recent events I don't think England are capable of such long-term planning. And anyway it's a ******** reason, I would say having players play in their usual roles and actually trying to give yourself the best shot of winning games would be a better preparation for the WC.

geoff_boycotts_grandmother 22nd January 2014 15:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by sanskritsimon (Post 613121)
I don't think that's why Tredwell wasn't playing.

In the scenario you paint, England would be far better off picking a second specialist spinner instead of one of their seamers. He's going to be a whole lot better than Root, regardless of how much bowling Root does for England between now and the world cup.

You'd pick a specialist bowler who is only going to bowl 6 overs?

Quote:

Originally Posted by JG_ (Post 613124)
Missed this at the time, sorry- I don't buy it anyway, based on recent events I don't think England are capable of such long-term planning. And anyway it's a ******** reason, I would say having players play in their usual roles and actually trying to give yourself the best shot of winning games would be a better preparation for the WC.

Of course England are capable of long-term planning. Look at the Lions, look at someone like Stokes and how they deliberately toured in Oz the year before the Ashes so he could get experience of playing down there.

Long term plans may not always come off and may change, but England want to know what they've got with Root and whether he can be a viable 6th bowling option.

JG_ 22nd January 2014 16:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by geoff_boycotts_grandmother (Post 613128)
Of course England are capable of long-term planning. Look at the Lions, look at someone like Stokes and how they deliberately toured in Oz the year before the Ashes so he could get experience of playing down there.

Long term plans may not always come off and may change, but England want to know what they've got with Root and whether he can be a viable 6th bowling option.

OK then, they're not very good at it. For every Stokes (and even then they seem to have no idea what to do with him in one-day cricket) there's a Root or Kerrigan, whose introductions into international cricket have been woefully managed by England. Similar lack of clarity in the treatment of Woakes, Rankin, Bairstow and Taylor, despite all playing lots of Lions cricket. England have brought in a whole series of structures designed to make players' transitions to international cricket more straightforward but they're doing worse than ever if anything.

sanskritsimon 22nd January 2014 16:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by geoff_boycotts_grandmother (Post 613128)
You'd pick a specialist bowler who is only going to bowl 6 overs?

I think in your scenario you're likely to be giving a specialist bowler a light workload in order to find 6 overs for a batsman to bowl. In my scenario the person bowling those 6 overs is a specialist bowler who's a much better bowler than Root, so there's a much more realistic option of giving them 4 more and calling it a full allocation.

geoff_boycotts_grandmother 22nd January 2014 16:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by sanskritsimon (Post 613133)
I think in your scenario you're likely to be giving a specialist bowler a light workload in order to find 6 overs for a batsman to bowl. In my scenario the person bowling those 6 overs is a specialist bowler who's a much better bowler than Root, so there's a much more realistic option of giving them 4 more and calling it a full allocation.

But England don't like bowling spinners with the new ball, during the power play overs or at the death.

sanskritsimon 22nd January 2014 16:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by geoff_boycotts_grandmother (Post 613135)
But England don't like bowling spinners with the new ball, during the power play overs or at the death.

Seemingly. Also, England are not very good.

geoff_boycotts_grandmother 22nd January 2014 20:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by sanskritsimon (Post 613139)
Seemingly. Also, England are not very good.

Certainly our spinners don't seem to be.

The previous ODI series our spinner (Tredwell) went at more than a run and a half an over more than the worst seamer.

sanskritsimon 23rd January 2014 09:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by geoff_boycotts_grandmother (Post 613149)
Certainly our spinners don't seem to be.

The previous ODI series our spinner (Tredwell) went at more than a run and a half an over more than the worst seamer.

Maybe that's why they dropped him, then. Not that England seemed to be any better as a result.

JG_ 23rd January 2014 12:15

I do think that Tredwell is getting close to the point of being worked out, by the Australians at least, but going in without a frontline spinner is not a sustainable strategy. Briggs is in the squad as well, of course.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:35.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Cricket247.org