Chris Woakes

[Rebelstar]

Originally Posted by 1000yardstare

I thought Jordan, Finn, Bopara and Tredwell were the better performers. Woakes 46.80 econ 6.21 s/r 45.2, Jordan 18.00 econ 4.40 s/r 24.5

Oddly enough plenty seem to believe Finn was worthy of a place in the worst XI, or at least didn't have a decent World Cup. Really bizarre to say that of a bowler based mainly, it seems, on ER and for some reason his 5wi wasn't a big deal because he took 3 wickets at the death of an innings or something like that.

He took 8 wickets, ironically 3 more than anyone else in England's squad.

Of the bowlers Finn took 8 wickets, Jordan (14.40), Woakes (46.80) and Anderson (49.00) took 5 each with Jordan's coming in 2 games. Tredwell only took 1/25 in his only match.

Bell was top runscorer with 262 runs @ 52.40, but a modest 77.29 SR. Root hit 202 runs @ 40.40 with a better SR of 84.17, Ali and Buttler hit at over a run a ball with averages mid 30s.

Did Woakes have a decent all-round World Cup? Not really, hit a 42no against Bangladesh making up near half his runs, and 37 against the aussies but 11 runs for twice out in his other innings. Unfortunately his bowling is hit and miss, more often the latter, and 1/65 vs AUS, 0/72 vs IND and 0/64 vs BAN counted more (negatively at that) than 2/8 vs NZL and 2/25 vs SCO.

Bopara took 1/31 in his only match but didn't bat! (against Afghanistan)


I'd say Jordan and Finn aside that our better performers were batsmen and depends how strictly you judge as to which/how many. If we're talking better 3 overall I'd go with Finn, Bell and Root. Jordan had good figures, but I'd leave him out only because I'd only include players who played more than 1-2 games.



On the flip side Broad, Morgan and Balance had a rubbish World Cup, can't believe Finn got as much criticism as he did when Broad took half as many wickets in 2 more games and half his wickets came vs Bangladesh and Afghanistan.

And compare them match by match then Finn wins 3-1 and Broad did little to justify retention over Finn in taking 1 wicket in each of his last 2 matches against relative minnows.

vs AUS - Finn 5/71, Broad 2/66
vs NZL - Finn 0/49, Broad 0/27
vs SCO - Finn 3/26, Broad 0/24
vs SRL - Finn 0/54, Broad 0/67

Against the kiwis England were slaughtered, everyone was hit and Finn's ER went through the roof because he conceded 49 off 2 overs. You take that anomaly match where the kiwis scored 125/2 off 12.2 overs out of the equation and Finn's ER was 5.59

Broad did bowl a couple more overs than Finn vs Sri Lanka, but ER seems to be the stick people beat Finn with - he just really got taken apart in ONE match, wasn't economy personified in the others but took wickets.

[Rebelstar]

Originally Posted by Chin Music

Of course it is best to avoid Sir Virgs all too frequent limited data sets. However it seems that he had forgotten that thus far Woakes had the princely sum of 6 wickets taken at 52.

Oh come on, isn't FOUR Tests adequate to prove beyond reasonable doubt............?

Originally Posted by Chin Music

As I said earlier, I do think we need to invest a bit of time in the more talented younger players but I can't see that Woakes would have brought anything more to the party in this series than any other bowler who hasn't made it on the tour.

Plenty rate Woakes, I don't. Not good enough as a bowler, I'm unconvinced he'd be anywhere near (as) effective on tour and he's too bits n pieces for me so not a great bowler, not a good all-rounder, and he'd be more or less a quick version of Ali.

I think Woakes will be in and out of the side in the various formats, his trend in ODIs is taking a clutch of wickets and then doing next to nothing for spells/runs of ODIs.

For example he took 6/45 vs the aussies then 2 wickets in his next 5 ODIs. He took 4/52 vs India then 3 wickets in his next 5 ODIs. He took 6/47 vs Sri Lanka then 4/40 vs the aussies a couple of ODIs later, and a modest 10 wickets in his last 10 ODIs which isn't that bad, but includes a 0/64, 0/72 and 0/89 plus a 2/25 against minnows Scotland AND those 10 wickets are at the princely sum price of 52 apiece.

Woakes ODIs (35)

0-2 wickets (29) : 226 overs, 22 wkts @ 62.45 (SR 61.64, ER 6.08)
3+ wickets (6) : 53 overs, 26 wkts @ 11.27 (SR 12.23, ER 5.53)

Obviously the two samples are going to be skewed and inequal in size, this isn't mean to be a conclusive proof or "robust analysis" of anything only highlighting that he does serious damage in a few ODIs and the bulk majority of the time (29/35 = 82.86%) he is pretty ineffectual. Great when he is on fire, but can you afford to carry him when the firemen have dampened him down............

I wouldn't want a bowler who 4 times out of 5 is poor, and whilst he can hold a bat it barely makes a lot of impact in the grand scheme of things. Might be a big part played in his taking no wickets in 13 of those 35 ODIs to date, although some are impressed by his increased pace.

I can see why he's playing 3rd fiddle to the regulars and even the likes of Finn, Wood and Jordan, definitely in Tests, even in ODIs I'd still class him as a bits n pieces 'nothing' player, that offers not nearly enough to be in the team.

[Chin Music]

Originally Posted by Rebelstar

Oh come on, isn't FOUR Tests adequate to prove beyond reasonable doubt............?



Plenty rate Woakes, I don't. Not good enough as a bowler, I'm unconvinced he'd be anywhere near (as) effective on tour and he's too bits n pieces for me so not a great bowler, not a good all-rounder, and he'd be more or less a quick version of Ali.

I think Woakes will be in and out of the side in the various formats, his trend in ODIs is taking a clutch of wickets and then doing next to nothing for spells/runs of ODIs.

For example he took 6/45 vs the aussies then 2 wickets in his next 5 ODIs. He took 4/52 vs India then 3 wickets in his next 5 ODIs. He took 6/47 vs Sri Lanka then 4/40 vs the aussies a couple of ODIs later, and a modest 10 wickets in his last 10 ODIs which isn't that bad, but includes a 0/64, 0/72 and 0/89 plus a 2/25 against minnows Scotland AND those 10 wickets are at the princely sum price of 52 apiece.

Woakes ODIs (35)

0-2 wickets (29) : 226 overs, 22 wkts @ 62.45 (SR 61.64, ER 6.08)
3+ wickets (6) : 53 overs, 26 wkts @ 11.27 (SR 12.23, ER 5.53)

Obviously the two samples are going to be skewed and inequal in size, this isn't mean to be a conclusive proof or "robust analysis" of anything only highlighting that he does serious damage in a few ODIs and the bulk majority of the time (29/35 = 82.86%) he is pretty ineffectual. Great when he is on fire, but can you afford to carry him when the firemen have dampened him down............

I wouldn't want a bowler who 4 times out of 5 is poor, and whilst he can hold a bat it barely makes a lot of impact in the grand scheme of things. Might be a big part played in his taking no wickets in 13 of those 35 ODIs to date, although some are impressed by his increased pace.

I can see why he's playing 3rd fiddle to the regulars and even the likes of Finn, Wood and Jordan, definitely in Tests, even in ODIs I'd still class him as a bits n pieces 'nothing' player, that offers not nearly enough to be in the team.

I realise that my post was from several months ago, but you did not get the context as to what it applied. I was referring to the West Indies series where conventional English seamers failed to run through the West Indies as England limped away with a draw to a side who would then get their backside handed to them on a plate versus Australia. Woakes is now a briskish but not outright fast seamer who doesn't do enough with the ball for me away from favoured home conditions. It is hard to see that too much different would have happened out there if he had replaced Jordan for instance.

I do not believe that four tests is enough to dismiss a player as not good enough unless they bowl a whole load of dross. I am not convinced by Woakes either in test or ODI cricket but I do believe that he has done enough over time to have deserved his call-ups to the test match squad. He probably needs more bowling time to earn a recall to that format after injury but I wouldn't wholly dismiss him. He may have the capacity to improve too. After all a certain James Anderson spent many years as a one trick pony who would look great when the ball swung, a raging liability who would go around the park if it didn't. (Got to get in a bit of fangirl baiting just for old time sake!)

[Fatslogger]

While Woakes hasn't done especially well overall in ODIs yet (it's not his better format), to call him a bits and pieces nothing player is fairly absurd, even in that form of the game. He's generally bowling his 10 overs in innings that complete 50, or close to and is being picked as a bowler who happens to bat, not really as an all rounder. His bowling efforts haven't been great overall but he does take wickets and the period he's played in has seen an awful lot of runs scored against England. Okay, you could frame some of that as his fault but it's harder to do brilliantly in a failing attack. With the bat he's not done as well as one might hope but batting down the order, mostly at 8, it's tough to post a good average. He did almost contribute to England chasing successfully against Bangla, under significant pressure, and England failed because the batsmen at the other end all got out, not because Woakes didn't do enough.

Brilliant so far? Clearly not but easily enough promise shown to be stuck with, especially as there are some signs that his limited overs game is improving from list A efforts this year.

[geoff_boycotts_grandmother]

Woakes is a good fit for this England side because of the need of a bowler who can keep things tight. Our only viable spin options are either too attacking (Rashid) or inexperienced (Ansari) or both (Ali) to tie up our end and our change seamers (Finn, Wood, Stokes, Plunkett) leak runs.

Woakes is the English bowling equivalent of Stuart Clark, Vernon Philanderer etc

[D/L]

Yes, Woakes can bring the type of accuracy little seen since Bresnan was at his best in an England shirt.

[geoff_boycotts_grandmother]

Originally Posted by D/L

Yes, Woakes can bring the type of accuracy little seen since Bresnan was at his best in an England shirt.

Yes, it probably is about 5 years since England last had someone doing that.

[D/L]

A little more recent than that, I think.

[Minor Maggie]

Originally Posted by geoff_boycotts_grandmother

Woakes is a good fit for this England side because of the need of a bowler who can keep things tight. Our only viable spin options are either too attacking (Rashid) or inexperienced (Ansari) or both (Ali) to tie up our end and our change seamers (Finn, Wood, Stokes, Plunkett) leak runs.

Woakes is the English bowling equivalent of Stuart Clark, Vernon Philanderer etc

What about Stephen Parry? He was a crucial part of the lancs T20 team and has played ODIs before.

[geoff_boycotts_grandmother]

Originally Posted by Minor Maggie

What about Stephen Parry? He was a crucial part of the lancs T20 team and has played ODIs before.

I was talking for test cricket.

Joe Root, who is five years younger and a part-timer has more fc wickets than Parry.

[Minor Maggie]

Originally Posted by geoff_boycotts_grandmother

I was talking for test cricket.

Joe Root, who is five years younger and a part-timer has more fc wickets than Parry.

That figures. Parry rarely plays first class he could almost do with a Tredwell style loan.

[1000yardstare]

Originally Posted by Chin Music

I realise that my post was from several months ago, but you did not get the context as to what it applied. I was referring to the West Indies series where conventional English seamers failed to run through the West Indies as England limped away with a draw to a side who would then get their backside handed to them on a plate versus Australia. Woakes is now a briskish but not outright fast seamer who doesn't do enough with the ball for me away from favoured home conditions. It is hard to see that too much different would have happened out there if he had replaced Jordan for instance.

I do not believe that four tests is enough to dismiss a player as not good enough unless they bowl a whole load of dross. I am not convinced by Woakes either in test or ODI cricket but I do believe that he has done enough over time to have deserved his call-ups to the test match squad. He probably needs more bowling time to earn a recall to that format after injury but I wouldn't wholly dismiss him. He may have the capacity to improve too. After all a certain James Anderson spent many years as a one trick pony who would look great when the ball swung, a raging liability who would go around the park if it didn't. (Got to get in a bit of fangirl baiting just for old time sake!)

At least Anderson had a very good first year in ODIs 46 wickets at 22.63 econ 4.59 s/r 29.5

[Marauding Bison]

I was at Lord's on Saturday and thought Woakes (pretty much all the time) and Finn (part of the time) were the only England bowlers who managed to maintain anything like a level of intensity and sustained threat.

[stevieh]

We need him to take some wickets, if we are interested in the new-style, aggressive version of the game that we were promised saw its genesis in the New Zealand series.

That doesn't preclude bowling line and length necessarily, but he needs to convince the skipper to give him attacking fields and risk a few more boundaries than might be more the norm in the Royal London competition.

[Psyduck]

Woakes continues to look totally innocuous to me. He just doesn't seem good enough for international cricket.

[Sir Virgs and Zamora]

@OptaJim: 5.5 - @crwoakes19 has the best ODI economy rate of any England seamer this summer (5.5, since June). Withdrawal.

[D/L]

Woakes bowled well, with little reward, at Lord's.

His supposed batting skills, so important for the pivotal #8 spot, have been conspicuous by their absence, however.

[1000yardstare]

Woakes has brought his bowling average down from 63.75 to 47.18 with a fantastic 7-4-9-3.

The Cricket Prof. ‏@CricProf
Woakes wicket balls release speeds:

Mathews: 84.8mph
Mendis: 78.7mph
Siriwardene: 86.1mph

[sharky]

Originally Posted by 1000yardstare

Woakes has brought his bowling average down from 63.75 to 47.18 with a fantastic 7-4-9-3.

The Cricket Prof. ‏@CricProf
Woakes wicket balls release speeds:

Mathews: 84.8mph
Mendis: 78.7mph
Siriwardene: 86.1mph

47 still isn't that great and he will need to back it up. I suspect his 39 is what will keep him in the side for a while longer, like with Bresnan, and knowing England when Stokes comes back they will drop Finn. To his credit he has improved a few things and taken the opportunity given to him. Perhaps that's the key, he almost wasn't expecting the chance to come and he happens to be in great form and up against a magnificently shocking batting line up. Just great timing.

[Fatslogger]

It's not absurd to suggest that Woakes could be a better choice than Finn as a first change seamer, if Finn continues to look off colour and Woakes continues to look like a destroyer. I do like Finn though and there may be some really difficult selections ahead if all the bowlers are fit.