Cricket 24/7  

Welcome to the Cricket 24/7.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. There are also more forums available to members, such as the Lounge - where members chat about just about anything under the sun except cricket!

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.


Go Back   Cricket 24/7 > Cricket Discussion Forums > International Cricket
Register FAQDonate Members List Calendar Casino Articles Terms of Use Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 28th February 2018, 10:43   #301
Sir Coolerking
International Material
 
Sir Coolerking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Berks
Team(s): England, Sussex, Portsmouth
Posts: 1,423
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chin Music View Post
Willey is an utter red herring with regards to ODI cricket in the first place. He's not actually a good selection as an ODI bowler in his own right as he does x to the amount of f all outside the first few overs when he is one of the few people to get the new white ball to swing, and even then it is for 3 for overs max. He is a borderline liability outside of that period. Although an occasionally useful striker of a ball at international level, he just won't come off often enough.

A decent selection for the t20 side though.
Although you can argue that having Stokes in the side allows you to have a specialist new ball bowler who isn't really needed later in the innings. But I'd sooner have a fully fit Wood.
Sir Coolerking is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th February 2018, 11:04   #302
Notts Exile
International Cricketer
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Berkshire
Team(s): Notts and Forest
Posts: 2,494
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Coolerking View Post
But I'd sooner have a fully fit Wood.
My daughter would like a unicorn too.

At some point we'll give up on Wood. He's a waste of time.
Notts Exile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th February 2018, 14:42   #303
sanskritsimon
Posting God
 
sanskritsimon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Team(s): Arkholme Bees, Hackney Grasshoppers, Holy Cross Academicals
Posts: 10,776
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bestie View Post
Because he hits a single almost every ball. ... The benefit then comes from maintaining the momentum and preventing the frustration that a succession of dot balls brings. ...
There's no frustration to facing dot balls if the run rate is motoring in relative terms. When one possible scoring shot is a six, the incidence of a few dot balls needn't have any particular implications for the run rate. In fact, frustration at facing dot balls is far more likely to occur for a batsman who usually scores in 1s or 2s than it is for a batsman who often scores in boundaries, since the batsman who usually scores in 1s or 2s really needs to be scoring runs off nearly every ball, whereas a six-hitter can pay off two maidens in two hits, as it were. There's a side-benefit in tiring out the fielders, but it's a two-edged sword since it affects the batsmen too. In general the benefit to Root of scoring off such a high fraction of his balls faced is that it stops his strike rate from being lower than it is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bestie View Post
... And yes, another batsman being in as long as Root will usually score more runs than he would. They don’t manage it very often though, whereas Root does. Besides, if SR is the relevant figure then Hales is only 8 ahead of Root. Given his average suggests he can be expected to stay in for about 20 balls fewer than Root, the expected increase in his run tally if he stayed in as long as Root is 1.6 runs. ...
If we're arguing for higher strike rates then we'd want them from all batsmen, not just Root. In general though 1.6 runs higher is higher, and thus desirable. They key is the benefit gained by the likely extra length of Root's innings, which is really then about how often one's big-hitting resources are left unused at the end of the team's innings, and to what degree. It's a hard thing to manage, particularly early on in the innings, because anything can happen, it only takes 10 balls to be all out. Also, if Root and Bairstow bat 40 overs fairly gently and then the rest go mad in the last 10 and we're 8 down after 50, you could say we timed it well, but more likely we would have scored more (and perhaps even lost fewer wickets as well) if we'd gone for it a bit earlier. I suppose the point really is that these days with so much more in the way of big-hitting going on all the time, and particularly in an England team with so many fine all-rounders allowing a very strong lower order, it seems timorous to have someone playing such an old-fashioned role. If it was controversial when Trott did it, it must be even more so now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Coolerking View Post
But you can't just look at strike rates, you need to look at what point of the innings players come in. You really don't want batsmen blazing away from overs 10-35 because you'll end up 7 down and no one to attack the last 15. Root is key to setting it up for the finishers that we have, and yes, ideally, him getting out after a run a ball 70 kind of sets it up perfectly for them (which is what he normally does). ...
Agreed in general you don't want to be 7 down with 15 overs left. But it might also depend on what the score was at that stage. I think that to set aside half of the innings and say our main priority here is to conserve wickets is fearful cricket. In any case, here you've basically said what I said in my first post, at which you were so incredulous -- that is, that if Root is going to stay in towards the end of the innings and convert his 50s to 100s then we really need him to crank the run-rate up as he does so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Coolerking View Post
... In the highest ever ODI score, Root scored a run a ball 85 whilst Hales was scoring at a higher rate. That's the best ODI score ever. If it was someone trying to do the same job as Hales, chances are they get out much cheaper and the innings needs re-building. ...
You've mentioned that record-breaking occasion a couple of times now. We scored 444 for 3. Four of our batsmen scored more than 20, and of those, Root had the lowest strike-rate (99, compared to 140, 176, and 211). But Stokes and Ali did not bat. I would say it is fairly clear that we could have got more runs, and that the most obvious way of us getting more runs would have been for Root to have faced fewer balls than the 86 he did face.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Coolerking View Post
... You seem to think that scoring boundaries in International cricket is easy. It's not, especially if bowlers bowl well. In fact I'm coming to the conclusion that your theories are based on an England side batting against a Dutch Under 15's team, in which case, yes, get the big hitters in. Rotating the strike is key to getting big totals and not allowing bowlers to attack the same batsman for an entire over.

Finally, as mentioned above, Kohli averages 58 with a strike rate of 92. Presumably you'd swap him for Willey as well???
As I said in a previous post, I wouldn't pick Willey at all. I don't think you're very good at clocking what I think even when I tell you straight, so please don't try to discern what I "seem to think" by some kind of intuition. I don't think scoring boundaries in international cricket is easy, but I think some of our batsmen find it a bit easier than Root does. Do you disagree? Regarding the thing about the under-15s, as I indicated in an earlier post, I'm not sure I really want to join you in the playground.

There's a point here about disrupting the bowler's plans. But I think it's far-fetched. See the comments above about strike-rates and dot balls. Also, it's fearful thinking again to view dot balls necessarily in terms of the bowler's advantage, when a few dot balls might equally be seen as the batsman investing in some observation preparatory to big shots, and the bowler might actually prefer to bowl at the other guy.
sanskritsimon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th February 2018, 15:00   #304
Notts Exile
International Cricketer
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Berkshire
Team(s): Notts and Forest
Posts: 2,494
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanskritsimon View Post
You've mentioned that record-breaking occasion a couple of times now. We scored 444 for 3. Four of our batsmen scored more than 20, and of those, Root had the lowest strike-rate (99, compared to 140, 176, and 211). But Stokes and Ali did not bat. I would say it is fairly clear that we could have got more runs, and that the most obvious way of us getting more runs would have been for Root to have faced fewer balls than the 86 he did face.
So, when Roy got out you would have had someone more aggressive walking to the crease to join Hales? At 33-1 there is always the risk of having too many dynamic players and you crumble as we have seen England do some many times since, in search of that mammoth score. Having a Root in the side lessens the chances of that happening, think how many times it would have happened had he not been there.
Notts Exile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th February 2018, 15:10   #305
sanskritsimon
Posting God
 
sanskritsimon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Team(s): Arkholme Bees, Hackney Grasshoppers, Holy Cross Academicals
Posts: 10,776
Quote:
Originally Posted by Notts Exile View Post
So, when Roy got out you would have had someone more aggressive walking to the crease to join Hales? At 33-1 there is always the risk of having too many dynamic players and you crumble as we have seen England do some many times since, in search of that mammoth score. Having a Root in the side lessens the chances of that happening, think how many times it would have happened had he not been there.
We scored 444 for 3. Root scored less than 20% of the runs. You say we might have crumbled without him that day. In principle you're right, but really? I doubt it. Three wickets fell!

Root faced 86 balls and was out once. Everyone else faced 214 balls and was out twice. So on average, everyone else was better than Root was at staying in, and they also scored at a much much faster rate.

You're being fearful. Perhaps you're imagining something extraordinarily unlikely and then thinking that because it didn't happen, therefore our policy was the optimal one. In any case, I'm thinking about how we might have scored more.

I didn't say I would have changed the batting order when the first wicket fell. I did say that the best way of our scoring more would have been for Root to bat less, so I suppose that would mean him getting out earlier. Sir Coolerking is worried about the effect that having to rebuild might have had upon the innings, but that happened anyway, since Root was out.
sanskritsimon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th February 2018, 15:13   #306
Notts Exile
International Cricketer
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Berkshire
Team(s): Notts and Forest
Posts: 2,494
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanskritsimon View Post
but that happened anyway, since Root was out.
.... and by which time Morgan and Buttler were able to create mayhem without worrying about what happened if they got out. Root did his job

I agree that England might have scored more, they might also have scored less.
Notts Exile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th February 2018, 15:22   #307
sanskritsimon
Posting God
 
sanskritsimon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Team(s): Arkholme Bees, Hackney Grasshoppers, Holy Cross Academicals
Posts: 10,776
Quote:
Originally Posted by Notts Exile View Post
.... and by which time Morgan and Buttler were able to create mayhem without worrying about what happened if they got out. Root did his job

I agree that England might have scored more, they might also have scored less.
No one can disagree with that last bit. It was a record-breaking score, after all. And Root did his job, yes. But on average everyone else did his job (i.e., stay in and score runs) better than he did. Morgan and Buttler created mayhem because that's what they do. The fact that Root had scored 85 may have made no difference to them whatsoever.

You're inventing a fear, and ascribing it to Morgan and Buttler, and then taking it away from them, and thanking Root for that. It's nonsense thinking. It would have been better if they had batted for longer.
sanskritsimon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th February 2018, 15:26   #308
Notts Exile
International Cricketer
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Berkshire
Team(s): Notts and Forest
Posts: 2,494
I know which way the thinking goes in planning meetings around the world. You are entitled to your opinion, it seems as though it's not one shared by many who captain, manage or play at the top level, they all seem to want a certain level of assurance. Can't think why.
Notts Exile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th February 2018, 15:44   #309
sanskritsimon
Posting God
 
sanskritsimon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Team(s): Arkholme Bees, Hackney Grasshoppers, Holy Cross Academicals
Posts: 10,776
Quote:
Originally Posted by Notts Exile View Post
I know which way the thinking goes in planning meetings around the world. You are entitled to your opinion, it seems as though it's not one shared by many who captain, manage or play at the top level, they all seem to want a certain level of assurance. Can't think why.
I can't either. I don't think anyone here can explain it rationally. Maybe it comes down to fear again. Or, as I've also suspected, simple lack of ambition. I think it's important to remember that avoiding the worst is not the same as success.
sanskritsimon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th February 2018, 16:04   #310
Chin Music
Administrator
 
Chin Music's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: la sala de opinion equivocada
Team(s): ****
Posts: 24,412
When the plodder was one of Cook/Bell/Trott (and of course we once had the pure joy of having all three as our top order) then I could understand less enthusiasm as to having such a more easy paced player. However Root is comfortably a quicker scorer than any one of those is without him trying to be a blaster. You can even argue that he is a better international t20 batsman than either Hales or Roy as the last world t20 prove although he barely plays a game these days.

Like others, I'm happy to go for a slightly less dynamic player who regularly scores comfortably more runs than the blasters. The likely runs on the board is the assurance. With this England side, there is always someone else who can do the pyrotechnics for a few overs near the end and turn 300 into 330+ in the right circumstances.
__________________
Quote:
"One of the greatest problems of our time is that many are schooled but few are educated" - Thomas More
Chin Music is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th February 2018, 16:15   #311
Sir Coolerking
International Material
 
Sir Coolerking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Berks
Team(s): England, Sussex, Portsmouth
Posts: 1,423
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanskritsimon View Post
I can't either. I don't think anyone here can explain it rationally. Maybe it comes down to fear again. Or, as I've also suspected, simple lack of ambition. I think it's important to remember that avoiding the worst is not the same as success.
I think what you're looking for is T20 cricket played for 50 overs. So given our best score is 230 (and that little wretch Root scored 83 of them off 44 balls) there seems no reason that we wouldn't therefore score 575 runs in 50 overs (apart from the minor fact that we were 8 down when we finished).

You've also not addressed the Kohli point, should India drop him for having a far too similar record to Root's?

Every one of your theories is beind de-bunked here with some perfectly acceptable stats.
Sir Coolerking is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th February 2018, 16:33   #312
Psyduck
Posting God
 
Psyduck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Manchester
Team(s): England, Lancashire, Man Utd
Posts: 16,337
I have to say the suggestion that Root may not be worth his place in England's ODI team is eccentric, even by your lofty standards Sans.
Psyduck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th February 2018, 17:00   #313
Ali TT
Posting God
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 19,537
England have scored 350+ nine times with Root in the side. He has scored 6 50s and 2 100s in and England have won 6, lost 3 of those games.
__________________
WARNING
Reading the above post may cause bouts of nausea.
Ali TT is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 28th February 2018, 17:25   #314
sanskritsimon
Posting God
 
sanskritsimon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Team(s): Arkholme Bees, Hackney Grasshoppers, Holy Cross Academicals
Posts: 10,776
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Coolerking View Post
I think what you're looking for is T20 cricket played for 50 overs. So given our best score is 230 (and that little wretch Root scored 83 of them off 44 balls) there seems no reason that we wouldn't therefore score 575 runs in 50 overs (apart from the minor fact that we were 8 down when we finished).
I don't think inventing ridiculous opinions that I don't hold and then ridiculing them is going to advance your case. And even though I don't think that Root should be treated as a VIP, equally I don't think it's really on to call him names like that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Coolerking View Post
You've also not addressed the Kohli point, should India drop him for having a far too similar record to Root's?
That's another position you wish I held, is it? I'm not arguing for that. I don't follow India's ODI performances and I'm not seeking to advise them on their selection or tactics. I don't think Kohli's available for England, but if he were he would presumably be judged for selection alongside the others who also were. I believe that more than ninety percent of posts on these forums in recent years have been about who is better out of Root, Kohli, Williamson, or Smith, and in what ways, so if you want to read posts about that kind of thing, you shouldn't have far to look.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psyduck View Post
I have to say the suggestion that Root may not be worth his place in England's ODI team is eccentric, even by your lofty standards Sans.
It's a suggestion that's been made by myself and others on many occasions before, but if you view it as excessively outlandish, for reasons reverential or otherwise, there's no need for you to engage with it. In the first instance here on this thread, though, my point was simply that if Root were to convert more of his 50s, it would be good if he were to up his strike rate in so doing. Sir Coolerking agrees with this, and I think most other posters would too.
sanskritsimon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th February 2018, 17:43   #315
Sir Coolerking
International Material
 
Sir Coolerking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Berks
Team(s): England, Sussex, Portsmouth
Posts: 1,423
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanskritsimon View Post
I don't think inventing ridiculous opinions that I don't hold and then ridiculing them is going to advance your case. And even though I don't think that Root should be treated as a VIP, equally I don't think it's really on to call him names like that.
Sorry, i thought you were advocating everyone smashing it for the entire 50 overs, fearless cricket. Are you now suggesting that maybe someone should hold back a little, help build the innings and allow for others to smash it around him?

Jeez, if only we had someone like that!!
Sir Coolerking is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th February 2018, 18:06   #316
sanskritsimon
Posting God
 
sanskritsimon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Team(s): Arkholme Bees, Hackney Grasshoppers, Holy Cross Academicals
Posts: 10,776
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Coolerking View Post
Sorry, i thought you were advocating everyone smashing it for the entire 50 overs, fearless cricket. Are you now suggesting that maybe someone should hold back a little, help build the innings and allow for others to smash it around him?

Jeez, if only we had someone like that!!
There has to be a difference of approach for a longer innings, because the batting line-up is not correspondingly longer. In both games, however, one wants to maximise the use one gets out of one's high-strike-rate players.

As mentioned above, however, if non-Root player X smashes it, that is X doing that, not Root doing it through him. And player X may smash it or not do so whether Root wishes him to or not. What allows X to do it is not Root, but rather the format of the game and his own skills and talent as displayed against the bowling he receives.
sanskritsimon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th February 2018, 18:53   #317
sharky
Posting God
 
sharky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sunny Sussex
Team(s): Sussex, England
Posts: 10,940
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psyduck View Post
I have to say the suggestion that Root may not be worth his place in England's ODI team is eccentric, even by your lofty standards Sans.
As is the notion that the forum is full of Root apologists, when literally this is the only thread on the entire forum designed (now Bell has retired) specifically to criticise, albeit relatively gently, one particular player, Joe Root. He gets criticism when it is due, but someone who averages about 65 at a strike rate above 90 since the start of 2016 is difficult to be too hard on.
__________________
She was like a candle in the wind...Unreliable
sharky is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 1st March 2018, 08:58   #318
Sir Coolerking
International Material
 
Sir Coolerking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Berks
Team(s): England, Sussex, Portsmouth
Posts: 1,423
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanskritsimon View Post
There has to be a difference of approach for a longer innings, because the batting line-up is not correspondingly longer. In both games, however, one wants to maximise the use one gets out of one's high-strike-rate players.

As mentioned above, however, if non-Root player X smashes it, that is X doing that, not Root doing it through him. And player X may smash it or not do so whether Root wishes him to or not. What allows X to do it is not Root, but rather the format of the game and his own skills and talent as displayed against the bowling he receives.
My final point on this is that until a higher ODI score is achieved by a team not including Root (or Kohli), there is no argument. They are essential to the building of big scores. Morgan and Buttler hit 160 off the final 12 overs in that innings, because it had been set up for them to do so. Remember that score was against the team who would win the Champions Trophy in the same country just a year later.
Sir Coolerking is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st March 2018, 09:14   #319
Chin Music
Administrator
 
Chin Music's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: la sala de opinion equivocada
Team(s): ****
Posts: 24,412
Quote:
Originally Posted by sharky View Post
As is the notion that the forum is full of Root apologists, when literally this is the only thread on the entire forum designed (now Bell has retired) specifically to criticise, albeit relatively gently, one particular player, Joe Root. He gets criticism when it is due, but someone who averages about 65 at a strike rate above 90 since the start of 2016 is difficult to be too hard on.
More than anything, the number of opportunities that we have had to mention him on this thread is a reason for criticism, although it is more acute for test matches than it is for ODIs given that the need is greater in tests for tons and that up to a point they are bonuses in ODIs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Coolerking View Post
My final point on this is that until a higher ODI score is achieved by a team not including Root (or Kohli), there is no argument. They are essential to the building of big scores. Morgan and Buttler hit 160 off the final 12 overs in that innings, because it had been set up for them to do so. Remember that score was against the team who would win the Champions Trophy in the same country just a year later.
Although don't forget we lost the semi in a foreign country! (for you Psy)
__________________
Quote:
"One of the greatest problems of our time is that many are schooled but few are educated" - Thomas More
Chin Music is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st March 2018, 21:36   #320
Chin Music
Administrator
 
Chin Music's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: la sala de opinion equivocada
Team(s): ****
Posts: 24,412
A relatively rare entry from Steve Smith. Although my impression was that Warner was a bit of a sucker for an unconverted 50 his overall record is still an impressive 21/28 in terms of centuries to 50s.
__________________
Quote:
"One of the greatest problems of our time is that many are schooled but few are educated" - Thomas More
Chin Music is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 22:11.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Cricket247.org