5 batsman or 6?
Personally I disagree with the way England have gone for the 4th Test. Apparently it's "aggressive" to play with 5 batsman, but it didn't look very aggressive at Headingley. Then again, playing with 6 didn't ensure runs at Edgbaston. I'd prefer to get runs on the board by picking 6 batsman and relying on your best 4 bowlers to take 20 wickets, with support from others like Collingwood or Bopara.
I hope Stuart Broad can come through and get a big haul of wickets as until he does there will always be a nagging doubt that he's an also-ran who isn't quite good enough as a bowler or a batsman. In the same way as Paul Collingwood is judged on whether he makes runs, Broad needs to be judged on his bowling alone and his batting is a nice extra, or he needs to bat at 6 and average 40+. I'm still confused about the batting order....I'd bat Broad at 6, Flintoff at 7 and Ambrose at 8.
I'm going to watch on Friday at The Oval - I hope that I feel truly behind the team by then....I'm not sure I do as yet given all the captaincy going-ons.
4 comments:
At least there's no spot for Bopara - what more to Key and Shah have to do ?
I don't know why I'm shown as 'anonymous' - must have pressed the wrong button.
In the case of Shah, he needs to average more than 38 this season in 1st class cricket - if he'd been averaging 50+ like Bopara then I think he would have got in.
Key is a bit more complex as he's been out for so long, but I don't think he's far away given Strauss and Cook failing to get big scores....
The thought occured to me, since I burbled the original post, that Pietersen may already realise that if he loses a few games and Vaughan is back in the runs, his captaincy will be called into question.
If England now choose to play 5 batsman that makes it all the harder for Vaughan to get back in the side as a batsman and therefore the chances of a run-scoring Vaughan watching an inferior tactician (I'm making an assumption there - never seen Pietersen captain, but it's got to be likely) going about his business in the field, is not one that Moores or Pietersen would relish.
Am I being too cynical?
Post a Comment