The England number 3 spot
Interesting to see the table giving the stats for England number 3s on Cricinfo.
Assuming that Pietersen's England, with Flintoff at 6, don't return to Vaughan for the India tour, we have moved from someone who averages 40 at number 3 to someone who averages 34 there. And I also noticed that a certain Mr Key, who is in with a chance of making the squad, averages nearly 41 at 3 in Tests too.
I still haven't got over the Vaughan thing, as you can tell! But if England want to persist with Strauss and are worried about him being too similar to Cook, the table also shows that Cook's average at 3 is well over 50 - that's pretty handy even accounting for the amount of luck he had early in his career with dropped catches and wrong decisions. So Key could open and Cook could move to 3, leaving Bell to fight it out for number 5 with Collingwood, Shah and Bopara.
Several of us have burbled about Ian Bell many times before, primarily because he inspires debate as he never seems to quite come good (enough), and opinion is still divided, despite his own protestations. Given that's the case I think moving him to 3 is a mistake, but it would be nice to be proved wrong if that means England win the series in India (they won't get a better chance given India's recent loss to Sri Lanka and the recriminations taking place).
12 comments:
It is time for Bell to stand up and be counted. In 2005 he was like a rabbit in headlights against top quality bowling (i.e. Warne) and has improved to deliver occasionally since then. He should be given three and if he fails to deliver, get him out of the team. You can't hide someone with as many Tests as he has (relative to some others) down at 6.
He has 43 caps and 8 hundreds, compared with Pietersen (43,14); Collingwood's (39,6) Strauss' (53,12); and Cook (34,7).
This makes him joint second most experienced and only marginally better than Collingwood in terms of hundreds per game. He is clearly more naturally talented than Colly, which makes it a woeful waste. Apparently none of Bell's tons have come when someone else in the team hasn't already scored one - hardly bossing the game.
I struggle to believe that given the same run of games Bopara wouldn't do better.
I agree in principle with Ed's point about Cook at 3, but what about KP? He's the best batsman. I would go with the following top 5 (assuming Fred at 6):
Strauss
Cook
Pietersen
Bopara
Collingwood
Then when Colly loses form and Vaughan weighs in with a load for Yorshire next summer they can do a straight swap!!
BTW - has anyone noticed the volume of runs being scored by Stephen Moore at Worcestershire? Who is he?
Much as I like the way you think picking Bopara ahead of Bell, I don't think that the England selectors feel that way! Unless he has a great ODI series against South Africa that is. I'm not sure about Pietersen at 3 myself but it could be well worth experimenting with given our lack of a 3 at the moment.
Are you picking Strauss for his batting or his slip fielding by the way?
I had a quick look at Moore and he was born and raised in South Africa so he's got to be better than the average Englishman!
I doubt England will make any changes to the batting line up bar Vaughan for Strauss, let alone whole sale changes to include Key, Bopara and Shah.
I think Shah should be batting at 3 in India but I don't think that's going to happen unfortunately. He seems to have lost favour in the Test team for now.
Bopara seems to be picked for also bowling a bit which I think is wrong as he is an inferior batsman and not a great bowler for Test cricket yet. Even Shane Warne thinks that Shah is a better batsman than Bopara.
And Key's average is boosted by a double ton against a woeful West Indies side pre-Ashes 2005. His inclusion is a possibility if Cook is included at 3.
Ideally, the top 5 should be:
Strauss
Vaughan
Cook
Pietersen
Collingwood
And it is more likely to happen than picking Shah or Key as Moores and the selectors rarely drop batsmen these days.
I'd like to see the following order:
Cook
Vaughan
KP
Colly
Shah
This is mainly because I believe Strauss is not good enough and I can't think of a decent number 3. As bad as Colly looks at times he might work as a 3 as he can hang around and see off a new ball, to free KP up for theoretically worse bowling.
What I fear the selectors might come up with as an answer is a batsman who can keep to come in up the order!!!
How about:-
Cook
Strauss
Prior
Pietersen
Vaughan
Collingwood
Bopara
Flintoff
Then 2 fast bowlers and Panesar?
I think Prior deserves another chance and would be better up the order.
I think you've just suggested exactly what Winks was scared of Grov - a batting keeper!
What about the same players in this order?
Strauss
Cook
Vaughan
Pietersen
Collingwood
Bopara
Prior
Flintoff
I notice that none of us can agree!
My thinking is that Prior is more likely to score runs up the order.
I believe wherever Prior would be asked to bat he would need to score a lot of runs to make up for his short comings behind the stumps.
Can we teach Colly to keep wicket - we know he is good in the field surely he could adapt.
We can agree on one thing - get rid of Bell!
Most of you seem to assume that Vaughan will be rapidly rehabilitated. Whilst I would like this to be so, I'm not convinced it will happen quickly, or at all. If he does come back, does he get back the captaincy? If so, I've heard it suggested that Pietersen was given the captaincy to prevent him defecting to the big money available elsewhere: if true, he would presumably go if/when he loses the captaincy.
I fear you are right about Vaughan. If he's playing he's likely to be a better captain than Pietersen, so it's in Pietersen and the England management's interests to keep Vaughan out of the team. And unfortunately he's unlikely to demand reselection with his form in county cricket (especially playing at Headingley) - he's a bit of a Gower in that respect.
I see that Shah is getting number 3 for ODIs, so it will be interesting to see if he's successful - if he is that will put serious pressure on Bell for the Test numbr 3 spot. I'd still prefer to see Pietersen coming in at 3 though in ODIs.
Post a Comment