Butler proves why Xfactor players need to be backed in long formats

[Ankit_sharma03]

38 minutes ago, Straight Drive said:

Joe Root also plays in same conditions, but he shows he is quality. The others need to increase their average else, the batting lineup will be fragile and prone to collapses.

have others played enough as root ? No 

Joe root is the best batsman.....every team one batsman will stand out 

Batting avg are often helped by home conditions 

[Straight Drive]

17 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

have others played enough as root ? No 

Joe root is the best batsman.....every team one batsman will stand out 

Batting avg are often helped by home conditions 

Have a look at batsmen England have tried in recent few years. It is a clear lack of quality if you see the actual perfromance. Some of them will not even be considered again. A team with specialsit batsmen averaging poorly will not post enough runs on board. The batting lineup needs to clearly get better else it will be left upon bowlers to win the matches to cover up so many below average batsmen,.

 

Minimum 5 matches played

Joe Root - 48.05
Ben Foakes - 41.50
Ollie Pope - 42.20
Domnic Sibley - 39.50
Ben Stokes - 37.84
Jos Buttler - 32.31
Rory Burns - 34.08
Jonny Bairtsow - 31.11
Joe Denly - 29.53
James Vince - 25.92
Keaton Jennings - 25.19
Jason Roy - 18.70
Gary Ballance - 13.40

 

Now comparing the the previous stable lineup after a whole career.  Nobody averages below 40, even the keeper batsman is averaging 40.

 

England was not dependent on only one batsmen then. Now it is totally upon Root scoring runs for England to score a 350 plus or 400 plus total, apart from one exceptional test innings.

Cook - 45.35
Strauss - 40.91
Trott - 44.08
KP - 47.28
Bell - 42.69
Collingwood - 40.56
Prior - 40.18

 

Edited August 9, 2020 by Straight Drive

[Straight Drive]

34 minutes ago, zen said:

I do not know from the top of the mind recall. But the current team has a lot of new players who avg in 40s including Pope and Foakes. Earlier guys like Cook averaged in 40s too.

Cook - 45.35
Strauss - 40.91
Trott - 44.08
KP - 47.28
Bell - 42.69
Collingwood - 40.56
Prior - 40.18

 

Their average fell by few runs at end of career. KP, Troot  and Cook were averaging almost 50 at one point of time. if not above.

Edited August 9, 2020 by Straight Drive

[zen]

1 minute ago, Straight Drive said:

Cook - 45.35
Strauss - 40.91
Trott - 44.08
KP - 47.28
Bell - 42.69
Collingwood - 40.56
Prior - 40.18

Those look like career averages though after batsmen have been identified to play and given a longer run. Currently, Eng is rotating and also trying new players. If you look at the tragetractory of current batsmen, you will find that many of their averages would be on the rise. 

 

Also I do not care about individual averages as long as a team collectively performs. The players play for the team and not to brand themselves as the best as many have the habit in India. Can't judge other teams with outdated Indian standards.

 

[Ankit_sharma03]

12 minutes ago, Straight Drive said:

Have a look at batsmen England have tried in recent few years. It is a clear lack of quality if you see the actual perfromance. Some of them will not even be considered again. A team with specialsit batsmen averaging poorly will not post enough runs on board. The batting lineup needs to clearly get better else it will be left upon bowlers to win the matches to cover up so many below average batsmen,.

 

Minimum 5 matches played

Joe Root - 48.05
Ben Foakes - 41.50
Ollie Pope - 42.20
Domnic Sibley - 39.50
Ben Stokes - 37.84
Jos Buttler - 32.31
Rory Burns - 34.08
Jonny Bairtsow - 31.11
Joe Denly - 29.53
James Vince - 25.92
Keaton Jennings - 25.19
Jason Roy - 18.70
Gary Ballance - 13.40

Erre how many matches has pope sibley crawley played ??

Pope is as good a talent as anyone

Whats the diff avg look same as previous batch if u look beyond odi specialist.

 

12 minutes ago, Straight Drive said:

Now comparing the the previous stable lineup after a whole career.  Nobody averages below 40, even the keeper batsman is averaging 40.

 

England was not dependent on only one batsmen then. Now it is totally upon Root scoring runs for England to score a 350 plus or 400 plus total, apart from one exceptional test innings.

Cook - 45.35
Strauss - 40.91
Trott - 44.08
KP - 47.28
Bell - 42.69
Collingwood - 40.56
Prior - 40.18

 

Even quality batsman like cook piertersen root dont avg 50 shows home conditons tough for batting

[Straight Drive]

4 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

Erre how many matches has pope sibley crawley played ??

Pope is as good a talent as anyone

Whats the diff avg look same as previous batch if u look beyond odi specialist.

 

Even quality batsman like cook piertersen root dont avg 50 shows home conditons tough for batting

It is different to have talent and actually score runs at international level. Performance matters not the hypothetical factors.  The batsmen who are topping runs charts in county are not able to cope up with international level. That is why even after many years the past quality batting lineup disappeared, England are unable to find replacement. The one they try flops and then the new search has to begin.

[Ankit_sharma03]

4 minutes ago, Straight Drive said:

It is different to have talent and actually score runs at international level. Performance matters not the hypothetical factors.  The batsmen who are topping runs charts in county are not able to cope up with international level. That is why even after many years the past quality batting lineup disappeared, England are unable to find replacement. The one they try flops and then the new search has to begin.

So has pope played enough that ur passing the judgement. Wait till 30-40 test atleast. 

Search goes with most teams and it takes a lot of time u find a perfect lineup where anyone is indespensable.

That lineup u showed also took a lot of time to build and didnt last long due to various reason. They are currently in transition phase and these phases take a lot of time

Look at us we started with dhawan rohit pujara rahane kohli vijay but now also kohli is the only consistent batsman. 

 

Edited August 9, 2020 by Ankit_sharma03

[Straight Drive]

12 minutes ago, zen said:

Those look like career averages though after batsmen have been identified to play and given a longer run. Currently, Eng is rotating and also trying new players. If you look at the tragetractory of current batsmen, you will find that many of their averages would be on the rise. 

 

Also I do not care about individual averages as long as a team collectively performs. The players play for the team and not to brand themselves as the best as many have the habit in India. Can't judge other teams with outdated Indian standards.

 

Indian standards are good. The past of Gambhir, Sehwag, Dravid, Tendulkar, VVS, Ganguly and Dhoni. Where do you see a bad test batsman there. So many individual batting stars there and some are above average as well.

 

[Ankit_sharma03]

1 minute ago, Straight Drive said:

Indian standards are good. The past of Gambhir, Sehwag, Dravid, Tendulkar, VVS, Ganguly and Dhoni. Where do you see a bad test batsman there. So many individual batting stars there and some are above average as well.

 

indian pitches also have been better for batting then englands 

[Straight Drive]

2 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

So has pope played enough that ur passing the judgement. Wait till 30-40 test atleast. 

Search goes with most teams and it takes a lot of time u find a perfect lineup where anyone is indespensable.

That lineup u showed also took a lot of time to build and didnt last long due to various reason. They are currently in transition phase and these phases take a lot of time

Look at us we started with dhawan rohit pujara rahane kohli vijay but now also kohli is the only consistent batsman. 

 

How many years should the transition period be for a major test playing nation according to you. Just have a look since when transition started for England batting and how many players they have found who are worth it.

[Ankit_sharma03]

2 minutes ago, Straight Drive said:

How many years should the transition period be for a major test playing nation according to you. Just have a look since when transition started for England batting and how many players they have found who are worth it.

there is no written rule , its when ur lucky 2 have so many good batsman at same time 

Aus still struggling to have 5-6

India to

England to 

SA to 

NZ to 

everyone is 

 

i like pope even sibley burns are good they have technical issues but so does many in world, pope surely is world class and honestly we dont know whats in store in their Fc 

Edited August 9, 2020 by Ankit_sharma03

[maniac]

1 hour ago, zen said:

That probably shows that ATG teams with many  ATG players can do without an AR (and also that good ARs are difficult to find). Not that teams like Ind with likes of Vihari, Ishant, etc.,can do without them

 

Also WI had likes of Viv, who were competent bowlers. Similarly, Aus had Waughs brothers, Chappell and Border, who were decent bowlers too. So you may have misread the information 

 

PS Note that Kapil had a few good spells in Aus and  WI. Apart from that he was not too great overseas. Similarly in batting, he had a few good knocks here and there (a 100 each in SA, WI and Eng). Pandya at his peak can be like a Botham, who hit 14 test 100s, with the bat for e.g., while also contributing with the ball

Viv,Border,Chappell are exactly what I was talking about. A front line batsman who even if he doesn’t bowl can make it to the team on merit but can also if required chip in with a few overs.

 

On the other spectrum guys like Kapil,Imran,Botham and Haddlee who were the best bowlers in their country during their time.

 

None of them were picked for “balance” they were picked because they were the best available resources in their department.

 

Thanks,I think we are finally getting somewhere now :)

Edited August 9, 2020 by maniac

[maniac]

Back to the topic though if a guy is good enough to get daddy 100s in LOIs then it will translate to tests.

 

Butler played in his LOI mode yesterday which has already made him  one of England’s greatest Odi bat. He needed to be backed.

 

Similarly we have a guy who not just locally but in world cricket has become one of the greatest to ever play the game of limited overs cricket but he isn’t backed for tests.

 

That was the point.

[zen]

4 minutes ago, Straight Drive said:

Indian standards are good. The past of Gambhir, Sehwag, Dravid, Tendulkar, VVS, Ganguly and Dhoni. Where do you see a bad test batsman there. So many individual batting stars there and some are above average as well.

Now Eng has batting depth till #8-9-10 depending upon the composition. I do not see it as a bad test batting line up as well so again can't judge based on outdated standards. Also avgs of Eng batsmen can be lower than similar Asian batsmen as they play a large percentage of cricket in SENA. 

 

Note that in the last 3 years, among batsmen with 1k-2k runs or more, only 2-3 avg > 50 against major teams. 

 

[zen]

20 minutes ago, maniac said:

Viv,Border,Chappell are exactly what I was talking about. A front line batsman who even if he doesn’t bowl can make it to the team on merit but can also if required chip in with a few overs.

 

On the other spectrum guys like Kapil,Imran,Botham and Haddlee who were the best bowlers in their country during their time.

 

None of them were picked for “balance” they were picked because they were the best available resources in their department.

 

Thanks,I think we are finally getting somewhere now :)

Again, India does not have Viv, Border, Chappell, Marshall, Lillee,  etc. 

 

If your point is that Pandya is no Botham or Hadlee, Vihari and his likes are no Viv, Border or Chappell. Ishant and company are no Marshall, Lillee or McGrath. Now Pandya has the potential to be a Botham, while likes of Vihari are probably not even as good as a Rahane. Ishant, Shami, etc., are in the last phase of their careers. Pandya is the best pace bowling AR in the country and can be as effective (if not better) as anyone considered for the #6-7 slots. 

 

Edited August 9, 2020 by zen

[YCCC]

It’s just one innings at the end of the day, in a situation he thrives on in white ball cricket. Doesn’t mean he’s a Test player. If, as is often the case as an England player, he has to come in at sub 100 for 4 or 5 in the first innings, he isn’t who you’d choose to rebuild the innings and drag a side to a decent score

[coffee_rules]

1 hour ago, YCCC said:

It’s just one innings at the end of the day, in a situation he thrives on in white ball cricket. Doesn’t mean he’s a Test player. If, as is often the case as an England player, he has to come in at sub 100 for 4 or 5 in the first innings, he isn’t who you’d choose to rebuild the innings and drag a side to a decent score

You don’t value what a gem you have 

[maniac]

1 hour ago, zen said:

Again, India does not have Viv, Border, Chappell, Marshall, Lillee,  etc. 

 

India didn’t have another Sachin either but we got Kohli right? We didn’t have another Dravid either but we got Pujara so on and so forth.

 

If we don’t have a Viv, then we should look for a Viv. If we don’t have a Botham, we look for one.

 

Bhuvi has looked more assured than Pandya in some of the test innings he has played and is a way better bowler than him but there is no spot for him unless one of Bumrah/Shami or Ishant get injured.

 

Jaiswal can be our Border/ Viv of groomed properly. A great prospect as a batsman who is more than competent at leg spin. That’s the kind of players we need for tests.

 

Pandya is good for what it’s worth in odis and is worth his weight in gold in T20’s.

[zen]

42 minutes ago, maniac said:

India didn’t have another Sachin either but we got Kohli right? We didn’t have another Dravid either but we got Pujara so on and so forth.

 

If we don’t have a Viv, then we should look for a Viv. If we don’t have a Botham, we look for one.

 

Bhuvi has looked more assured than Pandya in some of the test innings he has played and is a way better bowler than him but there is no spot for him unless one of Bumrah/Shami or Ishant get injured.

 

Jaiswal can be our Border/ Viv of groomed properly. A great prospect as a batsman who is more than competent at leg spin. That’s the kind of players we need for tests.

 

Pandya is good for what it’s worth in odis and is worth his weight in gold in T20’s.

Pandya is the  potential "Botham". We have one that can be groomed to be one. If it is easier, feel free to consider him as a specialist batsman (For e.g. has an average of 60+ at a SR of 96 in subcon in tests), who can bowl at 140+ too, an unique value proposition. 

 

As for others, they can be considered too based on the requirements of the team and in other slots. Many of the current players are in their last phase so opportunities are on the way. The upcoming Aus tour may potentially end careers of some. 

 

Your points have all been addressed in a variety of ways including through:

 

 

Edited August 9, 2020 by zen

[Adamant]

On 8/9/2020 at 3:02 AM, Khota said:

Rohit deserves to play all formats for India. People who think otherwise need help.

This test tour of Australia should be his last chance,if he performs keep him otherwise game over.

As for people who think Rohit provides some x factor ,does prithvi shaw lacks x factor or what.He is even more aggressive than Rohit Sharma.

 

Actually I want Sharma to play the day night test which is scheduled this time,that will show us whether he"ll be upto the task in other overseas country or not.