Desi Cartman Posted July 16, 2009 Posted July 16, 2009 He doesnt look like a test player. Maybe he was nervous and thats why he kept attacking but it showed that he was uncomfortable. There were couple of bad shots where the ball fell just short of the fielder but he still kept attacking. So who else can bat at #3 for England , shah ?
Mr. Wicket Posted July 16, 2009 Posted July 16, 2009 Shah is either too aggressive or too nervous, and just hasn't made the runs when given chances. Key is a good contender. So is Ed Joyce.
DomainK Posted July 16, 2009 Posted July 16, 2009 Ravi Bopara almost threw it away today. Showed no inclination to get settled and capitalize on an excellent start. Hilfenhaus was the only one bowling well and he could have seen him off and scored off the rest. But he was just not comfortable out there. Poor cricket.
Desi Cartman Posted July 16, 2009 Author Posted July 16, 2009 Shah is either too aggressive or too nervous, and just hasn't made the runs when given chances. Key is a good contender. So is Ed Joyce. How about KP at 3 and bell in the middle order? He has an avg of 40+ and he has been around for a while. Ofcourse he isnt as good as KP but still he is much better than Bopara
Desi Cartman Posted July 16, 2009 Author Posted July 16, 2009 Ravi Bopara almost threw it away today. Showed no inclination to get settled and capitalize on an excellent start. Hilfenhaus was the only one bowling well and he could have seen him off and scored off the rest. But he was just not comfortable out there. Poor cricket. The worst part was, he played some risky and not so smart shots but he got away but he still kept attacking. IMO he was nervous but after playing 10 tests he shouldnt be this nervous. Even in the 1st test he got out playing attacking shot away from his body & even today he was doing the same thing.
Dhondy Posted July 16, 2009 Posted July 16, 2009 Why do you guys simply not make a note of what I say and just accept it as gospel? Bopara, Mendis...gee...even a kid could have seen through them.
DomainK Posted July 16, 2009 Posted July 16, 2009 How about KP at 3 and bell in the middle order? He has an avg of 40+ and he has been around for a while. Ofcourse he isnt as good as KP but still he is much better than Bopara KP has played majority of his matches at no4, has done excellently well and is settled and comfortable there. Does not make sense to move him up or down.
Sachinism Posted July 16, 2009 Posted July 16, 2009 How about KP at 3 and bell in the middle order? He has an avg of 40+ and he has been around for a while. Ofcourse he isnt as good as KP but still he is much better than Bopara Nah no need to bring Bell back.
vvvslaxman Posted July 16, 2009 Posted July 16, 2009 He is not organizing a Test innings very well. He is a good stroke player. Excellent domestic record. He just needs to improve his temperament and judgement. Your mistakes at this level is highly visible which probably makes him increasingly nervous.
vvvslaxman Posted July 16, 2009 Posted July 16, 2009 Bell was delivering string of failures. One of the reason why he was dropped. He is not perfect either. He made some centuries on flat pitches.
The Outsider Posted July 16, 2009 Posted July 16, 2009 Bopara is not a test number 3 - no way he is. He might fit in at number 6, but you look around the world and see the likes of Dravid, Ponting, Younis Khan at that position and wonder how the hell can he fit in at that position. South Africa are also using a sub standard number 3 in Amla, but they have Kallis, DeVilliers, Duminy, and Prince to follow up. The problem for England is there just don't seem to be enough good batsmen to choose from and they'll need one more once Flintoff goes as they are not likely to play five bowlers too often without a genuine allrounder. There was some article recently about if you don't have a good number three, pick a thrid opener, but England don't seem to have much bench there either. Joyce, Key, and Bell are the only contenders as far as I can see.
DomainK Posted July 16, 2009 Posted July 16, 2009 I think he is a very good player who is just not relaxing enough while batting. Needs a good session with a good coach. He has played 8 matches and averages 41, which is not so bad but most of his runs have come against a weak West Indian attack. Averages 8 and 18 against Lanka and Australia. However, I think he deserves a few more chances....especially since England does not have a ready replacement for no3.
Dhondy Posted July 16, 2009 Posted July 16, 2009 English selectors don't understand that form is nothing, temparament is all. Could England, with its poverty of batsmen, afford to have jettisoned Vaughan? The guy was what, 34? Granted, he had a dicky knee, but it wasn't as if he was a fast bowler. You don't let your best batsman of the modern era just fade away with a whimper without giving him one more chance against the big boys. The Indian selectors were in danger of relying too much on the formbook and forgetting about the vital role that chutzpah plays, and we nearly lost Sehwag.
Desi Cartman Posted July 16, 2009 Author Posted July 16, 2009 Its amazing that with a decent domestic set up with so many teams playing all summer ECB still cant find a decent #3.
vvvslaxman Posted July 16, 2009 Posted July 16, 2009 Bopara is not a test number 3 - no way he is. He might fit in at number 6. Nothing to do with his batting order i think. Today he walked in when the score was almost 200. It is his judgement, temperament overall makes him a "get out any time" candidate. Once he improves that aspect he will start delivering consistently. He is only young. Hope he doesn't go Ramps, Hicks way.
The Outsider Posted July 16, 2009 Posted July 16, 2009 Its amazing that with a decent domestic set up with so many teams playing all summer ECB still cant find a decent #3. Number 3 is a specialist spot, often not recognized as such and you cannot "coach" a player for that role. Either you have it or you don't. It requires a mental steel and flexibility in the game that not everyone can possess. You can be out there at 2/1 and be required to play one kind of game, 62/1 and play a different game, or at 158/1 and have to do something completely different. You have to be good enough to be able to settle in against pace with a new ball in overcast conditions and also be able to negotiate a twin spin attack on a turning wicket when you enter the game. A lot many number 3s have moved down the order in the latter stages of their career like Richards and Gower. It's best to have a third opener and number 3 if your team does not have someone as natural and versatile in that position like David Boon or Vaughan.
vvvslaxman Posted July 16, 2009 Posted July 16, 2009 In Bopara's case he will fail at no.6 as well with this kind of approach.
cowboysfan Posted July 16, 2009 Posted July 16, 2009 I think he has the tools but i think warnie might be right about him not being mentally strong.the job of the no 3 is hold the fort and attack after you have settled in.
Bradman99 Posted July 17, 2009 Posted July 17, 2009 Keep him there, dropping him wont do his confidence any good, he can learn from the experience. He is clearly talented, he just makes poor choices. Hilfenhaus planned him out well.
Lord Posted July 17, 2009 Posted July 17, 2009 he is definitely a test player for the future,no sense dropping him.but hes not a no.3 Eng might fix this problem once Freddie goes by playing Bell at 3 n Bopara at 6
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now