littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
What did I say about SL batting? 
England Cricket 2024
- Thread starter littlebabyjesus
- Start date
planetgeli
There's no future in England's dreaming
2 day test?
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
They've got experience and quality in their batting. Just look at their averages. Chandimal to the rescue?
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
England getting this wrong now. They're letting the game drift and the ninth-wicket partnership is already worth 44. Bring on Wood and if they come off for bad light, so be it.
The light's got better. Would be a good time for SL to lose their last wicket and get England in for half an hour.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Comedy tailender run-out. Shame for SL, that. Still, they put on 230 for the final seven wickets, which is something of a recovery.
Monkeygrinder's Organ
Dodgy geezer swilling vapid lager
The tail looks pretty exposed if they can get one of these out doesn't it.
On the other hand a Joe Root century and a decent England lead is not exactly unlikely here.
On the other hand a Joe Root century and a decent England lead is not exactly unlikely here.
Don't know why Stokes is sitting on that balcony glowering. Surely not helpful. Just take a few weeks off man. Watch some porn, tidy up the garden, whatever... but if I was Pope I wouldn't be comfortable with this. But then even having Jimmy in that dressing room straight away after being told his time was up is a bit weird.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Game is rollicking along in acceleration mode. England scoring at five an over but losing wickets and Sri Lanka have it reversing already.
planetgeli
There's no future in England's dreaming
That scorecard looks pretty much exactly how I expected atm. And Potts, Wood and Bashir to come.
Hmmmmm.
Hmmmmm.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Sri Lanka felt about 100 runs light yesterday but were perhaps only 50 light. Very slow outfield so lots of fours turned into threes. Given that, England scored remarkably quickly early on. Can't say the batters have given it away - some very good balls taking wickets today. In fact, I'd say the difference between the two sides right now is the three terrible shots (well, two shots and one non-shot) played by Sri Lanka's top order yesterday morning.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
He's a very good batter. He seems to be a good catcher, but his keeping is a little messy at times and he did miss a stumping on day 1. It's not that he wasn't playing at Surrey - he was in the team as a specialist batter (Surrey's top-scorer this season) while Foakes kept wicket, which does actually make sense given Surrey's resources.
For me, the more intriguing situation is Bashir/Leach. Somerset rate Leach more highly while England rate Bashir more highly. There is a very clear difference in opinion between county and country. By contrast, everyone knows that Foakes is the better keeper, but that's not what England want. They're prepared to pay the price of the odd missed stumping to have Smith's better batting.
Last edited:
I think that missed stumping was his first error so far in an England shirt..? Anyway, looks like he's a keeper (so to speak), he's young, so could be around for many years. That's one problem solved. I think Surrey missed a trick there. Even as a former keeper myself I don't think you can justify having a specialist one in your side anymore.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Foakes isn't a specialist keeper, though. He has a first class batting average of close to 40. He's just not quite as good a batter as Smith. Genuinely specialist keepers, Bob Taylor-style, don't really exist any more. And even back in the 70s, Taylor missed out to Knott because Knott was the better batter. Taylor then owed his England career to the existence of Botham.
My take on it is that it's fine to compromise a little on the batting to have a really good keeper, but that's clearly not England's take. They want someone who justifies his place just with the bat. Being a great keeper is almost a mark against you.
One missed chance in three and a half tests is fine, but the real test for Smith's keeping will come in Pakistan.
My take on it is that it's fine to compromise a little on the batting to have a really good keeper, but that's clearly not England's take. They want someone who justifies his place just with the bat. Being a great keeper is almost a mark against you.
One missed chance in three and a half tests is fine, but the real test for Smith's keeping will come in Pakistan.
Monkeygrinder's Organ
Dodgy geezer swilling vapid lager
I think it's not just that Smith is a better batter than Foakes it's that they want something specific from that role that they don't think Foakes provides. He's a good batter but he's not one who'll come in and dominate. If he comes in when England have lost a few early wickets, he's batting with Harry Brook, say, and they need to steady the innings, then he's a good player to be coming in. And he's fine batting with a Stuart Broad/Mark Wood type tailender who'll bring some aggression. I think it is fair to say there's an issue there if he ends up batting with someone like a Jack Leach who can stick around and provide support but isn't going to score many though - you could see that a bit in India where things got quite bogged down. Smith on the other hand looks like he'd be absolutely fine with that.
I don't think that should automatically rule Foakes out as he does have a lot of qualities but I do think there's a bit more thought in it than 'good batter/less good batter.'
I don't think that should automatically rule Foakes out as he does have a lot of qualities but I do think there's a bit more thought in it than 'good batter/less good batter.'
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Foakes did struggle a bit in India and yes that has cost him. He wasn't the only batter to struggle there, though. Aside from his big century, pope barely scored a run.
I don't necessarily disagree with Smith's selection, but I do think the limitations of Foakes the batter are sometimes a bit overstated.
Anyhow, Smith's is possession for the foreseeable now. That's for sure.
I don't necessarily disagree with Smith's selection, but I do think the limitations of Foakes the batter are sometimes a bit overstated.
Anyhow, Smith's is possession for the foreseeable now. That's for sure.
He's very tall for a keeper actually. That might become an issue as he gets older. I'm 6'2 and my coaches told me I was too tall. Bending down to pick up the ball for my own son now I can see what they mean. Still, he looks good enough to keep his place purely as a batsman.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Yes, he could give up the gloves at some point. It can become too much. Quite common for keepers to do that - keeping wicket does normally affect your batting a bit. Think Sangakkara and McCullum. Needs to have a slot in the lineup to take first, which might require Root's retirement so may not happen any time soon.
Monkeygrinder's Organ
Dodgy geezer swilling vapid lager
Any potential gap is still towards the top of the order really isn't it. There's a whole load of players who'd like to play 4-6 ideally (including Pope) but of the players in possession, until Root or Stokes retires the ones who look vulnerable are still Pope and possibly Crawley, although he looks more secure than he did. So I wouldn't see a move up the order for Smith for quite a while and anyone else looking to force a way in will probably need to bat higher than they'd like, as per Lawrence here.
I actually think Pope might be the most vulnerable. He's a bit of a... meh... player. I don't really see what he adds. But hey, they're winning so lets trust in the powers that be. Smith is surely the next captain, you can see his composure on and off the pitch.
