The Cricket Thread
- Thread starter TheSecondStain
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
He's Lyon's bunny even when he's not in horror form. If we continue to select him, Lyon is just going to pick him off for fun.
Of course Curran isn't a like-for-like replacement, but the kid was player of the series vs India last summer. And he loves a fight, which is what you need Ashes. (And with a swinging dukes ball, he's a better fourth seamer than Stokes.)
Completely different scenario I know, but both the Currans were absolutely owned by Byram last night. I actually agree with Ides that Leach should be the spinner rather than Moeen.
garysfc
Well-Known Member
Denly is often selected as Kent's sole spinner. And Root can get through a few overs.
But most of all, if the ball is going to swing and modern day batters aren't going to play with a solid technique - such that tests will rarely even reach the end of day four unless bad weather intervenes - then I see little problem with an all out five man seam attack.
I'm not sure how picking Leach solves the problem of Moeens's batting?
(I know Leach got that score against Ireland last week, but it was a freak occurance.)
garysfc
Well-Known Member
Test cricket is much different & demands a main line spinner, not virtually part timers. You’ve only got to look at the past & present great teams. I get it, the selectors deem Ali our best but his batting, especially recently has been abject. He’s a good spinner but certainly not great.
I'm not disagreeing you with. But the selectors have deemed Moeen as being good enough as our front line spinner for quite a few years now (and in home conditions, they've generally been proved right), so in theory I don't see why that same logic couldn't extend to Denly. Denly has a better first class bowling average than Moeen - and that's the case whether you use Moeen's full first class average or just his domestic first class average (and that despite Denly not growing up as an all-rounder, with years of bowling under his belt). So if Denly is a part-timer, so is Moeen.
That said though, Denly vs Moeen really isn't my argument. Just like Leach vs Moeen isn't. Would I like a spinner better than Denly in our team? Of course I would, absolutely. But with our brittle top six or seven, I don't really see how we afford the luxury of accommodating one who can't bat, in English conditions where seam is king. Even more so when it means the player of last summer gets left out of team. Without Sam Curran, we'd probably lost to India last summer So either pick a spinner who can bat, or don't pick one and ask Denly to fill in if needed.
garysfc
Well-Known Member
Proving the case for five front line bowlers, each one offering something different. Like garysfc said, a front line spinner should be found a place in the team on any kind of wicket. The two greatest in the art, Murali and Warne, could take wickets on all kinds of wickets. Those of a lesser ability than the two spin Gods, such as Lyon and Moeen, need to be very disciplined if the wicket is providing nada, to enable the pace bowlers to do the job. Not sure if Moeen can be regarded as a front-line bowler who can bat a bit, or is someone who can bat a bit and can bowl a bit.
It begs the question - do we have five front-line bowlers or even four. The Aussies have only 4 but are clearly top quality. Our top quality being Anderson, Broad and maybe Woakes. So the questions is - are Stokes and Moeen front-line or back-up bowlers?