Curran for Jacks makes complete sense. Extra seam option, and in a shortened game the marginally weaker batting doesn't matter.
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
-
Hopefully Sam goes well with the ball, because he was whacked about at the IPL (but so were most bowlers, given how ridiculously that competition now favours batters). I'm keen on him staying in the side for the rest of the competition, should we progress, but only if his bowling can justify it.
The previous benefit of Jacks at no.3 is that if either or both of the openers fail, he could just come out and resume the opener role.
It means his impact is massively reduced when both of them get off to a flyer, like they did against Australia, because Jacks' game isn't coming out in the middle overs vs spin. But in that situation we should be more flexible and drop him down the order - essentially to play as a finisher, when the quicks return - rather than drop him from the XI altogether.
It means his impact is massively reduced when both of them get off to a flyer, like they did against Australia, because Jacks' game isn't coming out in the middle overs vs spin. But in that situation we should be more flexible and drop him down the order - essentially to play as a finisher, when the quicks return - rather than drop him from the XI altogether.
When and why was the rule changed about batsmen crossing on a catch, making the incoming batsman face the bowling?
To reward the bowler for taking a wicket - he then faces the new batsman.
