Home
Yes, I imagine Bairstow could play at 3 and probably has done in the past but he's been used as an opener far more often.
Just my opinion but I think Crawley would have that little bit less pressure at 3 than as an opener, expected to make a solid start for the side.
Personally he would be the man I would drop to bring Foakes back.
This is from Agnew's BBC article today...
By my Test Match Special colleague Andy Zaltzman's calculations, Bairstow has missed eight chances in the series, but for me it was just as worrying that he left the catch off Mitchell Starc for Brook on the third evening.
That was the wicketkeeper's catch and was a sign of someone low on confidence. Bairstow was lucky Brook did so well, running and diving from short leg.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/66149408
It is hard to chose between the bowlers, yes Anderson has not shone this series so far but he is reliable and will always take wickets.
I guess in theory Broad should be the one to be 'rested' (due to his age) but he's the one who seems to stir things up when they are needed and seems to be in the head of Warner - which helps a lot!
Can't see him being rested though and can't see us playing without a spinner.
I've always liked Robinson too, since he first played in tests. I can't put my finger on it but it seems the team plays better with him in it than without him and that he usually picks up wickets at some point when he bowls.
If he's fit would I drop him to let Jimmy return - probably not based on Anderson's form so far.
My team (if all are fit) would be Foakes for Crawley, with Bairstow to open.
No idea who will play at 3.
Not Brooks, Agnew wants Root, and Moen and Stokes could be options too.
If Root goes 3, then who goes 4?
Brooks for me is that he is best at 5 (maybe he might move up the order later in his career but not for now)
For now I'd go with Moen at 3, if Moen is still up for it?
Anyway I think Crawley will play and Foakes won't, so not much point me worrying to much about who bats where, is there!
Just my opinion but I think Crawley would have that little bit less pressure at 3 than as an opener, expected to make a solid start for the side.
Personally he would be the man I would drop to bring Foakes back.
This is from Agnew's BBC article today...
By my Test Match Special colleague Andy Zaltzman's calculations, Bairstow has missed eight chances in the series, but for me it was just as worrying that he left the catch off Mitchell Starc for Brook on the third evening.
That was the wicketkeeper's catch and was a sign of someone low on confidence. Bairstow was lucky Brook did so well, running and diving from short leg.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/66149408
It is hard to chose between the bowlers, yes Anderson has not shone this series so far but he is reliable and will always take wickets.
I guess in theory Broad should be the one to be 'rested' (due to his age) but he's the one who seems to stir things up when they are needed and seems to be in the head of Warner - which helps a lot!
Can't see him being rested though and can't see us playing without a spinner.
I've always liked Robinson too, since he first played in tests. I can't put my finger on it but it seems the team plays better with him in it than without him and that he usually picks up wickets at some point when he bowls.
If he's fit would I drop him to let Jimmy return - probably not based on Anderson's form so far.
My team (if all are fit) would be Foakes for Crawley, with Bairstow to open.
No idea who will play at 3.
Not Brooks, Agnew wants Root, and Moen and Stokes could be options too.
If Root goes 3, then who goes 4?
Brooks for me is that he is best at 5 (maybe he might move up the order later in his career but not for now)
For now I'd go with Moen at 3, if Moen is still up for it?
Anyway I think Crawley will play and Foakes won't, so not much point me worrying to much about who bats where, is there!
