[Cricket] Cricket- England tour of Pakistan- October 2024

[hans kraay fan club]

He did well in his only Test last time out in Pakistan, on a raging bunsen in Karachi. But there does seem to be an obstinacy about England's selections sometimes. I'm not convinced that another strong showing here will be the sign of great things to come. He averages 46 with the ball in county cricket. I should imagine Liam Dawson would have caused much havoc on this tour.

It seems to be all about next winter. During which I can see nothing but another pummeling with what we have.

I've said much the same.

Nobody will convince me that Liam Dawson is not a better cricketer (in all facets of the game) right now than ALL of the other spinning options. And actually, in all formats.

He's a fine bowler with better stats than his competition, and is the only one who is a genuine all-rounder. For whatever reason he's not the sexy choice - which is fine, if you are happy to accept that every other Test series is simply about preparation for a series in two years' time. (I'm not).

 

[Guinness Boy]

He did well in his only Test last time out in Pakistan, on a raging bunsen in Karachi. But there does seem to be an obstinacy about England's selections sometimes. I'm not convinced that another strong showing here will be the sign of great things to come. He averages 46 with the ball in county cricket. I should imagine Liam Dawson would have caused much havoc on this tour.

It seems to be all about next winter. During which I can see nothing but another pummeling with what we have.

I've said much the same.

Nobody will convince me that Liam Dawson is not a better cricketer (in all facets of the game) right now than ALL of the other spinning options. And actually, in all formats.

He's a fine bowler with better stats than his competition, and is the only one who is a genuine all-rounder. For whatever reason he's not the sexy choice - which is fine, if you are happy to accept that every other Test series is simply about preparation for a series in two years' time. (I'm not).

Looking at their stats side by side on Cricinfo the only thing that really stands out in both bowling and batting is Strike Rate. Despite Dawson getting an unbeaten 66 on the sub-continent his Test match batting strike rate is 42.63, whereas Ahmed is 59.58 in Test batting (with a much lower batting average). Bowling wise Dawson's SR is 75.1 and Ahmed's 51.7.

I'm not saying that's the reason, nor, if it is the reason, that it's a justification. It also ignores all of Dawson's cricket since his last Test. So why would I use that number? Because it was exactly the justification they used for picking Smith instead of Foakes, a decision that went ok at home but came back to bite us with the dropped catches last time out.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Looking at their stats side by side on Cricinfo the only thing that really stands out in both bowling and batting is Strike Rate. Despite Dawson getting an unbeaten 66 on the sub-continent his Test match batting strike rate is 42.63, whereas Ahmed is 59.58 in Test batting (with a much lower batting average). Bowling wise Dawson's SR is 75.1 and Ahmed's 51.7.

I'm not saying that's the reason, nor, if it is the reason, that it's a justification. It also ignores all of Dawson's cricket since his last Test. So why would I use that number? Because it was exactly the justification they used for picking Smith instead of Foakes, a decision that went ok at home but came back to bite us with the dropped catches last time out.

Their Test stats are way too small a sample size to make any meaningful comparison, though. They've only played 3 and 4 Tests each, and all of Rehan's four were on turning pitches on the subcontinent, whereas two of Dawson's three were not.

I'd focus more on the much larger body of work in First Class domestic cricket, on less spin friendly surfaces, where Dawson has a better batting average (35 to 29) and a far better bowling average (31 to 46).

Rehan does have a better (Test) strike rate - but that goes hand in hand with a significantly worse economy rate. Looking dangerous in India or Pakistan is great, but used as evidence to strengthen a case to ultimately be the best option for an Ashes series down the line, its very weak. He doesn't seem to me, to have the required control to hold up an end - and if he's ever in the side s the only front line spinner, he has to be able to perform that role.

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

He did well in his only Test last time out in Pakistan, on a raging bunsen in Karachi. But there does seem to be an obstinacy about England's selections sometimes. I'm not convinced that another strong showing here will be the sign of great things to come. He averages 46 with the ball in county cricket. I should imagine Liam Dawson would have caused much havoc on this tour.

It seems to be all about next winter. During which I can see nothing but another pummeling with what we have.

I've said much the same.

Nobody will convince me that Liam Dawson is not a better cricketer (in all facets of the game) right now than ALL of the other spinning options. And actually, in all formats.

He's a fine bowler with better stats than his competition, and is the only one who is a genuine all-rounder. For whatever reason he's not the sexy choice - which is fine, if you are happy to accept that every other Test series is simply about preparation for a series in two years' time. (I'm not).

Dawson / Ahmed feels like a false comparison to me, they'll be picking a leg spinner as a wild card type option who might buy a wicket out of nowhere or run through the tail if they can't pick the googly. You'd pick Dawson instead of Leach, who had a better economy and strike rate than Dawson last season, as well as bowling more maidens in fewer overs.

I don't see Ahmed getting a match in Australia anyway, unless he drastically improves in the next year. I can't imagine a situation other than a match on an total bunsen where a spinner with more control can get through most of the overs where he gets in the team.

 

[Eeyore]

Looking at their stats side by side on Cricinfo the only thing that really stands out in both bowling and batting is Strike Rate. Despite Dawson getting an unbeaten 66 on the sub-continent his Test match batting strike rate is 42.63, whereas Ahmed is 59.58 in Test batting (with a much lower batting average). Bowling wise Dawson's SR is 75.1 and Ahmed's 51.7.

I'm not saying that's the reason, nor, if it is the reason, that it's a justification. It also ignores all of Dawson's cricket since his last Test. So why would I use that number? Because it was exactly the justification they used for picking Smith instead of Foakes, a decision that went ok at home but came back to bite us with the dropped catches last time out.

The wicket keeping things really bugs me. Always play your best keeper. It's only the Taylor/Knott scenario where batting is a tie breaker. Two almost faultless keepers.

Better a keeper who takes the half chance off Williamson when hasn't scored than one who drops it but averages 36 and not 26.