Source
r/Cricket•
Combinho

The Foakes Question (again)

I know a lot of us have been calling for Foakes's inclusion for a long time, but proven probably wrong this summer. However, with Buttler's keeping being mediocre (for test level) at best, it's going to continue to be an issue.

In England, where a first innings par score is often around 250-350, wickets are generally less valuable than they are in say Australia, where par might be as high as 500. Additionally wicket-keeping becomes more important in the subcontinent where wickets can be more valuable on flatter decks, or on turners where you need to keep to many overs of spin.

The conclusion to this quandry is that Ben Foakes (in my opinion) has to play this winter, but there is no simple way to fit him in which isn't grossly unfair or short-sighted. So, the options as they stand are:

1. Leave Foakes out

The easy answer, no disruption to the batting lineup, who have all performed well or well enough over the past year or so, and certainly none deserve to be dropped in a straight swap for Foakes the batsman (even though he is a very fine batsman). I've already outlined the downside to this approach in the introduction to this post.

2. Straight swap for Buttler

The advantage of this option is that you get the best wicket-keeper (who's good enough to bat in tests) in the country behind the stumps for a tough pair of tours where keeping is likely to be crucial. However, Buttler has proved many of us, if not completely wrong, wrong for now over the summer in being one of our best batsmen consistently. He's also an excellent player of spin, so probably merits selection on his batting alone at present.

3. Swap for Pope, move Buttler to six

Pope's arguably been the weakest link of our lower-middle order this Summer (although the other two are Buttler and Stokes, to be fair to him), so on the surface this makes sense. In reality, it would be utterly ludicrous to drop the most promising player in the entire country (sorry, Zak) because he was merely 'fine'. For me, this is probably the worst decision available, so I bet the selectors do it.

4. Drop Burns, move everyone up a spot

With this approach, you can bring in Foakes for your worst-performing batsman even though they fulfil totally different roles, and Crawley's performances and opening experience make this a feasible option. The obvious downside is that you're fucking with the entire batting line-up except Buttler and Sibley, with Root at 3, Stokes at 4 and Pope at 5. It's also pretty harsh on Burns, who was okay against the Windies and pretty good before that, before a horrible series against Pakistan.

Conclusion

Personally, I think the best of a bad set of options is to go with option 4 and drop Burns. I think it's a pretty shit plan, and reverts to our habit of fucking around with the entire team balance to accomodate Buttler, but at least he's earned that right this time. Ultimately, it's a good dilemma to have, rather than searching around desperately to find 7 'good enough' batsmen, but I really feel for Burns if we go down this route. It also opens up a whole can of worms when we get back to England if Foakes performs as well as he's capable of, but we'll leave that thread for the end of the tours.

Would love to hear any alternative suggestions or different preferences out of the options I've put forwards.

Posted Aug 26, 2020, 2:01 PM UTC

2287
QuietDoveEssex•

We've waited for years for a consistent top order, and now we're saying that we should drop Burns?! Fine, he had a poor series against Pakistan, but all in all his summer has been ok.

If we want to build a strong side, then we need a solid top three or four who we stick with. It's simply not worth unbalancing the batting lineup for the sake of getting Foakes in.

If Foakes is to come in, then it has to be as a replacement for Buttler, let them fight it out over that place. And let's be honest with ourselves, Buttler's record in tests wouldn't get him in the batting lineup under normal circumstances, so let's not move heaven and earth to keep him in at 6. If he can prove himself as a keeper consistently, then great, he keeps his spot. If he doesn't, fine, Foakes comes in.

55
Stuff2511:Pakistan: Pakistan•

Do whatever you want, but when you come to Pakistan, drop Foakes, drop Buttler, and play Bairstow. Trust me, it’ll work

43
[deleted]•

This is a dangerous game, I wanted them to play Buttler before this last series and he won them one game and made 150 in another.

12
Stuff2511:Pakistan: Pakistan•

To be fair, I sort of expected him to do well against Pakistan. He just turns it up against us for some reason. He bossed the 2018 series (which he got selected for based on IPL performances), and should’ve been England’s player of the series then (but they didn’t award a PotS award that series for some reason). Bairstow doesn’t have that same history, so I’m reasonably confident we’ll be fine as long as we bowl at the stumps

4
[deleted]•

r/holup

10
NorkiiSouth Africa•

Dropping Burns is an overreaction. He averaged 46.8 v Windies 1 month ago, which is a comparable fast bowling attack to what we saw from Pakistan. He's had four bad innings in a row against Pakistan: 10, 4, 0, 6. That's not drop an opener numbers. It would be a knee-jerk response to drop him based on 4 innings, and lose his valuable ability to both score runs and soak up time.

Also it means putting Root at 3, which he bats worse at and has repeatedly said he doesn't want to bat at.

I strongly disagree with your sentiment that this is the best of 4 bad options.

34
CravatitudeEngland•

Yeah, Root should never be allowed to bat at 3, Id rather see Jimmy at 3 than root

7
MightySilverWolf:England: England •

Don't give Ed Smith ideas.

5
CravatitudeEngland•

Why not? he's only 0.3 runs worst at #3 than his average

5
MightySilverWolf:England: England •

His highest average is at #7 though. Clearly, Jimmy should be selected as specialist wicketkeeper. He can then show our slips how to catch.

10
[deleted]•

I remember how up until the WI tour, Burns was generally considered as one of the best openers in the world.

16
adsarepropaganda•

I don't think he's played enough games to be considered one of the best in the current crop of openers.

7
0onoodlesw:Sussex: Sussex•

Realistically, Buttler isn’t going to be dropped. He wasn’t dropped when he was playing dreadfully, so he’s not going to be dropped after just playing his two best ever innings and taking some stunners. And having a brilliant summer overall

14
sociallyawkwarddudeWales•

Pick the better keeper and drop Buttler. If England's top 6 can't score enough runs in India and Australia, then it doesn't matter whether Buttler scores 5 more runs than Foakes per innings. Whereas if you drop Kohli, Pujara, Smith or Labuschagne then it's going to hurt you a lot more than missing out on those runs.

That's besides the fact that I don't think Buttler does even score 5 more runs per innings anyway.

Dropping Burns is dumb because it messes up Crawley, Root and Stokes.

12
CravatitudeEngland•

Exactly, Buttler can expload when coming in at #7 with the bowlers tired, but if that's the case the top 6 have already ocupied the crease for long enough for get a decent total. It doesn't make sense to me to bet everything on Buttler taking the game away from the opposition when that only really works if you are already in a stron postion. Even if Foaks came in and blocked 100 balls, one of the best batsmen would be at the other end scoring at a decent clip. and then you could have curran coming in at 8 to be an explosive batsman

3
MightySilverWolf:England: England •

Buttler can expload when coming in at #7 with the bowlers tired

Buttler's record at #6: 848 runs @ 49.88, four 50s and two centuries

Buttler's record at #7: 1236 runs @ 30.90, nine 50s and no centuries

If you're going to play Buttler, play him at #6; otherwise, don't bother.

5
CravatitudeEngland•

There are definitely at least 6 English batsmen better than Buttler, so I guess don't bother

3
MightySilverWolf:England: England •

Why would you drop a #6 batsman who's in good form though? If Stokes doesn't come back then it's clear what team we should play: Pope at #5, Buttler at #6 as specialist batsman and Foakes keeping at #7. The fact that Stokes is returning, though, means that you can't play Pope, Buttler and Foakes in the same team without compromising the batting lineup.

1
Joemanji84England•

100%. Buttler has failed in the Gilchrist role that he was originally picked for, but succeeded beyond expectations when asked to play a more traditional test cricket.

3
MightySilverWolf:England: England •

The fact that some pundits still talk about Buttler as if he's some swashbuckling counter-attacking keeper-batsman (or even a specialist #7 batsman(!)) is ridiculous in my view. He hasn't succeeded at this bizarre role which Ed Smith has tried to shoehorn him into, yet he's done a good job as a traditional #6. He averages nearly 50 in that position and both his Test centuries have come in that position, yet most of his innings have come at #7 where he's averaged 30. No wonder his Test batting average is so low: He's played the bulk of his career in a position and role which he is not suited for!

4
Mikolaj_KopernikRegina Cricket Association•

Exactly, Buttler can expload when coming in at #7 with the bowlers tired

When was the last time this happened? Fact is, Buttler's white ball skillset simply doesn't translate to Tests. I've been really impressed with how he turned his batting form around this summer, but he got results by playing traditional Test innings rather than "Universe Jos" slogathons. So I think a lot of people (including Ed Smith apparently) get blinded by what he can do in limited overs cricket and expect him to produce it in the red ball format, when there's very little evidence of this ever happening. In 100+ FC matches (not exactly a small sample size), Buttler has averaged 33 with 7 centuries at a strike rate of 58. As a comparison, Joe Denly has a FC strike rate of 55 and Foakes' is 53. So it's not like Buttler is miles ahead, even on the one thing he's supposed to be better at (scoring quickly).

It's one of the irritating things about the Foakes v Buttler debate - even leaving aside the merits of selecting a better keeper, Foakes isn't a whole lot worse than Buttler at playing the classic, more defensive role that is usually required in Tests. So if you're selecting based on batting, you need to compare their actual red ball skillsets rather than bringing in Buttler's (largely irrelevant) white ball heroics.

1
CravatitudeEngland•

100% agree, and I would add that having buttler in tests risks him picking up habits that make his white ball roll worse

1
internetwanderer2•

They're all tough options, but I personally would go for 3 - drop Pope, play Buttler as a batsman at 6, then Foakes at 7.

Pope hasn't had an amazing summer with the bat, alongside his (potential) shoulder injury.

He is incredibly prodigious and talented, but ultimately, his form and his position in the order leave him most exposed.

By dropping Pope and bringing in Foakes, you maintain an establishing top 3, and a strong middle order of Root in his best position (4), Stokes, Buttler then Foakes at 7 (who's good with the bat as well).

I don't think this is a long-term solution by any means, but one that best suits the circumstances.

If/when Morgan retires as England captain (after T20 WC?) You would assume Buttler will become white ball captain, and as such will need/want to play all England's white ball games. Will he be able to do that whilst also being test wicketkeeper/batsman?

Then, Pope would come back in to 6 (if he's not back already), and Foakes is the test wicketkeeper.

10
tanbirjLancashire•

I would go with three. Pope has a lot of talent, but he didn’t play Yasir well at all. I fear that he won’t have time to adapt to the slow turners in India in time to make an impact

2
sociallyawkwarddudeWales•

How’s he going to adapt if he doesn’t get to play?

1
tanbirjLancashire•

He ain’t going to adapt if he lasts a handful of overs each time. I’m thinking A tour type experience so that he gets to grip with reading spin

1
Lateralis85•

Lads, I think we've found Ed Smith's Reddit account...

As you said yourself, option 4 is a shit option.

The equation is really very, very simple. Root is bollocks at 3, Stokes record at 4 is not good. By moving everyone up a slot you weaken the entire batting line up.

So let's take this logically. Root is best played at 4 and Stokes at 5.

You then need two openers. Burns and Sibley are the incumbents and had reasonable summers. They've certainly done the important function more often than not, which is see off the shine on the new ball.

For number 3 there is only one reasonable choice, and that is Zak Crawley. Pope has barely played there and is not an option.

So then we have our top 5: Sibley, Burns, Creepy, Root, Stokes.

I agree with you and everyone else that Pope is one of the best batting prospects England have since Root. So he bats at 6.

And then - and only then - you select the best option for wicketkeeper. On the subcontinent when England are likely to be playing 2 spinners you need the best keeper, and that is unquestionably Foakes. Buttler will cost England games with his keeping on the subcontinent.

People can argue over whether it is fair to drop Buttler or not, but the facts are he's flattered to deceive with the bat for much of his Test career, and his glovework is not up to the standard for the subcontinent, or even for England for that matter. People say Buttler's had a good Test summer with the bat, but more often than not he's failed. He's had two good innings all summer, which cannot justify his place indefinitely. He looks better simply because the rest of the batting has been variable and ropey.

So the equation really is simple: Foakes has a Test average of 40 and is the much better keeper. He's the best option, he has to play. Let Buttler go and be the worlds best attacking wicketkeeper batsman in limited overs, or at least let him go back to FC cricket and show his keeping has improved.

9
CombinhoOPSurrey•

Enjoyed the opening comment given that I'd have started Foakes over Buttler at the start of the summer, let alone in India. I've swung massively between all the options except the first reading the thread and my own thoughts over the last couple of days. Right now, I'm back on the drop Buttler train, because quite frankly if it's a choice between Pope and Buttler, I know who I'm picking and I think long-term, Foakes might actually be the better red ball batsman. But I can't see it happening, and I do genuinely feel it's harsh on Buttler who's finally come good, although I lay the blame for this ridiculous situation at the feet of the selectors for sticking with Buttler in the first place.

2
SpockytHampshire•

I haven't got a clue who should make way, but as far as I'm concerned Foakes has to play and keep in Asia.

7
HarryGoLocky:Somerset: Somerset•

Pope is suffering from a shoulder injury and the last thing we want to do is fuck up a top order that seem to have chemistry just to appease the fans.

Rest Pope, move Buttler up the line up and Foakes in as number 7 and WK

7
Joemanji84England•

I doubt Pope is going to be out for six months, or anywhere close.

6
[deleted]•

How are wickets less important in England? Without time pressure teams can rack up hundreds if wickets aren't taken.

None of the options presented are good because all of them will fuck with a settled top-order. I'm interested in seeing how Foakes does in what's left of the BWT. If he doesn't do awfully it might be best to drop Buttler for him. Buttler had a great series but I've got a feeling his batting form won't last, and it makes no sense to change Crawley's position after his success at 3. In Asia the improved keeping will have a bigger impact than Buttler's potential batting gains.

6
CombinhoOPSurrey•

Maybe 'chances are more important' would be better phrasing, because you're likely to create more of them here, meaning that missing one hurts you less than they would where chances come along less frequently.

6
SouthportdcLancashire•

4 is the worst option of all.

I'm still behind dropping Buttler for Foakes tbh.

Jos played very well, but it's still 2 centuries in 82 innings at about 33. I reckon Foakes can at least match that, and save runs and take wickets through his keeping.

6
resnaishiroshima•

I'm not sure on getting Foakes in at all. We've seen in one-days that Buttler can form decent partnerships with spinners if given sufficient time.

If we are to do it though I think I'd lean into the simplicity of dropping Pope. He hasn't had a perfect summer.

There's maybe an argument for a twist on option 4 too? Crawley to opener and Ben Stokes becomes the number three. I have more faith in him as a second down than Root tbh and it does protect Joe from a position he doesn't enjoy.

6
Joemanji84England•

I mean we haven't seen that. Buttler has kept pretty poorly to Rashid in ODIs, missing numerous catches and stumpings. Much less important / easier to get away with in 50 over games of course so it never really gets much attention. If Buttler misses an early chance off Kohli in a test match that's likely 200 runs and the game over.

Anyway, OP did a great job of explaining how difficult a choice it is. Not having a decent keeper over the winter could cost England dear, but nobody deserves to get dropped. Not that dropping Foakes in the first place wasn't equally unjust of course...

5
resnaishiroshima•

I guess it's all relative. I've viewed him as solid enough with Rashid. Admittedly, the value of an excellent wickie is probably reduced in limited overs so that might be clouding my perception.

1
Joemanji84England•

I think it's just a feature of LO cricket. Everything moves so fast that there isn't time to dwell on missed chances. In a test match when a keeper drops one and a player goes on to score big they replay it 50 times so it sticks in the mind.

1
CravatitudeEngland•

Buttler is great in white ball, but I think that's a reason to keep him out of the test side: all his best test performances have been much slower, him picking up bad habbits and becoming mediochre in all formats rather than excellent in limeted overs

2
resnaishiroshima•

It's a fair point. I wouldn't be opposed to seeing a more distinct separation between test and limited over formats, with only 3 or 4 or so players flipping between the two.

2
_rickjames:England: England •

If they legitimately think Buttler will keep well in the winter in those conditions, then they have another thing coming

6
NiallH22England and Wales Cricket Board•

I was listening to talksports cricket podcast this morning(I know but it popped up and Jared Kimber with Steve Harmison isn’t that bad..) and they were saying that England have strongly hinted Ben Foakes will be the keeper in the winter.

I hadn’t heard this at all, has anyone else seen these hints?

5
CombinhoOPSurrey•

I haven't seen that, but it makes sense given they've made that call previously. Having said that dropping Pope would be the worst call, I've now convinced myself that letting Buttler keep in India would be worse. I'm getting images in my head of Buttler missing a Kohli stumping on 30 odd preceding a double ton...

1
NiallH22England and Wales Cricket Board•

Yeah I can see why they’d want Foakes in the subcontinent, he’s a magnificent keeper.

My problem is who do you drop? I don’t want to drop the bloke who’s averaging mid 50s this summer(Buttler.), I don’t want to drop the bloke who has the potential to be a superstar(Pope) because I want him to get as much experience playing in as many conditions as possible and I don’t want to drop Burns, who despite a quiet Pakistan series has generally been very solid. I also don’t want to fuck around with the kid who’s just smashed 267 at 3 and move him to open, making Root bat 3 again too...

It’s a genuinely difficult decision...maybe we just go full Ed Smith, drop Burns and have Stokes open, Buttler at 5 and Foakes keeping....(this is not a serious suggestion and is a genuinely horrible idea..)

2
TheScarletPimpernelGloucestershire•

I think, at least as far as the first Test in Sri Lanka goes, Foakes comes in for Pope. Buttler is the in-form batsman and Pope's had problems with the spin.

You then build from there. Pope will get his chance on that tour.

1
cantell0•

Can't be option 1. Foakes is worth 10 runs an innings over Buttler just for his keeping, and that will only increase keeping to spin on the subcontinent. Buttler is no better that county reserve standard to spin. Regrettably I agrre with you that option 4 may be best, although I have no problem dropping Buttler as short term form is no replacement for long term failure.

4
CombinhoOPSurrey•

I think Foakes's keeping might be worth 5-10 runs an innings over Bairstow, quite possibly more over Butler, so 1 is a non-starter for me. Also didn't want to re-litigate the batting question, but I also remain unconvinced Buttler's batting gives additional value over Foakes long term, despite his current form.

3
TuskEUEngland•

Option 3 for me. I like Pope a lot but he doesn't seem like a great player of spin and is the least established of that middle order. I reckon they'll stick with what they've got though

4
[deleted]•

Pope is a terrific player of spin...

4
0onoodlesw:Sussex: Sussex•

Pope is a brilliant player of spin

1
[deleted]•

Pope is an amazing player of spin

1
Nightangel24•

I am whole heartedly against dropping burns after one bad series. For the next tests I would be tempted to drop pope for foakes and have buttler at 6 as buttler keeping of spin just isnt good enough. Pope can feel hard done by but stokes needs to return when fit

4
CombinhoOPSurrey•

I don't think it's so much about dropping Burns: he needs to be straight back in the team as soon as we leave Asia, because I don't want Crawley having to deal with opening in England. Instead, it's a horses-for-courses reshuffle. Really don't want to drop Pope because, thinking ahead, he needs to gain experience in the subcontinent so he can shape series in the future once he (almost) inevitably becomes one of the best batsmen in the world. Which led me to option 4. In all honesty, I don't think Buttler gives you anything with the bat long-term that Foakes doesn't, but I'm influenced by the fact that there's no chance in hell that the selectors drop Buttler now, as well as maybe being too nice (although I did once declare with one of my batsmen on 49 in a club match).

1
Nightangel24•

I would rather not shuffle Crawley around again. He has been shuffled enough. Let him have an actual run at 3. Leave the top order. It is a battle of the middle order

1
Zer0wned1:England: England •

It is absolutely vital that Foakes plays one way or another in India as you need your best keeper there. It's why Saha plays over Pant in India despite the latter being a better batsman.

4
thenintendobustr•

That and India's batsmen generally being better at home. Pant keeps in sena because of India's fragility in away conditions.

2
formergophers:Australia: Australia•

We keep hearing that it would be unfair to drop any of the current lineup after performing but cricket is filled with examples of batsmen being dropped after making a hundred etc. It isn’t fair to that batsman being dropped but it still happens.

Foakes has to play in the subcontinent, and then following on after that, provided he continues to do the job well of course.

I would say my preference is #2, 4, then 3, in that order.

3
Joemanji84England•

Absolutely, and in fact it was unfair to drop Foakes in the first place after winning man of the series. If England can be ruthless then, they can be ruthless now.

3