Moeen Ali - The day time night-watchman? Or is Joe Root now hiding?

[MenInG]

Absolutely ridiculous decision to send in Moeen Ali at 3 - Indians would think Xmas come early (no religious undertones - just a joke)

Is Joe Root so under-confident? If so, this is bad news for England

 

[Arham_PakFan]

Moeen hit a double ton at No.3 two weeks ago when batting for Worcestershire.He averages 55 at No.3 in county cricket.

 

[gazza619]

It wasnt an early X-mas, it was more like a late Baqra eid as England sacrificed poor Moeen.

 

[Watsupdoc]

Moeen Ali has opened before. So sending him at 3 is not really a ridiculous decision.

There was some sense to it.

 

[gazza619]

Moeen hit a double ton at No.3 two weeks ago when batting for Worcestershire.He averages 55 at No.3 in county cricket.

yeah but then why did he not bat at 3 in the 1st innings? clearly England are trying to protect Root and none of the middle order are gutsy enough to put their hands up and say I want to bat no.3.

 

[Arham_PakFan]

yeah but then why did he not bat at 3 in the 1st innings? clearly England are trying to protect Root and none of the middle order are gutsy enough to put their hands up and say I want to bat no.3.

I don't disagree with you.Just saying Moeen isn't that bad a choice to bat at 3.

 

[Joseph Gomes]

England can afford to send Moeen at 3, they bat really deep. England's top order getting dismissed doesn't mean the same for other teams. They always have at least 2 batsmen chipping when when needed

 

[Srtfan]

Not a bad call ,sometime u need to do something different.in first test india also send ashwin before karthik,& pandya.

 

[Srtfan]

Some time it work and sometimes not

 

[MenInG]

Absolutely ridiculous decision to send in Moeen Ali at 3 - Indians would think Xmas come early (no religious undertones - just a joke)

Is Joe Root so under-confident? If so, this is bad news for England

Apparently Kohli sledged him for that

 

[Deewana Mastana]

Could have been Bairstow instead but neither would have stuck it out would have been another debate.

 

[Mamoon]

Do we have a problem with Root’s perceived cowardice, or his decision to put our good friend Moeen in a precarious position.

Of perhaps it is a kill two birds with one stone type situation here.

 

[gazza619]

bring back Ian Bell and play him at no.3 and drop Adil Rashid.

 

[Zaz]

All this chopping and changing does no one any good esp moeens batting There needs to be some consistentcy

Is he going to bat at 3 now or just wherever whenever?

 

[InziRules]

I think it was a very good decision. Moeen was probably going to contribute 20-30 at most, down the order. With Root's terrible form, getting him back into form with that 48 was worth a lot more than those missed 10-20 runs

 

[Markhor]

Moeen plays at 3 for his county and Root is more comfortable at 4 so it wasn't a surprising move. England will have wanted him to provide impetus at the top of the innings but it didn't work out.

The 3 position has been problematic for England since the retirement of Trott. One idea is to drop Cook down one position and get Rory Burns to partner Jennings, but Cook is so out of nick I don't think it matters what position he plays.

 

[Hasan123]

Root should have come at 3 in this game. He is England's best batsmen. Hiding down the order doesn't look good.

Maybe in the next game he should look to bat at 4 , if that's where he feels comfortable.

 

[shaz619]

Do we have a problem with Root’s perceived cowardice, or his decision to put our good friend Moeen in a precarious position.

Of perhaps it is a kill two birds with one stone type situation here.

If you put the childish feuds away, it doesn't take a genius to work out who is more equipped to Bat at no.3 for England out of the two. The attacking decision was obviously made given Mo's recent form we can hardly criticise it and Root's preference to Bat at no.4 but trying to dissect people's reasoning with assumptions beyond this to try and sound cool even at this stage is just a bit weird mate, think of something new maybe?

 

[Robert]

Moeen hit a double ton at No.3 two weeks ago when batting for Worcestershire.He averages 55 at No.3 in county cricket.

This.

Root’s best position is #5 where he averages over 60.

 

[slipcatch]

Would have been a great decision had Moeen scored a quick 50.

 

[Ab Fan]

Root should bat at 4 or 5, not higher. He is best at that position only.

People can say cowardice and all but a batsmen should bat at position where he could maximise his potential.

 

[Varun]

Having Moeen at #3 is similar to our tactic of playing Irfan Pathan as opener / #3 all those years ago.

 

[MenInG]

This.

Root’s best position is #5 where he averages over 60.

Why do as a afterthought?

 

[Ab Fan]

Also, Moeen is a batting all-rounder.

 

[Gabbar Singh]

A man who lets Ben Stokes cut his hair is clearly not the sharpest tool in the shed hence decisions like this.

 

[Mamoon]

This.

Root’s best position is #5 where he averages over 60.

The best batsman in the country should not bat below #4. It gives a negative, defeatist impression.

Root needs to take charge at #4 if he is uncomfortable at #3.

 

[Mamoon]

If you put the childish feuds away, it doesn't take a genius to work out who is more equipped to Bat at no.3 for England out of the two. The attacking decision was obviously made given Mo's recent form we can hardly criticise it and Root's preference to Bat at no.4 but trying to dissect people's reasoning with assumptions beyond this to try and sound cool even at this stage is just a bit weird mate, think of something new maybe?

That is not my question. The question, is the criticism directed at Root for not batting at 3 or because he made Moeen bat at 3. I don’t think this thread would have surfaced if Root would have made Bairstow, Buttler or Stokes bat at 3. We seem to care a little too much about Moeen.

 

[Robert]

Why do as a afterthought?

Why not? Had it worked he would have looked brilliant.

The batting line doesn’t have to be fixed in stone. Imran would sometimes promote bowlers above batters to get a left-hander in.

 

[mkyawar]

Did Moeen not get a double hundred.

 

[barah_admi]

I don't mind fluid thinking in cricket but your best batsman should be out there for the toughest portion of the game. Ponting did it for 10 years, which is why I hold him in such high regard and why he will always be better than Lara who too often hid down at 4 or 5. There is something special about a number 3, Younis Khan among them, Williamson these days. Kohli and Smith also hide.

 

[Big Mac]

I don't mind fluid thinking in cricket but your best batsman should be out there for the toughest portion of the game. Ponting did it for 10 years, which is why I hold him in such high regard and why he will always be better than Lara who too often hid down at 4 or 5. There is something special about a number 3, Younis Khan among them, Williamson these days. Kohli and Smith also hide.

It's 2018 and we still have people believing the myth of "The best batsman bats at #3"

 

[shaz619]

That is not my question. The question, is the criticism directed at Root for not batting at 3 or because he made Moeen bat at 3. I don’t think this thread would have surfaced if Root would have made Bairstow, Buttler or Stokes bat at 3. We seem to care a little too much about Moeen.

I don't personally criticise Joe for not batting at that position or his decision to send Moeen out there to have a go but you seem to have made a big deal out of it specifically because there is criticism from others who were not happy with Moeen being sent at no.3 for reasons which we can make sense even if we're on the other side of the fence, am not sure if you'd be giving such a thread as much attention if Root was being criticised for sending Bairstow, Butler or Stokes at no.3.

I know you don't like Beards, but Mo's family isn't even particularly overly religious and he gave Islam more attention thanks to a West Indian friend; beyond that he isn't a bad guy but getting all hot every time specifically because others posters look up to him because he is into Islam or appears a certain way is just silly in my opinion.

 

[MoJoJoJo]

Moeen is doing the damage again.

 

[Bilal7]

That is not my question. The question, is the criticism directed at Root for not batting at 3 or because he made Moeen bat at 3. I don’t think this thread would have surfaced if Root would have made Bairstow, Buttler or Stokes bat at 3. We seem to care a little too much about Moeen.

Yes, in fact the criticism would have been 2x worse if he had made Stokes or Bairstow bat at 3 given that they are completely unsuited to bat that high up.

Moeen, on the other hand, has the ability to be a test-class #3 given that he bats at one down for his county, and also has experience opening the batting in all three formats. I actually want Ali to continue batting at #3 for the next test and for England's upcoming tests in Sri Lanka and West Indies. He's a good player of spin and can be a good counter for the Lankan spinners.

 

[Big Mac]

I don't personally criticise Joe for not batting at that position or his decision to send Moeen out there to have a go but you seem to have made a big deal out of it specifically because there is criticism from others who were not happy with Moeen being sent at no.3 for reasons which we can make sense even if we're on the other side of the fence, am not sure if you'd be giving such a thread as much attention if Root was being criticised for sending Bairstow, Butler or Stokes at no.3.

I know you don't like Beards, but Mo's family isn't even particularly overly religious and he gave Islam more attention thanks to a West Indian friend; beyond that he isn't a bad guy but getting all hot every time specifically because others posters look up to him because he is into Islam or appears a certain way is just silly in my opinion.

Go easy on him, this is a very difficult time for him.

 

[MenInG]

Not his batting.

But how important has he been for England in this game.

 

[Bilal7]

I don't personally criticise Joe for not batting at that position or his decision to send Moeen out there to have a go but you seem to have made a big deal out of it specifically because there is criticism from others who were not happy with Moeen being sent at no.3 for reasons which we can make sense even if we're on the other side of the fence, am not sure if you'd be giving such a thread as much attention if Root was being criticised for sending Bairstow, Butler or Stokes at no.3.

I know you don't like Beards, but Mo's family isn't even particularly overly religious and he gave Islam more attention thanks to a West Indian friend; beyond that he isn't a bad guy but getting all hot every time specifically because others posters look up to him because he is into Islam or appears a certain way is just silly in my opinion.

Lol, as a Moeen fan, I'm certainly not upset. In fact, this is a sign of how much his batting is respected by the team management which is only a good thing. [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] is once again, missing his mark.

 

[Bilal7]

Not his batting.

But how important has he been for England in this game.

Even with the bat, his 40 was an important cameo for England. Hopefully, he crushes India with bat and ball both, in the dead rubber. However, the Indians are dangerous when they know that they've lost the series.

 

[barah_admi]

It's 2018 and we still have people believing the myth of "The best batsman bats at #3"

It's 2018 and we still have people who don't understand cricket

 

[MMHS]

Traditionally, best ENG middle order batsmen used to bat at 4, while in AUS & WIN, at No. 3. Cricket in South Asia came from ENG, therefore here also tradition is that best middle order batsman bats at 4. I think, main reason for that is ENG had been historically tougher place for top 3, therefore of they (or Counties) used to put 3 openers at top 3. Ranji, Hammond, Compton, Dexter, Gower, KP - all batted at 4 for most part of their career. In that regard, I think Root should bat at 4 instead of 3.

Putting Mo at 3 is a silly call, as I mentioned just before AUS tour (last Ashes). He has massive weakness against short ball and he isn't a guy who would keep leaving balls until fast bowlers are tired. 7 is perfect spot for him. If he is to bat at top, I think it's better to open with him instead of those 2 walking wickets and allow a young middle order to bat at 3.

Mo didn't deserve to be dropped in ENG Tests - his stats in ENG are excellent after 29 Tests. Around 1600 runs at 38 and 91 wickets at 32, with 3/8 - 50/100 & 4/1 - 5/10for.

 

[Big Mac]

It's 2018 and we still have people who don't understand cricket

Tell me about it, look at this post for one example:

I don't mind fluid thinking in cricket but your best batsman should be out there for the toughest portion of the game. Ponting did it for 10 years, which is why I hold him in such high regard and why he will always be better than Lara who too often hid down at 4 or 5. There is something special about a number 3, Younis Khan among them, Williamson these days. Kohli and Smith also hide.

 

[barah_admi]

Traditionally, best ENG middle order batsmen used to bat at 4, while in AUS & WIN, at No. 3. Cricket in South Asia came from ENG, therefore here also tradition is that best middle order batsman bats at 4. I think, main reason for that is ENG had been historically tougher place for top 3, therefore of they (or Counties) used to put 3 openers at top 3. Ranji, Hammond, Compton, Dexter, Gower, KP - all batted at 4 for most part of their career. In that regard, I think Root should bat at 4 instead of 3.

Putting Mo at 3 is a silly call, as I mentioned just before AUS tour (last Ashes). He has massive weakness against short ball and he isn't a guy who would keep leaving balls until fast bowlers are tired. 7 is perfect spot for him. If he is to bat at top, I think it's better to open with him instead of those 2 walking wickets and allow a young middle order to bat at 3.

Mo didn't deserve to be dropped in ENG Tests - his stats in ENG are excellent after 29 Tests. Around 1600 runs at 38 and 91 wickets at 32, with 3/8 - 50/100 & 4/1 - 5/10for.

I did not say all the best batsman DO bat at 3, I said they should. It becomes especially important to do so when the players around you just are not good enough. India's modern batsmen just arent good enough, so why are so many frail batters going in at 3?

England spent months hiding Root at 4 to accommodate lesser batsmen at 3...he hasnt performed yet but he is a terrific bat and I think he will make no. 3 HIS position...unless he gets scared again. KP was criticised for years hovering around 4 or 5. He deserved to be.

Williamson, not as naturally gifted as Kohli or Root is remarkable for the runs he gets at 3...especially in the swinging conditions in NZ. His 135 in SL was sublime, his two centuries against SA even more special because he had to do it in hard, tough, pace bowling conditions while batting in the game's toughest position.

the sublime is made impeccable based on the difficulty of the task. Not just in cricket but in all sport.

 

[MMHS]

I did not say all the best batsman DO bat at 3, I said they should. It becomes especially important to do so when the players around you just are not good enough. India's modern batsmen just arent good enough, so why are so many frail batters going in at 3?

England spent months hiding Root at 4 to accommodate lesser batsmen at 3...he hasnt performed yet but he is a terrific bat and I think he will make no. 3 HIS position...unless he gets scared again. KP was criticised for years hovering around 4 or 5. He deserved to be.

Williamson, not as naturally gifted as Kohli or Root is remarkable for the runs he gets at 3...especially in the swinging conditions in NZ. His 135 in SL was sublime, his two centuries against SA even more special because he had to do it in hard, tough, pace bowling conditions while batting in the game's toughest position.

the sublime is made impeccable based on the difficulty of the task. Not just in cricket but in all sport.

My post wasn't referring to any one. I am speaking from history in general. However, history doesn't build itself - it's made from decades long legacy, tradition, practice. I am sure ENG didn't put their best middle order at 4 to hide him or make it easy for the batsman, rather from FC level the strategy had been to put best bat at 4. For example, Zaheer used to bat at 3 for PAK, but for Gloster he used to bat at 4.

One reason I can give is the wickets & game condition. In AUS & WIN, FC games were played on harder, bouncier tracks where ball comes on to bat at height and stroke making batsmen with back foot game enjoys batting there. These countries play (played) more aggressive game and they used to put their best player at 3. In ENG, batting techniques are developed more on front-foot because ball seems there. Therefore, tradition had been to put less flashy batsmen at 3, and master batsman at 4. More or less, SAF & NZ wickets were also similar - more English than Aussie, though SAF had more bounce.

I am sure Root can be a fantastic No. 3, but ENG might not play him there, which is fine. Every major countries in every major sports have developed their own style and often they stick to that. Batting strategy is built around the best batsman (batting leader), and it hardly matters if he is batting at 3 or 6 - Bradman batted at 3 while Sobers at 6, Pollock at 5, Tendulkar at 4 and now Kohli at 4, while Smith at 3. However, No. 3 demands most dynamic game and I have seen even best players move down to 4 or 5 by their early 30s - Viv, Greg, Kanhai, Zaheer, Sanga.... and now Amla is struggling at 3.