Countdown to Test cricket: Who should bat at number 3?

[aydee]

Unfortunately he's[elton] not firing there anymore so his spot in that middle order is there for Coventry's taking. Positionwise this guy has been messed around kind of like Carlisle, Wishart & Viljoen. But keep him there and you'll be sure he'll be on par with the Morgans, Pallards& Pathans of this world.

Where's the superlike button?

Mate, how can you compare Coventry to somebody like Morgan, who regularly gets 50's for England, or even Patahn who has struck a century against South Africa in South Africa...
Coventry is MILES away from even being compared to such players. You could relate him to Pollard...hard hitter...strong guy...lots of talent... but fails...

Except that Pollard has an excellent domestic record with bat and ball, and is highly sort after throughout the world for T20 competitions. So I don't think you can compare Coventry to him either.

[Boundary]

So the debate about who should bat at three in Tests is far from settled. Ervine, Masakadza, Sibanda and Williams all have 5 votes each. Taylor with zero votes seems to be the consensus choice for opening the batting. In other words, ZCF isn't ready to offer any advice to Campbell & Co.

[hhm]

Mate, how can you compare Coventry to somebody like Morgan, who regularly gets 50's for England, or even Patahn who has struck a century against South Africa in South Africa...
Coventry is MILES away from even being compared to such players. You could relate him to Pollard...hard hitter...strong guy...lots of talent... but fails...

Except that Pollard has an excellent domestic record with bat and ball, and is highly sort after throughout the world for T20 competitions. So I don't think you can compare Coventry to him either.

Precisely. My mistake. What on earth was I thinking putting him down so badly. The guy's got an unbeaten 194, more in the class of Sachin & Anwar than those guys!!!! Eoin, Kieron & Yusuf look up to him instead. 10 times out of 10 they wouldn't be able to get 194 against Bangladesh!

You missed the point guys. I wasn't and I won't kid anyone and say he's better. In truth Charles Coventry hasn't delivered as expected, and he might well not reach his potential - not that his inconsistent position in the batting order will help. But you know what, if Eoin, Kieron, Yusuf, Charles & Sachin included, were to bat in an ODI against an Aussie side at its zenith (on separate occassions of course), and that they are all guaranteed to get centuries, you can be rest assured that the cricketing community (Indians included) will rate Charles' centrury top of the list. His batting at its best is beautiful, calculated, assured and definitely a joy to watch. Sachin is too careful, Eoin is cheeky but too cute, while Kieron&Yusuf are plainly violent and one dimentional in their strokeplay (in fact I don't think you can put the word strokeplay in the same sentence with those two). I haven't come across any of the top commentators who isn't dissapointed when they witness one of his cameos quickly come to an end. Almost everyone appreciates whats on display while he lasts on the crease. Probably one of the most frustrating guys in international cricket.

[hhm]

So the debate about who should bat at three in Tests is far from settled. Ervine, Masakadza, Sibanda and Williams all have 5 votes each. Taylor with zero votes seems to be the consensus choice for opening the batting. In other words, ZCF isn't ready to offer any advice to Campbell & Co.

You're right Boundary, the ZCF in not ready to 'offer advice' to Campbell & Co about the #3 position. 4 extrmely different players all tied for the same spot. I admire Ervine and he's probably been arguably the best & most consistent performer for us since the time he bacame an international player. 5 people have voted for him as their preferred number 3, but for the life of me I can't see anything about him that says he's the kind of player that comes in at at first drop. That England have put a player in the mould of Trott at number 3 is an abnormality and a result of desperation. And probably why they will never win an ODI series with him in that spot! But you can be rest assured that he (& Ervine) will be their respective team's best batsmen in every series.

Anyway If we're 1 down for naught under a brilliant display of opening bowling, I can bet my last dollar that, unless extras/overthrows intervene, we'll be 2 down for naught if Vusi comes in. I have no problem with the other two coming in at 3.

[cock]

So the debate about who should bat at three in Tests is far from settled. Ervine, Masakadza, Sibanda and Williams all have 5 votes each. Taylor with zero votes seems to be the consensus choice for opening the batting. In other words, ZCF isn't ready to offer any advice to Campbell & Co.

No 3 is meant to be our best batsman which in my opinion is either Ervine or Masakadza, but as A Campbell did not even look at him for WC I think the only possibilty is Ervine. Unfortunately nowaday even if ZCF had good advice, Campbell would not take it.

[sloandog]

The guy's got an unbeaten 194, more in the class of Sachin & Anwar than those guys!!!!

Worst comment ever posted...
Coventry scored that 194* on a flat wicket in Harare against a poor Bangladesh bowling attack.
Anwar proved his class by scoring big hundreds all over the world...
He's got massive strides to make if he's to meet your ridiculously high expectations...

[Conant]

There's much to admire in most of your posts, hhm; but on ths issue and issues such as Taibu batting at 8, doubts creep in.

A few days ago after ur first post I posted a comment which I almost immediately regreted; but after reading this kind of futile, dogmatic support for players the calibre of Coventry, I do wonder.

Coventrys name and Saeed Anwars do not belong in one sentence, let alone Tendulkars!

Such glaring inaccuracies wth statistics and numbers do not do a clearly lucid brain such as yours any justice! After all was it not you who started by saying we need to be serious wth selection as fans first?

[Conant]

The point being, if we were to dissect players we would find no redeeming qualities in Charles Kevin Coventry. He cannot block or defend his wicket for any length of time; he cannot attack for a sustained period of time without giving his wicket away; his domestic stats are average to below average, meaning even domestic attacks have no trouble getting him out.

Cricket history is littered with batsmen who have dominated their domestict leagues utterly - Graeme Hick, Ajay Ajeda, Martin van Jarsveld - only to fail depressingly at international level; but I'm yet to hear of one who failed domestically only to set the world on fire!

As evidence or support for your assertions you talk of commentators showing dismay when Coventry is dismissed. Well, I've heard them being dismayed too when, say, Hamilton Masakadza is dismissed; and between the two of them I know who I would choose - even in bloody Twenty20!

[hhm]

My dears sloandog & Conant, considering that it is de facto to converse using the Queen’s language on the ZCF, it is rather discouraging when certain quarters betray their understanding of it, rendering it quite difficult to ensure that any sense that is communicated, ultimately makes the sense intended. At no point was Coventry classed together with those batting icons, and based on comparative achievements so far, neither was/can he be said to be superior to Pathan, Morgan & sadly Pollard. Besides, I’d like to think my level of reasoning is more sound than you make it out to be. You will however have noted, with greater than applied inspection of course, that the phrase preceding my statements surrounding Coventry, actually contained a thinly veiled form of sarcasm indicating my disappointment at how unfair some are towards him.

The man is talented, and his ability is – one might argue – innate. Of the current crop of players (maybe bar Blignaut & Vermeulen – pity him), in terms of longevity I can go so far as to say that he is the most experienced, and the one player in local cricket who cut his teeth with the best that our domestic cricket could throw at him, and he received acknowledgement and respect from those very players. Campbell, whose known him from those days, alluded to that recently. Unlike the half baked off-shoots from Churchill, Plumtree, Falcon etc, who put on national colors merely because of quotas and those days of transformation madness, Coventry had a track record. He did his apprenticeship at club and provincial level from a tender age of 15/16 (perhaps even younger in senior club cricket), when both levels were more compact & competitive. You see I’m a Bulawayo boy, and I’ve played the game on the fringes, and observed him & some of these guys first-hand from the beginning, as opposed to merely assessing him from scarce live TV, general reports and Cricinfo. Bear in mind too that he was also a victim of that madness because it started in small form not long after the 99WC.

Contrary to what you say my friend, my expectations of Coventry are not ridiculous. He has obvious class that well and truly exceeds most average international batsmen and I would have thought you are conscious of that fact and should give him credit where it’s due. What appalls me is when Zim supporters fail to see and praise the few true beacons of talent that we have and stand by them. You won’t be surprised to see Bangladeshis putting Tamim alongside Sachin, and Shakib alongside Kallis (as their response to great allrounders) – which they do. While exaggerated, that’s not naivety its positivity, and there’s a sound basis for it. And I say he’s one of our few true shining beacons because, at their best, I can’t see Ervine, Vusi, Taibu being dominant world beaters (not convinced about Williams), but I can certainly see him and Hamilton being so if they reach/had reached their potential.

NB: Conant, my earlier post clearly acknowledged Taibu as being the best of our Test batsmen (you might feel otherwise) and more so deserving of a place higher than 8th. However for tactical reasons (security), as well as the fact that the other batsmen started out their careers (FC & international) as top & middle order batsmen, in my opinion it would be unreasonable - and bad for their game – to place them below seven. In any case if most of these possible batsmen are included in the test XI that’s where they should be placed or not at all. Meaning Tibbly drops lower. While Taibu may well and truly outperform most of them, compared to them however, I believe heisn’t more technically accurate than them and plays mostly crosswise than straight which is a sign of a deficient batsman. Case in point – Daiel Vettori: I wouldn’t fear him if I bowled to him, but over the recent past he has arguably been NZ’s best batsmen with ball (&bat) yet he still bats 8/9 in Tests&ODIs. I can guarantee you that most analysts in international cricket will have you shot if you told them Taibu is a better batsman than Vettori. You will remember that it was the same for us with Streaky towards the end of his career, and he was only moved up the order when it became glaringly obvious that the new breed of our batsmen were absolute incompetent novices in comparison to him as a ‘tailender’. Yet for me, for all of Streaky’s superiority & better performances in comparison to those guys, he’s no middle order batsman, merely a better performer under the circumstances! Oh, there was a brief interruption in Coventry's presence locally as a result of that period of madness, which partly explains why, despite his longevity, he's played so few games domestically compared to most of the pther guys - hence his modest List A & FC records. Granted his crease occupation is factor but I never denied that, neither does that fact threaten my point.

[Conant]

You see, there is a great arrogance and condescension which you betray in your posts suggesting that many here do not have the reasoning capacity you possess. That is not the problem of course: one is entitled to be as arrogant as they feel, even if in the same breath they laugh at your ability to write or comprehend properly 'the Queens language'.

That is fine as well, because I can also reason in some excellent French! Or, Ndebele.

You criticize us of not recognizing the excellence if our own, going on to mention that Bangledeshis have no problem with mentioning Tamim Iqbal in the same breath as Sachin Tendulkar. Presumably this should be earned. So l despaired when Coventry's batting was refferred to in class and aesthetic terms. Ok so I think the great Leornard Dembo was a greater musician than Elton John. See, no inferiority complex there. Not even sarcasm, mind you.

Which is why I would still disagree when you say Taibu is our best test and first class batsman. It seems pointless going into that one now. But when you said he would bat at 8, my first thought was: what an insanely talented team this is! and if not, what balance would it be lending to this team, which you select?