Where should Taylor bat?

[Flower power]

I have just dug some partnerships that Taylor has had over the years and have ranked them according to the number of runs yielding in those partnerships .
I see that when Taylor and Masakadza play together they yield more runs .

1.Taylor with Masakadza =1336 runs

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine ... w=fow_list

2. Taylor with Taibu =1101

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine ... w=fow_list

3.Taylor with Matsi = 1084

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine ... w=fow_list

4. Taylor with chiggs = 734

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine ... w=fow_list

5.Taylor with Chibhabha = 625

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine ... w=fow_list

6. Taylor with Vusi =607

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine ... w=fow_list

[Flower power]

I would let Taylor open and push Vusi to 4 .

[hhm]

I voted for him to open.

Like andybligz said, he has more time to build his innings and score heavily, while the others bat around him. At this level, dealing with his footwork and a seaming new ball is his problem! He's done well in the past so we shouldn't worry too much about that. More importantly, I want Vusi to drop down to 3 or 4. He can use his feet to the spinners and dispatch the part-timers and the tired returning opening bowlers - better than Taylor or any other batsman in my view. So the 230 could've easily been turned into 260. We are in agreement there Flower power. I've said it countless times that all this experimenting will eventually lead back to the orginal combination with Taylor opening with Hamilton in the ODIs. Absolute waste of time, and a concern I have of the decision-makers!

Unlike the Test arena, I'm not too particularly about only having specialist openers (e.g Duffin) at domestic level being used to open in ODIs. Which is why I made an outcry but can afford to give benefit of doubt to Ac&Co regarding Coventry&Chibhabha opening in ODIs.

Don't you just love this forum! We lose the game within the fisrt 10 overs of our innings, then Taylor goes on to get a century and he's now the best thing that's happend to Zim. Not too long ago he was struggling to even get a run against mighty Bangladesh during the ODI series(except in another losing cause which is when our predictable rot started). Make no mistake, he's a great batsman, but he will always be on and off due to his technical deficiencies. 'Feast or famine' as Zimdoggy aptly puts it. Of late he's been scoring slower than what he made us get used to, and been very circumspect - unable to break the shackles early on. I suspect that will continue to happen more often than not. So in that respect he's suitable as an opener. Then again with our fragile opening pair, even at three he'll be pretty much an opener. As for him playing in County cricket, particularly with that poor footwork, it'll be 1-2 or even 3 years before he makes an impact just like GB, JC and SE all toiled initially. His loss if he chooses that route! Adds more subtance to that 'chaos' matter!

NB: It's good to have these polls from time to time BRM. Although it's rather funny that people have since backtracked on a lot of their original votes&comments made in a series of polls you conducted sometime back! Anyway, I'd like to see this poll: Apart from the core players (e.g. Taibu, Hami, Taylor, Vusi, Mpofu & Elton)
1) Should we persist with our current 'youngsters' despite results (e.g. Jarvis, Mawoyo, Craig, Waller, Vitori, Mutizwa, Chakabva) and move forward by adding on new youngsters (e.g. Meth, Shingi, Nicholson, Chatara, Raza, Ncube, Chinouya, Mushangwe) while completely forgeting about the mature palyers; or
2) Should we give our youngsters time off to develop and play more Logan Cup & A tours, while the 'mature' players hold fort (e.g Duffin, Matsi, Ewing, Rainsford, Panyangara, Dabengwa)

I'd love to add a third like 'we should mix them' but that's like sitting on the fence. You either believe(like me) that for the time being, and for the good of Zim Cricket the critical short-term - Rainsford is better than Vitori, Duffin than Tino, Ewing than Craig, Matsi than Waller or you don't

[foreignfield]

I like Taylor at three (in ODIs) for all the reasons takleg gave, and moving Vusi to 4, as hhm suggested all along, would suit me as well (again speaking for ODIs). I still prefer Taylor at 4 for test and would keep the Tino-Vusi opening partnership going as well.

[FlowerPower]

I went with at number one, unlike you hhm its so that we can get a partner for Vusi. This would also allow room for Mutizwa and Waller (or Ervine when he finds his mojo).

see my comments on viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2585

[brmtaylor.com admin]

And another century batting at number three. Which does nothing to help answer the question...
A century opening the batting against Bangladesh, a century at four against New Zealand and now a century batting at three.

[Jemisi]

I'm glad no one has chosen to put him below 4. At least ZCF voters agree on that.

[andybligz93]

opening is definately his best position and were i definately want him but atm we are missing another quality opener and dont have the middle order class to cover him if he goes early ! atm keep him at 3 get williams and stop his little sooky la la's then taylor can move to opening drop vusi to 3 williams at 4 taibu 5 then it looks much more safe ! mazzy needs to find some odi form soon or he could just be a test specialist because mutizwa , waller , ervine , matsi , ewing are all pushing for his spot. has anyone ever thought of the idea of mutizwa opening ? worth a crack maybe ??

[Flower power]

Taylor moving up the ladder i ODI rankings .Soon he will be in top 10 were he belongs

http://www.relianceiccrankings.com/ranking/odi/batting/

[brmtaylor.com admin]

Equal 17th, that's a good jump up the ratings. Would that be the highest a Zimbabwean has ranked in the ODI batting since Andy Flower?