Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú

i think trotts inning was good but to be fair the attack and the pitch didnt had much life in it...

It was an impressive knock by Trott, whilst it is easy to be dismissive of the Bangladeshis being able to bat all day isn't an easy task.

I hope Trott can nail down the number 3 slot. Oliver makes note of the up and down nature of Trott's scores since his Ashes debut but it is pertinent to remember that, prior to this Test, Trott has batted at 5 (debut), 3 (4 Tests against SA and 1 against Bangladesh) and 2 (the final Test in Bangladesh). With his 'too focused' approach, he strikes me as the sort of player who really needs to understand what his role and position is in the side.

With that heavily focused approach, it may be wise to restrict him to Test cricket only in order to get the very best from him. I don't see him fitting into the T20 side at all and even the 50 over game doesn't present a natural slot for him, as Strauss will be the obvious anchorman in the 50 over game. It's arguable that Michael Vaughan added pressure onto himself by trying to be a limited overs batsman when his real strength was Test cricket. Many sides in the world are happy to have T20 specialists (David Warner being an obvious example) so having Test only players seems totally fine to me.

A good knock. I hope we'll declare about an hour after lunch, and get 10 to 15 overs at them before tea. Get the hammer down with the bat tomorrow after the first hour and really try to dominate the bowlers.

I think "anti-entertainer" is a bit harsh, and comparing him as a polar opposite to Petersen equally as harsh. If this was anyone but an England batsmen, we would be calling him a "good solid batsman who knows how to stay in for a long knock", yet he's English, so he gets labelled as an "anti-entertainer".

For the record, Petersen gets out too cheap a lot of times, so if thats what passes for entertainment, then give me anti-entertainment any day of the week and twice on sundays. England have been crying out for someone who can produce long, productive innings on a regular basis for years, so why not try some encouragement, rather than throwing mild insults at him? Just a thought.

Congratulations Trott.

To the many who are knocking the oppostion (the web seems full of them) I say forget the opposition.

Trott was today not competing against the bowlers, but the other batters. If the opposition were as weak as we are led to believe then why no other Tons? He scored more than double his closest challenger, Strauss, who scored more than double his, although of course Morgan is still at the crease.

Cook's dismissal was not out, he cannot be blamed for it. Strauss's and KP and Bells were their fault, the reason Trott is still in is because he didn't get himself out.

That is a trait that is very usefull in Test cricket.

Now lets forget about Trott beating other batsmen, and look relative to himself, the only fair comparision would be how he did away against Bangladesh, (same team different conditions) in which comparision he is much improved and against the Aus (different team similar conditions) where he is doing almost as well (if you cout 1 run against bangladesh as 1/2 against the aus) and of course, he's still in.

Trott is a very similar player to Collingwood, and he's someone I'm not worried about coming in when we loose a wicket. Last summer when we lost a wicket I always thought we were only moments away from loosing another, or more.

Trott is obviously a work in progress, but he has the talent, ability, concentration and patience to be a success at No 3, all the other options fall short in at least one of those 4 areas.

Congratulations to centurion Jonathan Trott.



Dr. Cajetan Coelho

Preceding from the assumption that Graeme Swann's prodigious spin will continue throughout the English Summer and that he will tie up one end during the Ashes, we will have the luxury of being able to go into the Ashes with 6 specialist batsmen and still have a decent chance of taking twenty wickets in a match. There is a strong counterargument we will need 4 seamers.

Strauss, Cook, Pietersen and Collingwood's places are assured. Which leaves Trott, Bell, Morgan and anyone else who emerges fighting for the scraps of one or two places.

I am going to stick my neck out and say Jonathan Trott is the most natural number three England have had this century and must be in the side.

It's really disappointing to see him described in such negative terms. If Rahul Dravid bats a test innings at a strike rate of 30-40 it is described as an "effective rearguard action" or a "defiant knock". If someone does it in an England shirt, in this case Trott, it is "anti-entertainment", "boring" and "dull".

We have been crying out for a number three to anchor our Test Match batting line up for a long, long time and long, long may Trott's long, long innings continue.

It proved that he can maintain concentration.

Whether he can replicate his form against Test nations rather than whipping boys remains to be seen. As Sehwag said last year, the Bangladeshis were not good enough to take 20 Indian wickets once. Their bowling attack is not good enough.

Hopefully, he can take this experience into bigger matches where his team is collapsing. Then we are in a great position for the Ashes.

So are we saying we've found the new Chris Tavare? Is that a good thing?

175 runs in a day? Hardly dull!

I'm amazed that no-one seems to be saying that he has only really batted well at home yet. He didn't look at all comfortable against the Saffers.

Lets just say that I'd hope we can go into the ashes in the position where we are able to pick 6 from 7 or 8 batsmen (plus Prior/Kieswetter) so that we have a safety net if it all goes per shaped for whoever gets the nod in the first two tests.

I accept that the main thrust of your article is positive but I do think it's unfair to major on Trott being an anti-entertainer. Fair enough, he takes a bit of time to get himself ready before deliveries but he scored his runs quite briskly today and to be honest I found his innings pretty entertaining in the main. Having said that, I completely agree that the jury is still out on Trott. After a great start against Australia, he looked uncomfortable over the winter, and runs against Bangladesh certainly don't prove that he's Test class. But hopefully he'll get a double ton tomorrow and go on to fill his boots for the rest of the summer. It's about time someone made that no.3 position their own!

From Trott we have had 2 games out of 5 where he has scored at 3. That ratio isn't very convincing. His best game was at Centurion given the opposition. Oliver Brett also thought Bopara was a cert because of three tons against the Windies which is a much better ratio. But Bopara was taken apart by the Australians. When Trott batted at 5 at the Oval he was new to them. Now they will have been studying every video including the ones when he was struggling on tour in South Africa and Bangladesh. The point is Trott is a very good County cricketer and Bangladesh is about that level. To spring from that to a long innings against Australia down under is a leap in faith too far. Bell got 138 in his previous Test innings which was against Bangladesh in torrid conditions of 40 degrees on a low slow pitch and saved the match when the top order failed. If this same Bell is now not sure of his place after today's innings and after a winter of top scoring, then goodness me, the team is in trouble. For the record Bell did not give his wicket away, he was bowled by a good ball nipping back according to everyone and my eyes.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Surely Trott, with his capacity to build big innings, is more of an 'entertaining' player in the Test arena at least than Pietersen who 'swashbuckles' (the unkind might say 'flails') around attempting to batter bowlers into submission and more often than not gets himself out for less than twenty? Though I'll admit the replays of his dismissals do tend to be entertaining, but for the wrong reasons.

Oliver,

"Today against Bangladesh proved pretty tough viewing as a spectacle, in as much as the result was not in doubt from before play started, so one was yearning for entertainment, and it didn't come."


I don't disagree. The challenge wasn't there. A player like Pietersen is at his best when he is facing an opposition he respects and feels will challenge him. You might mention the West Indies who aren't the force they were. In that department, you have the Gayle factor. Pietersen likes to perform against them because doing well against them means getting one over on Gayle. The rivalry there is personal. Pietersen against Bangladesh... it isn't the same.

For every great Test series, and there have been some fantastic matches over the last year, a day like today does nothing to promote the best of Test cricket. If Bangladesh crumble with the bat on a pitch with a history of staying true all five days and with weather conditions that aren't swing and seam friendly, then questions really will need to be asked. With India and Sri Lanka playing in Zimbabwe, the call will come at some point for Zimbabwe to be readmitted to the Test arena. Both Bangladesh and Zimbabwe as they are right now do not/would not enhance Test cricket. Both sides have talented individuals but the team as a collective don't have enough to them.

We need a second division of Test cricket, perhaps almost something like a Tri-Test Series. Imagine something like Bangladesh and Zimbabwe coming to Ireland to play Tests against one another. If time is an issue, perhaps the second division Tests could be four days long. Throw in games against representative sides in Ireland and perhaps in England like the MCC etc.

One quirk with Bangladesh is that in June they disappear off to play in the Asia Cup before returning to the UK. What's the point in getting a young side out here, start getting them used to English wickets, and then taking them out to Sri Lanka for a meaningless ODI series, and then bringing them back here? I don't think that schedule is conducive to their development at all.




Hackerjack:

No, he didn't look comfortable against South Africa. Cook didn't look comfortable in Australia. Trescothick didn't first time in Oz. Players learn and adapt. Despite his South African association, Trott still has to develop on the international arena like any batsman.

Kieswetter for the Ashes? With those keeping hands? Not a chance.

trott - is a selfish cricketer only interested in playing for himself and not the team. all his motives are centered around if its the right thing for trott not england. im sre tomorow he will go back to his block block block mode again when we should be piling the runs on.

Having been at Lord's today, I thought Trott played pretty well. I think he did enough to answer the short term questions as to the number 3 spot, but I have a few concerns about his innings (if its possible to criticise an innings of 175 not out).

Firstly I was a bit worried that the pace of his scoring seemed to feed off his partner. He came in confidently and scored quickly to start with. Once Strauss got out he seemed to relax a bit whilst KP was in with him, but slowed down once again once Bell was in, and relax again when Morgan came in.

The second minor thing is that, certainly before he played himself in, he seemed to struggle bit against spin.

That being said, a very satisfying day for England. Lets hope they can kick on on day 2, get another 200 or so runs or day 2 and get the Bangladeshis in and then put the pressure on.

I'm intrigued by the description of Trott as the anti-entertainer. He scored his runs faster than anyone else in the team today - even KP.

Hello Oliver

Should my post take an hour to moderate?

Not taken to ODIs?

He averages over 50 as an ODI opener (Before being harshly dropped) and has the highest List A average of any English player EVER and the 20th highest for any player anywhere in the world EVER!

He is a WORLD CLASS ODI player!

Sorry my facts are wrong there!

He averages 139 as an ODI opener (Before being harshly dropped)!

saintlymark74:

"Firstly I was a bit worried that the pace of his scoring seemed to feed off his partner. He came in confidently and scored quickly to start with. Once Strauss got out he seemed to relax a bit whilst KP was in with him, but slowed down once again once Bell was in, and relax again when Morgan came in."

I don't think he feeds off a partner too much. Most normal batsmen will have periods in a long innings when they don't score quickly or seem to stagnate a little. I'd agree that he's not the best against spin but he can learn to score better against slow bowling. If he is going to be a good number three, being secure against seamers is perhaps a greater priority, especially for those times when an opener is knocked out quickly and the ball is still pretty new.

like a few others, i completely disagree with the idea that the innings was not enjoyable to watch or that it was 'anti-entertainment'. trott played some lovely shots and scored rapidly apart from one session where he slowed to a strike rate of just under 50.

the other thing i find odd are the remarks that trott is not suited to T20 or the one day game, and that he would struggle in those formats. anyone who follows the county game will know trott is amongst the top of the list for runs scored in domestic T20, is the england player with the highest list A average ever, and is already up amongst the leading run scorers again this season. also, if you look at a list of the worlds top 30 run scorers in T20 (all games - international and domestic) trott has the highest average of them all at 39.44 - better than KP, jayasuriya, sehwag, dhoni, cameron white and many other 'greats' of the game. but why let the facts get in the way of some good old cliches and lazy journalism? :)

Every team needs a rock in an important position, be it opening the batting or number 3. As in Pietersen and Strauss's dismissals, lack of concentration can be a weakness against any attack, world class bowlers can throw in a slower ball or spinners an arm ball or a flipper. Partnership breakers are used not because of their ability, but because the batsmen feel they have to score runs off them. An awesome display by Trott when all around were found wanting.

___SwAnNsOnG___ wrote:


"He averages over 50 as an ODI opener (Before being harshly dropped) and has the highest List A average of any English player EVER and the 20th highest for any player anywhere in the world EVER!

He is a WORLD CLASS ODI player!"
------------------------------------------------


Can you be world class when you've only played four ODI matches, one of which was against an Associate side?

The English always manage to come up with pejoratives or veiled adjectives that do not flatter too much. Trott is 'anti-entertainer'. Grudging pain-relievers ensue; 'come the Ashes, give me anti-entertainer any day' from some of the more discerning.

If I were to vote I'll go to the constituency of #4 Riggadon and #5 laughingdevil. There's no room for criticism of Trott's innings, despite the opposition being BD. Take out the Trott score and where would the entertainers be? If others abdicate we may have to put up with 'Trott, the boring plodder, the anti-Sehwag'.

At the very least, Trott has laid down a pretty good marker for the season to follow. The number three spot is his for the next few Tests and it would be churlish to make too much of the limited opposition - a man can only play what is bowled to him.
Of course the rather sad tale of Ravi Bopara last year is bound to be in most minds but there is one significant difference: Trott already has a hundred against Australia , albeit one scored at a later batting position.

Anyway there is only one sure way to see if a man can make runs against Australia on their own pitches and that is to actually send him there to try - Trott may not be on the plane yet but he has gone a big step towards the departure lounge.

I'm with sevenseaman - no criticism whatsoever is warranted of Trott today. To be fair to Oliver (and I'm sometimes not), this piece, over all, is not that critical. However, I am disturbed that it's the first day of the International summer, a player has scored 175* at the highest strike-rate of the innings, and the journos are grubbing around looking for something negative to say about him.

I hope Trott continues in this vein all summer, and through the winter. A specialist Test number three is just what we're after - I'm definitely with largehat on that one: "the most natural number three England have had this century and must be in the side".

It does make competition for batting slots tight though! Especially since I'm very much in the "five bowlers, Bres at seven" camp. It's very harsh on Bell, and, to some degree, even on Morgan, but neither are in my starting Test XI right now.

I think Trott is very much like Jacques Kallis mark 2. In test cricket he can grind out some big scores which are of benefit to the team but may not have the run-a-ball strike rate that is needed for the modern ODI games. This isn't meant to be negative. Rather I find it refreshing that someone in the England team has the temperament to bat for a day, and rather stupid all those comments about the manner in which he scores his runs. Keep going for another 4hrs at least today!

Anti-entertainer ??? That really is abit harsh, too me that seems a confidence conflict, if Trott isn't 100% confidence then the runs wont flow and he'll defend his wicket more, but like yesterday with a big score already behind him this season so batting confidence high he'll up his offensive shots.

I'm stunned. OK, not the strongest opposition, but England make 360-4 on the first day of a test match and number 3 makes 175 not out, and half the people on this blog want to get stuck into him? You're all kidding, right?

evenseaman wrote:
'The English always manage to come up with pejoratives or veiled adjectives that do not flatter too much'.

Ah, sweeping racist generalisations, where would we be without them?

Regarding the number three position, I guess you could say that Bell's score of seventeen yesterday gave the lie to the charge that he can only score centuries against weak opposition......

Score at over 3 an over, score faster than anyone else (including Pietersen), play percentage shots (not T/20 slogs), play without giving chances, play a judicious mixture of attacking and defensive shots AND DO IT ALL AT No.3 in a 5 day TEST MATCH at Lord's. That beats any "entertaining" cameo that lasts a few minutes!!
If TROTT understands TEST CRICKET and is only chosen for that form of the game, that's fine by me! The "entertainment" of TEST CRICKET is a big concept. It encompasses patience, stamina, pacing, wearing down the opposition, grinding them, building, consolidating, dominating.....

I hope Trott moves serenely and patiently to a double century. The attributes listed are JUST what we need to beat the Aussies in OZ.

Oh how we need an 'anti entertainer', someone who will get under the Aussies' skin, someone to grind and bore them into losing. While Ian Botham was biffing his way into the history books in 81, Chris Tavare was performing this function, and didn't Sir Geoffrey do a bit of this too. Even further back there was Ken Barrington (have a look at his average) buckling down at number four. While flash harrys like Ted Dexter were scoring scintillating seventies there was Ken grinding out big, big scores at the other end. Carry on anti entertaining say I.

I thought it was the perfect first day test innings from trott.

The bangladeshi attack is clearly weak but you have to firstly respect the opposition (bell, pieterson) and build a platform from which you can then attack and play entertaining shots - ie today should be the day england can really cash in and play some agressive cricket.

Good to see morgan enjoy a good start to his test career as well. Set on 40odd, with england in a strong position, wouldn't like to be bowling to him today!

Trott is still in the first year of his international career, and has a real chance at a double century here. We constantly complain that we don't have an anchor in the team who can bat through, and he looks like the one player who looks like he has the temperament and class to be that man.

For those thinking it's boring and dull, this is test cricket, it can be a grind at times.

As mentioned previously, Rahul Dravid is copnsidered one of the great test batsman, yet it would've taken him about 500 deliveries and 2 and a half days to score 175!

We should be greatful we have a man standing up to the plate at number 3 and showing real resilience, class and punch, and is always looking to score. Long may Trott and his big runs continue at number 3.

How can Trotts innings be described as anything but excellent. His solid batting performance instils confidence in the rest of the team.

It doesn't matter if he "fed off his partner"?

It doesn't matter if he was " anti - entertainment"? (which I disagree with)

He is on 175 not out after day one! Strike rate of 65 in test match!

Morgan/Prior now have the confidence to attack as they have a "rock" at the other end.

I'm not even an England supporter but some of the posts on here iro Trott are just absurd!

Great innings, simple as that!

You can only take runs off the attack put in front of you and Trott has certainly done that with some aplomb.

That said, I'm still not sure if he is really a test match number three and fear he could get exposed against the Aussies especially on their pitches.

As such, our latest post asks whether Trott's runfest further complicates England's number three woes?

Congratulations to Trott and England. I am not into statistics but it may be one of the faster double hundreds if you do not bring Sehawag in; and only in his 8th Test!

For me the "entertainment" factor watching test innings IS EXACTLY the fact they require serious concentration, crafting an innings by selecting only poor balls to punish. At test level "anti-entertainment" is watching people like Pietersen gift their wicket away by thinking they can club every ball wherever they want to hit it. Its ugly and stupid. I think most test cricket lovers would agree, otherwise they would save time and watch limited-over games exclusively.

Hello Oliver

I am astounded that my post has been removed. It would help if the moderators could allude the the specific house rule which has been broken, so that an improved version could be offered.

Unbelievable really!