Remove this Banner Ad

Peter Forrest

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

imadodgyumpire said:
I am stunned at the focus on Forrest's strike-rate of his 104. Staying in the crease long enough to score a ton is actually hard to do, as Warner is clearly demonstrating to us. The guy was playing in his 4th international cricket match! He has scored two 50's and a 100 in his first four games and "we" are nit-picking at his SR? :confused:

Just take the runs and be happy with them.
Click to expand...

People are nitpicking due to his List A record. This isn't test cricket where sr is irrelevant.

I would hope that the senior players - but not Langer, he doesn't appear to be of any use at all - are encouraging him about the rotation of the strike.

Though Clarke himself isn't great at that, so I'm not sure who would really be the model there now that Punter is gone.
 
Doodlesweaver said:
People are nitpicking due to his List A record. This isn't test cricket where sr is irrelevant.

I would hope that the senior players - but not Langer, he doesn't appear to be of any use at all - are encouraging him about the rotation of the strike.

Though Clarke himself isn't great at that, so I'm not sure who would really be the model there now that Punter is gone.
Click to expand...


Clarke isn't great at rotating the strike?
Or Clarke isn't great at being a senior player and encouraging others?

If the first one, clearly you're getting "boundary hitter with +100 strike rate" confused with "rotating the strike."

To say Clarke isn't great at it would be like saying Geelong didn't win the 2011 premiership, i.e wrong.

Clarke's ability to rotate the strike is the reason he's one of the very best ODI batsmen in the world.
 
Ricketts said:
Clarke isn't great at rotating the strike?
Or Clarke isn't great at being a senior player and encouraging others?

If the first one, clearly you're getting "boundary hitter with +100 strike rate" confused with "rotating the strike."

To say Clarke isn't great at it would be like saying Geelong didn't win the 2011 premiership, i.e wrong.

Clarke's ability to rotate the strike is the reason he's one of the very best ODI batsmen in the world.
Click to expand...

Agree with this. Clarke will go close to a run a ball and only have a couple of boundaries to his name.
 
Good posts by Black Thunder. As good as Forrest has been so far at making runs, it is a concern that he is not scoring off so many balls.
I was out for all of his innings on Friday, so I didn't see any of it, but I was shocked to learn that he didn't score off 83 of the balls he faced. That is a hell of a lot.
If this is what he does when he's in sparkling form, which he looks to be at the moment (these look to be by far his best performances in one day games at domestic, or international level) then you've got to wonder how he'll go when he's not picking the gaps so well on the big shots, or when the bowling to him gets tighter and better.
If he's not scoring off 83 balls an innings, it also means he's using up a lot of the strike, which means whoever is up the other end won't necessarily get much of a chance to score.
Just say Forrest faced half of the balls in the innings (150) and went at that strike rate of 75, he would only score 112/113 runs. I say only, because if you double that (bringing you to the 300 balls of an innings) you only have a score of 225 (off the bat), which means that it puts a fair bit of pressure on the others to score very, very quickly, to get us to a good total.
And when he's not going so well, you could expect that number to come down to an even less desirable level, as BT has been saying.
I then read today that Forrest went out with over 10 overs still remaining. So that means he used up almost half the balls in the innings (143) in less than 40 overs, so he must have been seriously hogging the strike during his innings.
That sort of thing is fine for test cricket, and I look forward to seeing him playing for us there, but at this point I hope he gets a wriggle on a bit in ODI's, if he's going to be staying in the team.
It will be interesting to see if he keeps his place when Clarke comes back next game. I think it has been mission accomplished (as he was largely picked to see how he would handle international cricket) so it will be a tough call as to whether he or Warner or Christian miss out.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

I'm sure he is aware of his need to turn the strike over more. I hope that is the reason why he continually looks like running out his partners because every time he hits the ball he starts off on a run.
 
Whoever said he was like Trott is exactly right.

Yes he should continue to try and improve but if he can be the anchor with a strike rate of about 70 then thats ok with the guys around him in the team atm. Warner and Watson would strike at 90+ most games. Clarke, Mhuss, Dhuss, Christian etc would strike 80+ most games so it shouldn't be a problem. We prob couldnt afford to have 2 guys like Forrest in there but having him come in at 3 or 4 and bat till the 40th+ over then we should get some really good scores as a team. 20/20 is different of course.

Hopefully will be a great test match batter. Very good technique and temperament by the looks of things and still young enough to be able to improve for years to come.
 
That's the thing, he's obviously improving rapidly all the time, so who knows where he'll end up, or how good he'll be in the various forms.
One of the best signs is obviously how he's handled the step up to international level, so that is a very big tick to begin with. :thumbsu:

jknothimjustafan said:
Yes he should continue to try and improve but if he can be the anchor with a strike rate of about 70 then thats ok with the guys around him in the team atm. Warner and Watson would strike at 90+ most games. Clarke, Mhuss, Dhuss, Christian etc would strike 80+ most games so it shouldn't be a problem. We prob couldnt afford to have 2 guys like Forrest in there but having him come in at 3 or 4 and bat till the 40th+ over then we should get some really good scores as a team. 20/20 is different of course.
Click to expand...
That's the thing, though. If he bats for a long time, like he did the other night and uses up say 150 or so balls (half the balls in the innings, not including extras for wides and no balls) and only scores at 70, as you suggest, he's only going to make 105, which means the rest of the team needs to be striking at over 100 between them, to get us to a score of around 270-280 (including say 20 extras). If we want to get to 300 they'll all need to be striking at 110+, each, on average, which is a fair ask.
 
Ricketts said:
Clarke isn't great at rotating the strike?
Or Clarke isn't great at being a senior player and encouraging others?

If the first one, clearly you're getting "boundary hitter with +100 strike rate" confused with "rotating the strike."

To say Clarke isn't great at it would be like saying Geelong didn't win the 2011 premiership, i.e wrong.

Clarke's ability to rotate the strike is the reason he's one of the very best ODI batsmen in the world.
Click to expand...

Clarke's ability to rotate the strike is overstated. For about three years he was one of the worst in the world for it. Cricinfo did a stats run down on the dot balls faced by the top ODI batsmen - in terms of averages -a year or so ago and Clarke came out on top.

That is also one of the reasons why he was so awful in T20.

He has picked up his act in ODI's in 2011 for sure and it's very good to see.

I have no idea if he is good at encouraging others but I would think he is. He seems to get on very well with the younger players.
 
jknothimjustafan said:
Hopefully will be a great test match batter. Very good technique and temperament by the looks of things and still young enough to be able to improve for years to come.
Click to expand...

I hope you're right, but I can't say I'm convinced just yet.

Forrest is 26, has played 37 first class matches and averages just over 36, an average that's risen markedly this season on the back of some consistent good form.

Its a decent first class record but its not exactly a record that screams 'future test star'.

The real question is whether he's just having a very good season or whether he's matured as a batsman and is ready to continue this year's form into the future.

I guess we'll find out in due course.
 
Doodlesweaver said:
I would hope that the senior players - but not Langer, he doesn't appear to be of any use at all - are encouraging him about the rotation of the strike.

Though Clarke himself isn't great at that, so I'm not sure who would really be the model there now that Punter is gone.
Click to expand...

Doodlesweaver said:
Clarke's ability to rotate the strike is overstated. For about three years he was one of the worst in the world for it. Cricinfo did a stats run down on the dot balls faced by the top ODI batsmen - in terms of averages -a year or so ago and Clarke came out on top.

That is also one of the reasons why he was so awful in T20.

He has picked up his act in ODI's in 2011 for sure and it's very good to see.

I have no idea if he is good at encouraging others but I would think he is. He seems to get on very well with the younger players.
Click to expand...

Wondering if you are still of this belief?

Let's not beat around the bush here, we're probably talking about the best overall batsman in the world.
 
Ricketts said:
Let's not beat around the bush here, we're probably talking about the best overall batsman in the world.
Click to expand...


Clarke is certainly right up there, but AB de Villiers would be my choice. Absolute gun in all forms of the game.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Hashim Amla would round out the top three with Clarke and De Villiers for best three batsmen in the world right now. probably AB on top.
 
Bucking Beads said:
Forrest is a fair chance of getting a baggygreen if Clarke's injury is serious. But they might even take Bailey over on the Tour as well.
Click to expand...

with Warner and Clarke feeling the pinch they will probably take two back up batsmen.

take a punt on go with burns i say. but i've always felt bailey is criminally underrated, and his first class record down playing down in Hobart is top drawer.

you've got the solid dependable "older" back up who is having a great season in forrest. i would rather take a slight risk on the other, picking a younger bloke with undoubted potential, not having quite as good as season as a couple of other older "safer" options in Bailey or Davis, but hardly having a shit season (600+ at 38)...
 
i hope CA go with 17 players, two back up batsmen, give Warner's and Clarke's issues... there's no domestic cricket on so there is nothing for guys to be missing.
 
I would say Bailey is a given if they are taking two backup batsmen. The only other name close would be Quiney.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

aussie1st said:
I would say Bailey is a given if they are taking two backup batsmen. The only other name close would be Quiney.
Click to expand...

i think you're right. bailey almost for sure would be the selectors next choice after forrest. but personally would go a different route.

in fact, i don't think burns would be in the selectors top five contenders after forrest - davis, quiney and s marsh also almost certainly in front of him.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom