Beefy on Trotters

A treat to warm the hearts of all Fire Nick Knight's connoisseurs of expert commentary: Botham and Knight teaming up in the commentary box. So what gleaming insights would we learn from Knight and the knight?

As discussions meanadered on with about as much purpose as a mid-90s England one-day innings, thoughts turned to the inclusion of Jonathan Trott in the one-day side.

This prompted the revelation that Sir Ian doesn't "really consider [Trott] an one-day player" before going onto say "I didn't even realise he was in the squad".


Is it really too much to ask for Sky's "expert" summariser to glance at a squad list? Here at FNK we don't mean to be dismissive of Sir Ian's charity work so if as appears to be the case here his charity work consumes too much of his time to allow him to properly fulfil his paid role, we'd be of the opinion that we could forgo his commentary in the name of charity. Even if he missed him in the squad, you'd have thought he'd have noticed him on as sub-fielder at Trent Bridge, or at least milling around the boundary edge.

Even if we are willing to overlook his lack of interest in the composition of England squads, his claim that he doesn't consider Trott to be an one-day player deserves a closer look. Trott has played four ODIs in the last 12 months for his adopted country suggesting that he shouldn't be such a surprise to be in the squad. In those four games he has a more than respectable average of 49 albeit at the sluggish run-rate of 68.83. However England easily chased down targets in the two of those four games in which Trott had a meaningful bat (he scored half centuries in both) suggesting that it would be harsh to count his run-rate in those games against him: he might not have demonstrated an extra gear, but he had no need to do so.

More telling is Trott's List A domestic record. Trott has scored 11 List A hundreds in 152 innings (30 not out). That's a hundred under every 14 games. To give some sort of context Strauss, who somehow is considered one of the best two openers, scores a hundred once every 32 and a bit List A games; Bell one of every 31.5; Collingwood one every 41 (although it should be said that batting in the lower middle order like Collingwood does, he'll have had far fewer opportunities to score hundreds than Bell and Strauss in particular); Morgan an impressive (for a middle order bat) one every 20. In the current set-up only Kieswetter has a better record (one every 11.2)

Of those on the fringes for the Lions such as Cook one every 17.75; Bopara one every 24; Davies one every 21.5; Gale one every 75 and Taylor one every 26 (Taylor and Gale have one List A hundred a piece) - all need more innings to score hundreds. Now scoring hundreds isn't the only measure of a List A batsman, but it is an important one and it seems to be premature to be writing off a batsman who has scored so many List A hundreds. It's almost as if Sir Ian is completely oblivious to what goes on on the county scene.

Beefy's co-commentator Mike Atherton reckons as a player you should read the laws of the game, maybe expert summariser should take a passing interest in the game as well?