Australia v England, 1st T20, Hobart January 29, 2014

No Stokes, no-ball, no nerves

Plays of the day from the first T20 between Australia and England in Hobart

Omission of the day
There are sound reasons for keeping faith with players that have served you well but when it means leaving out one of your in-form stars, it has to be questioned. Ben Stokes was a rare shining light during the Ashes and recent one-dayers but he was nowhere to be seen when England's XI was named on Wednesday evening. Instead, they went with two players - Jade Dernbach and Danny Briggs - who have played no cricket of late.

No-ball of the day
When Cameron White hoicked at a full toss from Luke Wright, the umpire was already calling no-ball for height by the time it was caught at short fine leg. Then, however, the game ground to a halt as queries were made about the call and eventually the third umpire was called in. It was a borderline call, and the TV official took his time before sticking with his on-field colleague. After all that, however, it barely mattered because White was out to the next ball he faced.

Nerveless start of the day
Chris Lynn is one of the players to benefit from Australia having a number of first-choice names unavailable. When he came in during the 16th over he did not have much opportunity to make a mark, and there was no time to worry about playing himself in. Maybe that helped, because facing just his fourth ball in international cricket he slotted Tim Bresnan straight down the ground for six.

Over of the day
Moises Henriques' Twenty20 series has been cut short by a call to South Africa but he still had time to make an impression during an opening over that seriously dented England's chase. First he bowled Wright, who under-edged a slower ball as he aimed leg side, then trapped Alex Hales lbw when the opener shuffled across the crease. Unless there are injuries in South Africa, it could well be the last bowl he has in the middle for a few weeks.

Andrew McGlashan is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • Scott on January 30, 2014, 15:27 GMT

    @Chris_P, looking at his performances with the bat, similar performances would've seen Phil Hughes dropped twice and with the ball Mitchell Starc would've been dropped thrice! Joking aside, (at present) his ability in tests with the bat hardly warrants selection in the top 6 of a batting order and his bowling doesn't warrant selection as one of normally 3 seamers. Where does that leave him? For me, if you can't fill one of the two criteria, then you shouldn't be in a test side (unless you're a WK, of course!)...

    Also, I noticed your man MoHen got a call up to SA as Faulkner's replacement. Not entirely sure that's MoHen's role as I thought his batting was coming along nicely. Who knows, a good knock or two in the warm ups and he may just take #6, especially so since both Doolan and Hughes are looking for top order spots that, barring injury, aren't there to take. We're looking for a #6, his bowling and fielding will be an extra bonus.

  • Ed on January 30, 2014, 1:52 GMT

    How on earth can you justify selecting Dernbach and not Stokes. Dernbach was, as usual, nothing less than pathetic. Why do the selectors not learn - surely we should be building and trying to cement a team for the next World Cup - not just persevering with average players like Dernbach.......but then the side is selected bu Ashley Giles. possibly the least exciting player ever to put on an England shirt - so what do you expect....sigh......

  • Mark on January 30, 2014, 1:33 GMT

    @ScottStevo - totally agree. Being the best of a bad bunch doesn't make you good, let alone a shining light. To put his 100 at Perth into perspective, even Watson (the man who can't convert) got 100 on that track.

    Stokes, to me, looks like a slightly more skillful batsman than Broad, but much the same style... tends to just throw the bat at everything. Looks good when it comes off, like in Perth. Looks pretty ordinary when it doesn't, like every other test innings he played.

  • Dummy4 on January 29, 2014, 22:19 GMT

    Ben Stokes is a young cricketer with a lot of potential. However all the pundits seem to be going way overboard over his performaces, and that doesn't do anyone any good least of all Stokes. I'm glad somebody else can see it.

  • Peter on January 29, 2014, 20:50 GMT

    @ScottStevo. You're correct. The write-ups are a little over the top, however I do think he is a very valuable member to have in any side. Now if the English top order had performed, his inputs would have capped off any game. He offers a genuine 4th seamer option (no, he isn't a front line bowler) & is a crunching lower middle order batsman. But there does need to be slowing down of the write-ups, agreed.

  • Dummy4 on January 29, 2014, 17:52 GMT

    @ScottStevo you maybe right mate Stokes getting a tad over-hyped, and you don't know what you going to get from him. But you know what you're going to get from Dernbach. Pure unadulterated filth, every time. Out of those 2 I know who I'd prefer in my side.

  • Scott on January 29, 2014, 15:45 GMT

    I'm getting sick of this 'Ben Stokes - shining light' rubbish. He made one score from 8 innings and apparently was great? As opposed to what? His teammates who were ridiculously awful? Maybe a stand out, or for being young , but this whole shining light, amazing Stokes rubbish has to stop. He had a poor series for a number 6 and made 1 century and 0 half centuries from 8 innings. He didn't bowl that well either, although he picked up a few wickets, he was generally getting panned. In the ODI series he made one score of 70 out of 5 goes and got slammed for around 6 an over in every match with the ball. Is that really the performance of a shining light? Because of his unwarranted arrogance and his generally distasteful behaviour, he's somehow made himself appears useful?! I hope so. I'm more than happy to play against an Eng side with him at 6 or 3 and bowling 10 overs.

  • No featured comments at the moment.