Re: Bairstow v Foulkes

There are lots of things people forget.

Bairstow had an unbelievable 12 months with the bat for England prior to his broken leg. Before that he had more often then not been pretty average to not great. Even after that stellar year his overall record isn't that shit hot. His wicket keeping has always been comfortably below test standard.

There was really no necessity to rush him straight back in.

Foakes is by a million miles the better keeper, and his batting for a keeper is perfectly fine.

Alan Knott was the best keeper I have ever seen for England and his batting was rated by Mike Brearley as top class for a wicket keeping allrounder. Foakes' batting average over an admittedly shorter sample size is very similar.

I have never bought the argument that if a keeper costs you a few runs with the gloves he can make it up with the bat. Same as a bits and pieces spinner like a Joe Root.

There are certain absolutes which "Bazball" can't reinvent.

A proper keeper and proper bowlers are where you start. Otherwise it costs you.