One down...

[Tiresias]

Hurrah! It's a real question and not pornographic spam!

OK, following up on an article I was reading the other day, how do people select their third batsman in the batting line-up?

The article suggested the best batsman in the side should, typically, play at three (unless they are necessarily an opener). But since I am playing as England my best batsman is normally Kevin Pietersen - surely more of a number 4?

So, how do you select your third batsman? Best player in the side? The most adaptable? Another opener in case you lose a quick wicket? Or do you have a different and more cunning strategy?

[Chewitt]

I tend to go with someone with a high average in the hope they build a high score early on and thus keep the score ticking over, said player must also be solid and steady, nothing too outlandish as if i lose an early wicket i need somebody to come in and steady the ship. I found HD Ackerman to be an excellent number 3.

[Sureshot]

Ponting is a Number 3, I think Bradman and Richards were. You have to give your best batsman the most amount of time to score runs, if he happens to be an opener, then obviously open with him, if not, then you should play your best batsman at 3. For Essex I have Brady at 3, a regen who averages 60 in FC cricket and his OD average is now up to 40, because he averages about 100 this season.

[MarksNotts]

I always go for a solid defensive batman for No.3, just so that if an opener goes early i have someone coming in to steady things and not throw away another early wicket and prompt a collapse, i always play my best batsman at No.4.

[Screenwriters CC]

I always go for a solid defensive batman for No.3, just so that if an opener goes early i have someone coming in to steady things and not throw away another early wicket and prompt a collapse, i always play my best batsman at No.4.

I have to agree with MarksNotts of playing your best batsman at four and that is normally the prefered strategy within most cricket teams. One major reason for this is that it will usually keep them away from the first new ball although I do also see the reasoning for batting him/her at three and it can depend on the individual make-up of the team. For me, I prefer to have them at four with as MarksNotts says, a strong batsman who is defensive (or even another batsman who can open) at number three.

You can easily find out which players will play best in certain positions by testing them. In another thread, Chris Child's mentioned that ICC is suppose to represent as real of an experience as possible, which is why player's individual stats aren't part of the game. He mentioned that players must watch the batsman to work out their strengths and weaknesses and he gave the real-life example of Ramps who has been the top domestic batsman for many seasons in a row, but that he did not easily sit well within the international game during his career. I have a feeling that batsman in ICC may suit certain positions best but it is up to the user to test them for him/herself and work out the best balance for their team. Experience and a solid place within a certain batting slot may also help a batsman as it does in real life, but that would just be speculation on my part!

Good thread Tiresias and good debate so far.

[Hootington]

I usually go on the situation in hand. I try and have 3 potential opening batsmen in the side, obvious 1 and 2, but usually at 6 or 7 aswell so they can come in at 3 if we lose an early wicket, but i have three agressive batsmen that will come in at 3/4/5 if the openers do their job and then that extra opener at 6 or 7 can help rebuild with the keeper and/or the left over batsmen (normally kp who i bat at 4) if we lose a couple quick wickets in the middle. As for just a number 3 i like a batsmen who will take their time to get going, but once they get going, they can be quite aggresive, unless you have two really good openers that put on 300 run opening partnerships, in which case its best batsmen in at 3. I guess the main thing is to not have a set line up and leave it like that, try and be flexible, which will give you more options for all the situations you could face.

[qpeedore]

I usually have three openers in my team. One bats around 6 or 7 so he usually comes in when the new ball is due.

My number three is variable, but it's usually a balanced batsman so that I can adjust to the state of the game at the time.

[aus5892]

For Hampshire I have Ed Smith, my captain at number 3. He's an opener, and a quality batsman, so I think it's good for him to be there.

For Australia, I'm yet to replace Ponting at number 3. It's not necessarily your best batsman, but sometimes a player with pace bowling preferences is a good idea in case your openers get out early and he needs to face the new ball. Of course if that happens you can always bring in someone else.

[Mongrel]

Yeah, definately someone who has a preference for pace bowling. Has to be a quality player though, but generally one capable of grinding an innings out.

[Knoxen]

I play a random selection as to a number 3 batsman.

For instance, if I am playing a County Championship match, I would usually either go for my best batsman, such as Pieterson, to try to bat out time and get big scores.
However, I found that when I signed an overseas player, Misbah-ul-Haq, I found playing him at number 3 was extremely productive, since he averaged at 80+ in County matchs, and 66 in One Day matches.
Then again, if I start really well in a Twenty20, then I will send in a pinch hitter, someone like Bresnan, or McClaren, just to boost the runs, because I find sending in a "Number 3" like Pieterson or Ponting usually proves fatal in a Twenty20.

Don't know what others feel...