A worrying thing, for me, is that Joe Root – very fine batsman though he undoubtedly is at Test level – continues to evade what I regard as his true calling, or responsibility, in the England side. Sure, he’s been one of England’s all-time greats; but that is irrelevant for the thrust of this piece!
Overall, Root has tried the crucial Number 3 spot a considerable number of times, in 30 of all his 104 first innings, starting with T2 to T4 in December 2013 during the Ashes series under Captain Cook. Then a long gap: his next appearance at Number 3 coming two and a half years later, against Pakistan (at home) in July 2016. He continued in that spot for the following series against Bangladesh (away) and India (away).
Yet despite doing well during the India matches, he returned to batting at Number 4 for the following home series against South Africa and the West Indies during the summer of 2017, and after that for the Ashes series Down Under (November 2017 to January 2018). Then dipping his toe in the number 3 water in TI – though not in T2 – against New Zealand (away) in early-2018.
Root tried his hand batting at number 3 again in the following home series against Pakistan and against India in summer of 2018, though reverted to number 4 in T5 of that India series. And so it went on. In the following three-match series in Sri Lanka…you’ve guessed it…he continued at Number 4…not long afterwards (after one more series) being back at 3 for (most of) the Ashes series of summer 2019, then ducking back to number 4 for the next series – vs NZ (away) and vs South Africa (away) – before mixing batting at Numbers 3 and 4 against WI (home) and Pakistan (home) during the summer of 2020.
He was back at Number 4 for the next five series until having another go at Number 3 for the three-match against WI (away) in March 2022; yet again reverting to Number 4 until a solitary appearance at first drop in T1 against in Pakistan in early-October 2024. It was adieu to that position rather than au revoir! England have played a further four series since then (plus hosting one match versus Zimbabwe).
Yo-Yo Feature
Plotting these appearances at first drop reveals a yo-yo feature, so frequent have been the switches.
From December 2013 through to March 2022, Root occupied the Number 3 spot a total of 30 times in 104 of England’s first innings: 29%. That being from his 13th through to his 116th innings.
And during July 2016 to March 2022, it was more intensive: 27 times at Number 3 in 74 innings, 36.5%, occurring from his 43rd to his 116th innings. A veritable yo-yo act.
Balance of Performance
Whilst it is the case that Joe Root has performed better at Number 4 than at Number 3, this hasn’t been by a large distance: by one-fifth on batting average in these two positions. Yet he seems to have developed a strong aversion to returning to the number 3 spot, in effect for the past four and a quarter years.
The (presumed) Conventional Wisdom
If a poll were to be taken of commentators on Test cricket, the conventional wisdom to emerge would, I presume, be that – in general, taking all participating nations – batsmen are thought to perform rather better at number 4 than at 3. However, of the fifteen England batsmen who are, validly, Joe Root’s comparitors since 1945, only four of them – Denis Compton, Peter May, Keith Fletcher and Allan Lamb – have borne out this belief – as detailed in the Appendix.
Of the other eleven comparitors, as many as nine have performed distinctly better at number 3 than at 4; and with Graveney and Hussain doing better there by a smaller margin – 8%. This is testimony to their versatility, able to hold the fort after an early breakthrough by the opposition whilst also being able to flourish and play like a classical number four when a substantial opening partnership has been forged.
Also surprising (to me), is that four of these comparitors have actually done materially better, on scoring average, at number 3 than at the, often coveted, number 5 spot: Ken Barrington, Tom Graveney, Ted Dexter and Derek Randall – with Gower and Gatting doing similarly well in these two positions.
The Interlopers
Meanwhile, the selectors and captains Cook (until Dec 2017) and Stokes (from June 2022) – with Root in the job in between – have acceded to his wishes; and, during the New Regime under Brendon McCullum (BMC), they have “thrown lambs to the slaughter”: a frequently fidgety and over-impetuous Ollie Pope for the bulk of the time – having a total of 73 innings under BMC, from age 24 and a half through to a couple of weeks before his 28th birthday, nearly always at Number 3, unless Bethell was present.
Pope has averaged 33.3 in this position under BMC (putting aside his two matches against lowly Ireland and Zimbabwe) – perhaps “acceptable” as a summary figure, though inconsistency and his manner of batting are the warranted criticisms.
Pope has been briefly interspersed with, and then superseded by, a young and inexperienced Jacob Bethell – from when having recently turned 21 years of age through to his latest stint at age 22 and eight months. Manifestly, a high calibre batsman; but despite strong showings in second digs, in his nine first innings – eight of them at Number 3 – Bethell has moved above 16 runs only once (scoring 74 versus New Zealand in T3 of the most recent series).
A regular feature of Bethell’s dismissals when at first drop is being caught either behind the stumps or in the slips cordon, often being tempted into driving at pace deliveries outside off stump (some of which could have been safely left alone). This is unbecoming of a batsman in this position in the order, especially as he’s arrived at the crease in England’s first innings with the scores on: 9, 12, 32, 7, 35, 16, 45 and 8. Just three moderately good starts in that series of eight! Virtually opening the innings on the other five occasions. (In only one match being tried elsewhere in the order – at Number 6 vs India, for scores of 6 and 5.)
One notable commentator has condoned Bethell’s first innings failures by saying he’s a quick learner, usually making amends in his second innings – perhaps true, though a premature injection, it seems, in view of the trend. And this is certainly untrue of the latest three match series against New Zealand – with his second innings scores of 14, naught and naught.
Contrast the younger of these two “lambs” with a feature of top class batsmen, tending to reach a peak of capability in their mid to late-twenties, and quite often later than that. Below are the peak periods for all of the comparitors, plus Kevin Pietersen and Mike Atherton. The implication is all too obvious!
Denis Compton when age 29-31
Tom Graveney hit his straps from age 26
Peter May at his best from age 24-28
Ken Barrington best when in his early-mid-30s
Colin Cowdrey best during age 25-33
Ted Dexter maturing early, at age 24
Keith Fletcher at his peak from around age 28-30
Derek Randall best from age 26-32
Allan Lamb best from age 28-30 and later on when age 34-37
David Gower hit his straps from the very start, at age 21
Mike Gatting best at age 27-30
Alec Stewart at his best from age 28-31 and age 33-36
Nasser Hussain best during age 28-30 with a resurgence during age 33-36
Kevin Pietersen best at age 26-28
Mike Atherton: best early on at age 21-22, followed by a lengthy resurgence at age 25-30
Michael Vaughan at his best from age 26-30 and, after a break, from age 32-33
Ian Bell best from age 23-29 and age 31-33
The grand average peak, at its initiation, for these batsmen works out to be age 26.
In Joe Root’s case, blossoming early on, from age 22 through to age 26, though with no discernible slumps in form of any note thereafter. The comparable age for Aussie and Indian batsmen post-WW2 might be a little lower: I haven’t done the analysis as this isn’t relevant to the point I’m making in an England – and quintessentially English – context.
In view of the discussion and argument so far, I feel that all this recent heady laudation of Joe Root is somewhat overdone – perhaps misplaced even. Yet I believe he has the batting talent and the repertoire of shots for the number 3 spot as shown, in part, by his ten innings opening the batting for England in the Ashes series of 2013/14, in which he averaged 37.7 – scoring 30, 68 and 180, accompanied by two other starts (11 and 16) and 13 not out. This done when facing the high calibre deliveries of Mitchell Starc, Ryan Harris, James Pattinson and Peter Siddle.
And Root has shown he can handle the Number 3 spot even when England get off to a poor start, losing their first wicket for less than 30 runs: ie when the openers have each made no more than about 14 runs, together facing some 7 to 9 overs.
There isn’t a strong correlation between a poor England start – as indicated, being put at under 30 runs – and Root himself making a relatively low score (for him) – put at under 40 runs – when coming in at Number 3. On two-fifths of England’s poor start occasions during his Test career, Root when at Number 3 has made 40 plus runs. So I think it is fully reasonable to conclude he has the equipment to succeed at the Number 3 spot.
As the following charts show, though, he’s been on a declining trend in that spot. Both including and excluding his mega innings, in Pakistan, of 254. I think he’s talked himself into it!
It remains to note that, overall at Number 3 for England, Joe Root’s batting average is 36.9…and that when his mega innings of 254 in Pakistan is excluded, it reduces to 33.1 – still not too bad!
JMB to be Commissioned?
To move to the potential future action: as further context I ask you – the reader – to acknowledge that the crucial skill of researchers – contrary to so many lay persons’ beliefs – lies not in the delving into, and beavering away at, reams of data. Rather, it is having the intuition and imagination, backed by some informed insight, to formulate potentially rewarding hypotheses for testing. As illustrated so well by the work of the greatest scientist of the twentieth century, Albert Einstein. To quote him:
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honours the servant and has forgotten the gift.
Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited to all we now know and understand, while imagination embraces the entire world, and all there ever will be to know and understand.
Here, my working hypothesis for testing is that Joe Root’s problem with the number 3 spot really has little, or nothing at all, to do with his scoring sequences there, nor his ability to master that position. Instead, it is predominantly – or wholly – a psychological barrier that he has created and is now confronted with. He may well be intimidated by it…viewing it as a rather forbidding place. If this is confirmed after clinical probing, his aversion to going in at first drop can, surely, be overcome…with the right sort of help.
In the team’s interest, Brendon McCullum should give him Mike Brearley’s (JMB) telephone number and get him to scoot down to London’s NW3 district where JMB still provides psychoanalysis and psychotherapy services. In general, a series of about 12 to 15 weekly sessions is sufficient to see a significant improvement in a patient’s problems, and could be expected in regard to Root’s aversion. And, hopefully, JMB will also tell him to put away that inherently risky (attempted) glide through the slips area, with plenty of video recordings shown to drive this point home.
