Vaughan to score an ODI ton before his 100th ODI?

[Richard]

He should open, as I think should Bell. They're probably the most orthodox players in our ODI side so most in need of the extra time to play their natural games. Of course, with the fielding restrictions in the first 15 the temptation is to put in stroke players first up, but I think SA today showed the virtue of having wickets in hand come the last 10 overs.

Vaughan / Tresco to open, Strauss 3 and Pietersen 4 with Flintoff(Bell for now) 5 and Collingwood 6, Jones 7, Giles 8 + 3 Fast Bowlers

People seem to have forgotten that just over 6 months ago Vaughan was opening and people were blaming his failings on opening, and saying once he was put at three the problems'd be sorted-out.
Funny how often these things are both-way syndrome.
IMO you simply can't justify Trescothick not opening the batting, nor Bell opening - how often has he ever opened (except for England-u19s)?
Yes, having wickets in hand is important, but Trescothick is one of the few assets for this current England ODI side, quite clearly the best batsman by a country mile (though Pietersen is coming-up very fast indeed) and he has to open, because he's capable of playing lots of different types of innings.
Personally I'd like currently to see something like:
Trescothick
AN Other (Strauss, I suppose)
?
Bell - possibly?
Pietersen
Flintoff
Read
Ealham
AN Other
Gough
Hoggard - maybe?
Never rated any of Prior, Simon Jones, Wharf, Mahmood, Geraint Jones, Kabir Ali, Key, Troughton, McGrath, Clarke, Harmison, Anderson, Batty, Blackwell, Snape, Kirtley, Shah, Collingwood, Vaughan, Solanki or Giles.
Never used to rate Hoggard, but he's worth another go - Bell and Strauss I'm not totally convinced about; Richard Johnson I'm struggling to work-out how 11 bowlers have been selected ahead of him (3.56-an-over at 21.72 - even if that is a little flattering it's hard to justify his exclusion). But England have had real problems for a long time now in ODIs.

 

[twctopcat]

People seem to have forgotten that just over 6 months ago Vaughan was opening and people were blaming his failings on opening, and saying once he was put at three the problems'd be sorted-out.
Funny how often these things are both-way syndrome.
IMO you simply can't justify Trescothick not opening the batting, nor Bell opening - how often has he ever opened (except for England-u19s)?
Yes, having wickets in hand is important, but Trescothick is one of the few assets for this current England ODI side, quite clearly the best batsman by a country mile (though Pietersen is coming-up very fast indeed) and he has to open, because he's capable of playing lots of different types of innings.
Personally I'd like currently to see something like:
Trescothick
AN Other (Strauss, I suppose)
?
Bell - possibly?
Pietersen
Flintoff
Read
Ealham
AN Other
Gough
Hoggard - maybe?
Never rated any of Prior, Simon Jones, Wharf, Mahmood, Geraint Jones, Kabir Ali, Key, Troughton, McGrath, Clarke, Harmison, Anderson, Batty, Blackwell, Snape, Kirtley, Shah, Collingwood, Vaughan, Solanki or Giles.
Never used to rate Hoggard, but he's worth another go - Bell and Strauss I'm not totally convinced about; Richard Johnson I'm struggling to work-out how 11 bowlers have been selected ahead of him (3.56-an-over at 21.72 - even if that is a little flattering it's hard to justify his exclusion). But England have had real problems for a long time now in ODIs.

Never one for sweeping changes eh richard?

 

[superkingdave]

What is so wrong with Gilo Richard? Indeed his ER is almost the same as Gough, whilst he can actually hold a bat.

 

[BoyBrumby]

IMO you simply can't justify Trescothick not opening the batting, nor Bell opening - how often has he ever opened (except for England-u19s)?
Yes, having wickets in hand is important, but Trescothick is one of the few assets for this current England ODI side, quite clearly the best batsman by a country mile (though Pietersen is coming-up very fast indeed) and he has to open, because he's capable of playing lots of different types of innings.
Personally I'd like currently to see something like:
Trescothick
AN Other (Strauss, I suppose)
?
Bell - possibly?
Pietersen
Flintoff
Read
Ealham
AN Other
Gough
Hoggard - maybe?
Never rated any of Prior, Simon Jones, Wharf, Mahmood, Geraint Jones, Kabir Ali, Key, Troughton, McGrath, Clarke, Harmison, Anderson, Batty, Blackwell, Snape, Kirtley, Shah, Collingwood, Vaughan, Solanki or Giles.
Never used to rate Hoggard, but he's worth another go - Bell and Strauss I'm not totally convinced about; Richard Johnson I'm struggling to work-out how 11 bowlers have been selected ahead of him (3.56-an-over at 21.72 - even if that is a little flattering it's hard to justify his exclusion). But England have had real problems for a long time now in ODIs.

It isn't that I don't want Tres to open, rather that if we keep playing Vaughan (which we will) & Bell (which we probably will) they are the two of our top 7/8 batters that are least able to go out & play shots from scratch. I'd have Tres come in @ first-down only because he's more able to play his shots from the off.

Ealham is a bit of a leftfield call. Now I like Ealham a lot, he bowls wicket-to-wicket, which is a great virtue in ODIs & is no mug with the bat. I can't help but think his time is past tho. Maybe if he were 5-6 years younger.

Not so sure about Hoggy as a ODI bowler. Like Ali he seems to find it hard to adjust his length to the slightly fuller-pitch needed.

Harsh on Colly & Gilo there, I think. Still think Collingwood is our most likely Thorpe-esque strike manipulator (not quite in the same league tho, obviously) &, whatever merits Vaughan's (& KP's too, to a lesser extent) part-time offies have, they aren't sufficient to dispense with a specialist spinner.

 

[Richard]

Never one for sweeping changes eh richard?

Too darn many of the things - Knight dropped 2 or 3 times, Hick (with an average of 37 and 3 or 4 poor games in a row) dropped, Alleyne never given a fair crack, Ealham dropped because of 2 bad games, Mullally dropped because he was rested and they forgot to recall him, Caddick dropped 2 or 3 times, Stewart dropped in favour of James Foster, Thorpe dropped in favour of Vaughan, the list goes on...

 

[Richard]

What is so wrong with Gilo Richard? Indeed his ER is almost the same as Gough, whilst he can actually hold a bat.

Get rid of his games against Bangladesh, Zimbabwe et al - gets a bit worse.
And worse to come, too - he's always seemed to escape a massive hammering that would raise it to the 4.5-4.6-an-over sort of mark.
He's a fingerspinner - he can't be very effective for that long.

 

[Richard]

It isn't that I don't want Tres to open, rather that if we keep playing Vaughan (which we will) & Bell (which we probably will) they are the two of our top 7/8 batters that are least able to go out & play shots from scratch. I'd have Tres come in @ first-down only because he's more able to play his shots from the off.

If you're going to play Bell he can't bat in the top 3 IMO, he's not done that in his entire career - let alone open.

Ealham is a bit of a leftfield call. Now I like Ealham a lot, he bowls wicket-to-wicket, which is a great virtue in ODIs & is no mug with the bat. I can't help but think his time is past tho. Maybe if he were 5-6 years younger.

He's 35 - and he's the sort of player for whom age and fitness is not a major issue, he's never been lightning in the field but equally he's always been pretty darn good.
I've felt ever since I thought about the matter that he's amongst the best 2 or 3 ODI bowlers in the country and nothing has changed over the 7 years since.

Not so sure about Hoggy as a ODI bowler. Like Ali he seems to find it hard to adjust his length to the slightly fuller-pitch needed.

Exactly - which is why I'm still not fully convinced about him. I do think he's a better bet than most around currently.

Harsh on Colly & Gilo there, I think. Still think Collingwood is our most likely Thorpe-esque strike manipulator (not quite in the same league tho, obviously)

Collingwood against the up-to-standard teams: average 27.16. Thorpe did just a bit better than that if I remember rightly.

&, whatever merits Vaughan's (& KP's too, to a lesser extent) part-time offies have, they aren't sufficient to dispense with a specialist spinner.

Why pick a specialist spinner when he's not amongst the best side relative to the conditions?
Best bowlers - never mind what they bowl.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Why pick a specialist spinner when he's not amongst the best side relative to the conditions?
Best bowlers - never mind what they bowl.

Couldn't disagree more. With the exception of Harmy & Flintoff (who are genuinely quick) all our other front-line bowlers are medium/medium-fast right arm seamers.

If we don't pick Ash for some variety we're making it even easier for the oppo. Batter is set against a right-arm med-fast bowler so we bring on....well, you see the point I'm making.

If you're going to play Bell he can't bat in the top 3 IMO, he's not done that in his entire career - let alone open.

I suspect after KP's form that when Fred is back fit Bell will be the one to miss out. That doesn't alter my opinion that he needs to open or bat no lower than 3. I don't see him as flexible enough to bat lower.

Collingwood against the up-to-standard teams: average 27.16. Thorpe did just a bit better than that if I remember rightly.

Of course he did; Thorpe is unquestionably the better player. But Colly is the batter most suited to that type of role. Of the others currently in favour ODI-wise the next best bet would probably be Solanki, but he's too inconsistent to be entrusted with it.

 

[superkingdave]

Get rid of his games against Bangladesh, Zimbabwe et al - gets a bit worse.
And worse to come, too - he's always seemed to escape a massive hammering that would raise it to the 4.5-4.6-an-over sort of mark.
He's a fingerspinner - he can't be very effective for that long.

Unless i'm mistaken, if you get rid of the minnows from both's careers and Gilo's ER is better than Gough's.

 

[marc71178]

Why should he explain it, when its obvious to everyone?

The term used was 'not very good'.

Yes, and on what basis does he say this?

 

[marc71178]

But Vaughan's average - against the up-to-standard sides - is aboninable for a supposed specialist batsman (23.87 presently).

It's actually over 28.

 

[Richard]

No, it's over 28 only when you include the games against the substandard sides.
Which I clearly stated I had removed.

 

[Richard]

Unless i'm mistaken, if you get rid of the minnows from both's careers and Gilo's ER is better than Gough's.

Gough has bowled in 9 games against substandard sides (1 each against Kenya, Holland, UAE and Bangladesh, and 5 against post-WC2003-Zimbabwe).
Out of 145 matches (I refuse to include the Asia-ROW game) that's hardly going to make a difference.

 

[Richard]

Couldn't disagree more. With the exception of Harmy & Flintoff (who are genuinely quick) all our other front-line bowlers are medium/medium-fast right arm seamers.

If we don't pick Ash for some variety we're making it even easier for the oppo. Batter is set against a right-arm med-fast bowler so we bring on....well, you see the point I'm making.

No, I don't.
I've never believed in the "getting used to" argument for a minute.
Doesn't matter how used you get to a style of bowling, it doesn't make accurate bowling (especially if the wicketkeeper is standing-up) any easier to score off.
Anyway, you can hardly say Flintoff and Gough, for instance, are comparable just because they're right-armers and mostly bowl over-the-wicket to the right-hander, because their angles and height are totally different.
In my view it's very easy to score off a fingerspinner in a one-day game unless the pitch is turning, so therefore a better option is to pick a medium-fast seamer of equal accuracy.
If you've got 4 accurate fast-medium\medium-fast seamers in your team, a fingerspinner is exactly what you don't want - it lets the pressure off, the batsman can use his feet easily. Whereas if you've got yet another seamer with the 'keeper up coming on, it's almost suffocating.
Always, remember, of course, that the accuracy needs to be there - if you're wayward it doesn't matter what you bowl, you'll still get hammered.

I suspect after KP's form that when Fred is back fit Bell will be the one to miss out. That doesn't alter my opinion that he needs to open or bat no lower than 3. I don't see him as flexible enough to bat lower.

Personally I'd prefer Bell to Vaughan - I see no reason why Flintoff can't captain competantly.
If Bell makes any runs he's not going to make them at three, I repeat that - he just hasn't ever batted there, and there must be a reason for that.

Of course he did; Thorpe is unquestionably the better player. But Colly is the batter most suited to that type of role. Of the others currently in favour ODI-wise the next best bet would probably be Solanki, but he's too inconsistent to be entrusted with it.

What type of role? That bloody "finisher" stuff that people go on about too much, because hardly anyone has ever been a "specialist" at it.
Read is perfectly capable of playing it if neccessary - yes, if you ask me he's a better ODI player than Collingwood, and you'll see what I mean if you look at his one-day stats in the last 2 years.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Personally I'd prefer Bell to Vaughan - I see no reason why Flintoff can't captain competantly.
If Bell makes any runs he's not going to make them at three, I repeat that - he just hasn't ever batted there, and there must be a reason for that.

I see him as an opener. It's where he's looked most comfortable for England in ODIs.

What type of role? That bloody "finisher" stuff that people go on about too much, because hardly anyone has ever been a "specialist" at it.Read is perfectly capable of playing it if neccessary - yes, if you ask me he's a better ODI player than Collingwood, and you'll see what I mean if you look at his one-day stats in the last 2 years.

Thorpe, Fairbrother....Bevan, of course....

& I might take Read over Geriant (his unorthodox style is ideal for the last few over, but as an attacking shot maker, not a nurdler), but not over Collingwood.

No, I don't.
I've never believed in the "getting used to" argument for a minute.Doesn't matter how used you get to a style of bowling, it doesn't make accurate bowling (especially if the wicketkeeper is standing-up) any easier to score off.
Anyway, you can hardly say Flintoff and Gough, for instance, are comparable just because they're right-armers and mostly bowl over-the-wicket to the right-hander, because their angles and height are totally different.
In my view it's very easy to score off a fingerspinner in a one-day game unless the pitch is turning, so therefore a better option is to pick a medium-fast seamer of equal accuracy.
If you've got 4 accurate fast-medium\medium-fast seamers in your team, a fingerspinner is exactly what you don't want - it lets the pressure off, the batsman can use his feet easily. Whereas if you've got yet another seamer with the 'keeper up coming on, it's almost suffocating.
Always, remember, of course, that the accuracy needs to be there - if you're wayward it doesn't matter what you bowl, you'll still get hammered.

Why do you think slow-balls are so effective in one-dayers Richard? Because the batter isn't expecting them! They're set to receive the ball at the bowlers usual pace. It messes up their timing.

& you're seriously trying to suggest that the is no more similarity between two right arm seamers than a right arm seamer & an orthodox slow-left armer?! Well that's just beyond an answer, or, indeed, parody!

 

[Richard]

I see him as an opener. It's where he's looked most comfortable for England in ODIs.

In 3 games... against the might of Zimbabwe...

Thorpe, Fairbrother....Bevan, of course....

BEVAN!!!!!!
That is one of the things that infuriates me the most!!!!
Michael Bevan categorically is not a specialist at "finishing" - he is a quite magnificent one-day player who is capable of being a "starter" (as you'd see if you'd watched him bat at three for Yorks, NSW and Sussex) and a "middler" with equal brilliance!!!!!!!
As for Fairbrother, well, he's practically an English Bevan (ie good - but not as good as his Australian counterpart).
Thorpe isn't incapable of starting or finishing, either, but his best role is in the 15-40 over period, the "middler" period.

& I might take Read over Geriant (his unorthodox style is ideal for the last few over, but as an attacking shot maker, not a nurdler), but not over Collingwood.

Why not?
What evidence is there that Collingwood is a good ODI player at all.

Why do you think slow-balls are so effective in one-dayers Richard? Because the batter isn't expecting them! They're set to receive the ball at the bowlers usual pace. It messes up their timing.

Slower-balls are overrated IMO - most batsmen can pick most bowlers' slower-balls.
Anyway, that's totally different to bringing-on a slow bowler after seamers - the batsman can clearly see the difference and can adjust to it. More significantly still, he can think about adjusting to it.

& you're seriously trying to suggest that the is no more similarity between two right arm seamers than a right arm seamer & an orthodox slow-left armer?! Well that's just beyond an answer, or, indeed, parody!

No, I'm not saying the dissimilarity is comparable.
I'm saying to say Gough and Flintoff are alike bowlers, just because they're right-armers and tend to bowl over-the-wicket, is folly.

 

[steds]

As for Fairbrother, well, he's practically an English Bevan (ie good - but not as good as his Australian counterpart).

WAS practically an English Bevan

 

[Richard]

Well... I imagine he still is.
Playing career over or not, I was still sad to see him go - anyone can have one bad season, and I'll always wonder whether it was maybe premature.

 

[superkingdave]

I think he enjoys his new career anyway

 

[Richard]

What's he up to, again?