England and One Day Cricket?

[wpdavid]

its 40 overs this year

Oh OK, I'd missed that. As you say, not ideal for the future.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I'm of the mentality that you give your best batsmen as much time to bat as you possibly can. That's why I'm an advocate of Lara batting at 3 in ODIs and I pretty much like the idea of Pietersen at 3 in the England side. He's the only world class ODI batsman (aside from Trescothick) that England has right now, so they've got to give him enough time to carry the side if he must.

 

[marc71178]

A Facotr in this is that we play too many forms of the one day game which other counties simply dont

The rubbish this year of the C&G trophy into two groups is awful..... 50 over knockout

and the national league as 40 overs rubbish it should be 50 overs

then we might see something a little better

That is a factor, but how much of one is it when the main players play next to no domestic one day cricket?

 

[luckyeddie]

Funny you have a go at the 3 worcester players

No, but it's funny when I do:

The England selectors are scatty
picking three Worcester players AND fatty.
If you mixed them 'til yucky,
you'd get ONE if you're lucky -
Stand up, Kabram Soliblackatty.

 

[open365]

I think the only way for England to improve at ODIs is to take them as seriously as test matches, which includes winning a few games.

I don't think we're as bad a side as everyone makes out, and that when we win a few we will look quite dangerous, but unfortunately i'm not confident of that happening.

England should pick a croup of players they believe ar capable of playing ODI cricket and stick with them, there is far too much tinkering and random selections in ODIs.

In an ideal world, the side in IMO should look like this-

1.Prior
2.Trescothick
3.KP
4.Strauss
5.Bell
6.Flintoff
7.Collingwood
8.Blackwell/Gilo
9.Harmison
10.Jones
11.Anderson

This side should be treated completely differently from the test side, this means dropping Vaughan and Jones because Virgil is only there because he's captain(and Freddy is no worse) and i really don't see the point in playing 2 keepers.


7.

 

[savill]

In today's Colchester Evening Gazette there was an interview with Darren Gough, where he said that he'll be playing in the 2007 World Cup. What do you guys think? Admittedly, England have been 2 bowlers light in this series, so do you think that the performances in India have paved a way for his ODI return?

 

[luckyeddie]

In today's Colchester Evening Gazette there was an interview with Darren Gough, where he said that he'll be playing in the 2007 World Cup. What do you guys think? Admittedly, England have been 2 bowlers light in this series, so do you think that the performances in India have paved a way for his ODI return?

He and Shahid Afridi could dance a tango.

 

[BoyBrumby]

In today's Colchester Evening Gazette there was an interview with Darren Gough, where he said that he'll be playing in the 2007 World Cup. What do you guys think? Admittedly, England have been 2 bowlers light in this series, so do you think that the performances in India have paved a way for his ODI return?

It'd be a backward step, but we could do worse. That said I'd put Jonah & Tremlett ahead of him in the "seamers to come back" pile.

 

[Richard]

In the last 3 years or so we have seen English Test Cricket rise up and up, with famous away victories in the West Indies and South Africa, Seven home wins out of seven in 2004 and of course the historic 2005 Ashes win. We also recently secured a fantastic draw in India with half a team, this in a series everybody had written us off for following our first defeat in two years, away to a deservedly victorious Pakistan. basically recent times have been good and the future looks bright for test cricket in England.

I'd actually trace it back much, much further - after the dark days, the first blocks were put in place in 1990 - then things stayed much the same for a decade - lots of promise in Tests, very little to cheer about in ODIs after 1992. Since Duncan Fletcher has taken charge, English Test cricket has enjoyed plenty of success. Just occasionally there were disappointing failures to hold onto leads (Pak 01, NZ 01\02, Ind 02) but mostly we've been going well.

Because of this, in an optimistic wave of euphoria on September 12th last year and onwards, those less in the know have said because of all this, England can be looking to winning the World Cup next year in the West Indies. Anyone who has watched this series in India, the last one in Pakistan, or indeed any away series in recent years, and most at home, knows, that this is complete nonsense and that unless something miraculous happens, we will fall short once again in the World Cup, probably at the Super Eight stage.

We made the final of the last Champions Trophy, and held our own against the Aussies, but let's be honest, watching our One day side has been disappointing for English fans, to put it mildly. Where we stand in One Day Cricket now isn't too far off where I was accustomed with us standing in Test Cricket growing up ie nowhere, not good enoguh to challenge the best except for the occasional one-off performance that gives everybody hope.

So why is this? Most people seem to rank us as #2 in the world in Tests, and I doubt the Aussies will ever be less optimistic going into a home Ashes series than they will be in November. Why can our Test side scale such heights while our One day team just falls away?

Listening to "experts" a common view seems to be that we tinker far too much to our One day team in comparison to our Test side. Players like Kabir Ali, Vikram Solanki, Gareth Batty etc simply aren't good enough IMO to compete at the top level. World Cups are only every four years, while I certainly don't think we'll win it, I'd love for us to have a good run - if players like these are in the side Kenya will be licking their lips!

Okay, I am getting carried away, but what does everybody think? What side should we play in One day cricket, and why does the side we currently pick fail so consistently?

Test Cricket is my priority but the thought of us getting hammered in the Champions Trophy, then hammered in the VB Series before topping it all off by getting hammered in the World Cup is very disheartening.

I actually think the problem is that there's not enough of what's often called "tinkering". We so often see players like Vaughan, Solanki, both Joneses, Strauss, Shah, Hoggard, etc. picked for ODIs when they blatantly shouldn't be, however good they are in Tests.
The simple fact of the matter is - there are not a lot of good one-day players going around in England at present. This is not something that ANYONE can do anything about. We can, though, do something with the best players we have - ie, pick them. This has not been the case with the likes of Ealham, Read, Gough and Afzaal. If we don't even pick the few good players we have, there's absolutely nothing to be done.

 

[Richard]

England have some very good one day players but obviously lack any strength in depth and also i dont think they have aquired that mental resiliance and the one day game they they have in test matches. The currnet series in India we must not forget the injuies and difficult conditions faced against the Indian side. I would personaly look to make the ODI side as similar to the test side as possible. So something like:

1.Trescothick
2.Strauss
3.Bell/Vaughan
4.Pieterson
5.Flintoff
6.Colingwood
7.Read
8.Giles
9.Harmmison
10.Jones
11.Anderson

This may be a little weak on the batting front and obviously depends on fittness but if Flintof finds the form with the bat in ODIs that he has in Test matches and the bowlers perform then that is a pretty good side.

No, it's not - the bowling is very, very weak. None of the specialists are proven performers in ODIs - Giles is the closest.
And with Vaughan, Strauss and Collingwood in the side, be prepared for many of the collapses we've seen in India of late. And if both Trescothick and Pietersen fail, then REALLY watch-out.

 

[Richard]

Rikki has to be recalled.

Due to his single half-decent one-day season last year...

 

[Richard]

Can someone please explain the widespread assumption that Strauss should continue to open for our oneday side?

It's based on his magnificent achievement of scoring 332-for-twice-out against Bangadesh.
Against the ODI-standard teams, he currently averages 17.66 as an opener. Admittedly, he's only played more than 1 game as an opener against 2 of those ODI-standard teams.
Whereas at three he averages 35 and at four 34.42.
Still - almost all his success in those positions has come against West Indies.

 

[Richard]

I've been saying that for ages. His only hundred came at four, his averages at 3 and 4 are significantly higher than as opener....all the signs are there.

Yet even then, the only team he ever scored runs against was West Indies.
Scored 7 in his 1 innings against SL; averaged 22.50 against Ind; 17.33 against SA; 34.50 (from 2 innings) against NZ; and 28.60 against Pak.
Strauss at four is far from a guranteed success - unless West Indies are the oppo.

 

[Richard]

I think the only way for England to improve at ODIs is to take them as seriously as test matches, which includes winning a few games.

I don't think we're as bad a side as everyone makes out, and that when we win a few we will look quite dangerous, but unfortunately i'm not confident of that happening.

England should pick a croup of players they believe ar capable of playing ODI cricket and stick with them, there is far too much tinkering and random selections in ODIs.

In an ideal world, the side in IMO should look like this-

1.Prior
2.Trescothick
3.KP
4.Strauss
5.Bell
6.Flintoff
7.Collingwood
8.Blackwell/Gilo
9.Harmison
10.Jones
11.Anderson

This side should be treated completely differently from the test side, this means dropping Vaughan and Jones because Virgil is only there because he's captain(and Freddy is no worse) and i really don't see the point in playing 2 keepers.


7.

Not only should Prior be nowhere near the side, if he opens with Trescothick Trescothick faces first.

 

[Richard]

It'd be a backward step, but we could do worse. That said I'd put Jonah & Tremlett ahead of him in the "seamers to come back" pile.

And I'll bet they do come back ahead of him.
I also think most decent ODI sides will belt them out of the park.

 

[Richard]

Scaly, I don't think the team management are willingly sacrificing ODIs in England's case.

The "don't take it seriously" \ "are only using it as a breeding-ground" \ "are sacrificing it for Test success" is just a poor excuse.
Simple fact of the matter is, there aren't enough good players.
And anyone who seriously thinks ODIs can prepare someone for Tests needs their head examining.

 

[marc71178]

It'd be a backward step, but we could do worse. That said I'd put Jonah & Tremlett ahead of him in the "seamers to come back" pile.

Not to mention Harmison.

Then there's the likes of Clarke, Parker, Wharf, Uncle Tom Cobley...

 

[aussie]

well for me the best OD team may be:

Trescothick
Strauss
Vaughan/Bell/Shah/Joyce
KP
Freddie
Collingwood
Jones/Read
Blackwell/Giles
Harmison
Jones
Anderson

Vaughan/Bell/Shah/Joyce - the skipper wont be dropped just like that but his recent knee injury may make him rethink playing ODI's since we may never see the best of him again & due to the fact that his OD career has bee poor for such a good player. Thus i think Bell/Shah should be given a chance in the crucial #3 spot.

Jones/Read - Jones overall has been poor but he has showed on a few occassions he can contribute well at 7, plus we all know how Fletcher thinks so i think he will be persisted with. Read on the other hand in his OD career has shown he can be a real dangerous lower order hitter, while as we all know his glovework is the best in the land. Its a close call with these two, its a matter of who England prefer i guess.

Blackwell/Giles - I am a huge Blackwell fan, he has done well since his return with the ball, but with the bat he has been awfull. I dont want to totally write him off because i strongly believe if he can translate ANY of his county batting form to OD cricket he would give England a bit more strenght in the lower oder for sure. If not well Gilo has to be picked.

But even at full-strenght England OD side doesn't seem as strong as the test side.

 

[tooextracool]

England have some very good one day players but obviously lack any strength in depth.

IMO england have 2 world class ODI performers- flintoff and Pietersen, 1 good one - tresco, and one acceptable one -collingwood. The rest are all so poor that it defies belief that they are actually selected.

 

[tooextracool]

I dont see any reason why Read should replace Jones, given the fact that Geraint has come good in the last 2 ODIs.

give him a medal, a whole 2 ODIs, one of which was a dead one.