Major England ODI Overhaul Needed

[gunner]

England need to overaul their entire ODI setup,
There are players in the county team who are much mroe deserving of an odi spot than some which are already there.
The entire line up is messed up
Bopara is a much more equipped batsman than flintoff and they send flintoff before him?
flintoff needs to be in the no 6 slot where england need his power hitting at the end.(time to get over it and not expect him to come in at 4 and play like clarke,ponting,inzi,yousuf and kallis)

Owais Shah needs a call up and a couple of others cos at the moment englands batting is more feeble than bangladesh's batting.

Sure they are missing Tresco and Harmy but thats no excuse for some of the big blunders they have made in tactics, batting positions and squad selections

 

[Langeveldt]

England are just a poor ODI team, they can tinker and change all they like, they have been doing that since 1999 and its got them nowhere.. Why would it work now?

 

[simmy]

A new coach is needed. Their mental game needs to change.

 

[ozone]

The fact is, England still go into matchs with a historic approach - why have three 'dabbers' in the top three whilst every other team in world cricket is using big hitters. They need to use the powerplays with someone such as Loye, Benning or even Flintoff. Until the selectors (+ particularly coach) realise this, England will have no consistency.

 

[open365]

Calling for an overhaul is all well and good but when you think about you can't get past the fact we just haven't got the quality of players other international sides have

 

[Langeveldt]

Calling for an overhaul is all well and good but when you think about you can't get past the fact we just haven't got the quality of players other international sides have

Pietersen, Flintoff? Mahmood?

 

[open365]

Pietersen, Flintoff? Mahmood?

Vaughan, Strauss, Mahmood?

 

[ozone]

Calling for an overhaul is all well and good but when you think about you can't get past the fact we just haven't got the quality of players other international sides have

We do have players with quality but the problem is they aren't in the side/in the right position/performing. Imagine the quality, albeit raw talent rather than experience, of players such as Bopara, Broad, Shah, Panesar and Cook. The qualities there but, as mentioned before, the attitude is wrong. These players are probably the future and there is no end of talent there.

 

[open365]

Our attitude is wrong?

What the hell does that mean?

Those players you mentioned are nothing more than run of the mill players the England produce so many off, they are not going to develop into world beaters.

 

[silentstriker]

They are the 2nd best Test side in the world, changing anything that might negatively effect their Test ability is ludicrous.

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

Calling for an overhaul is all well and good but when you think about you can't get past the fact we just haven't got the quality of players other international sides have

NZ don't exactly have a huge pool of quality players! But they do the basics right.

(Admittedly we suck at 'real' cricket though)

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

They are the 2nd best Test side in the world, changing anything that might negatively effect their Test ability is ludicrous.

Totally seperate sides for Tests and ODI's?

 

[ozone]

Our attitude is wrong?

What the hell does that mean?

The fact that Vaughan, Bell and Strauss takes 20 balls to get off the mark. Young players aren't taught the importance of hitting runs from the start. I agree that the players mentioned will just end up as mediocre players if they aren't given the right signals. English cricket is to old fashioned for us to be best in the world.

Also I don't think that English players getting 10s and 20s in ODIs does anything for 'test confidance' and that dropping them would not have the negative impacts people expect. Having an ODI team made up of young players grooming them for test level may not make us the best ODI team in the world but would give ODI cricket a meaning for England.

 

[open365]

NZ don't exactly have a huge pool of quality players! But they do the basics right.

(Admittedly we suck at 'real' cricket though)

NZ have a hell of a lot mroe talent than England do.

That's not a team attitude, that's how they play, KP and Flintoff score quickly, Bell Strauss Joyce and Vaughan score slowly, it's just who they are.

 

[ozone]

That's not a team attitude, that's how they play, KP and Flintoff score quickly, Bell Strauss Joyce and Vaughan score slowly, it's just who they are.

Well, using them in the order they are being used in at the moment is never going to work (consistently), hence the overhaul. All these players possess talent and (except Joyce) are key members of the Test team. To make the point again, ODI cricket needs to serve a purpose for England, even if it is only to see how a young player fairs in international cricket.

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

NZ have a hell of a lot mroe talent than England do.

That's not a team attitude, that's how they play, KP and Flintoff score quickly, Bell Strauss Joyce and Vaughan score slowly, it's just who they are.

What I am trying to say is, surely there are many more players who score quicker than Strauss, Joyce, Bell and Vaughan. England have quite a large pool of players dont they? Defo more than NZ by far

 

[silentstriker]

Totally seperate sides for Tests and ODI's?

And coaching and support staff? Yea, ideally you would have a cricket side and an ODI side, but that's not feasable. You should never sacrifice anything in your test side for any gains in ODI side IMO.

 

[wpdavid]

Totally seperate sides for Tests and ODI's?

I occasionally wonder whether England might actually be the one side in the world who would benefit from something approaching that. Obviously most other countries' oneday sides are hugely dominated by test players but England have been so ****e at these games for so long now that you wonder if something radical is needed. If nothing else, having 11 players who really want to be there would help.

 

[open365]

Well, using them in the order they are being used in at the moment is never going to work (consistently), hence the overhaul. All these players possess talent and (except Joyce) are key members of the Test team. To make the point again, ODI cricket needs to serve a purpose for England, even if it is only to see how a young player fairs in international cricket.

That's exactly the kind of attitude England don't want.

Like SS said, the two forms of the game should be treated seperately.

The order has **** all to do with it, Joyce Bell Strauss and vaughan are just slow end off, batting them anywhere will not change that, and just because they are good test players doesn't mean they should get the free ride in ODIs that they have been getting.

 

[open365]

What I am trying to say is, surely there are many more players who score quicker than Strauss, Joyce, Bell and Vaughan. England have quite a large pool of players dont they? Defo more than NZ by far

We do have a large pool as we have 18 county sides, but a lot of the ones performing well in domestic cricket aren't seen as being able to cope with international cricket and a conservative coach like Fletcher will keep on ignoring them.