England XV

[Bazza]

OK guys I've been meaning to post this for a few dyas now (ie since before the VB series started), so it is no way indicative of recent performances.

I was going to suggest the following 15 for England's world cup squad:

Knight
Trescothick
Hussain
Shah
Vaughan
Stewart
Flintoff
Blackwell
Collingwood
Irani
White
Hollioake
Giles
Caddick
Hoggard

Now then - the thinking is a first choice XI would look a bit like this:

Knight
Trescothick
Hussain
Vaughan
Stewart
Flintoff
Blackwell
Hollioake
Giles
Caddick
Hoggard

Shah and Collingwood would be able to replace any batsman who got injured or was out of form (maybe Vaughan who's a little unproven in ODIs), or one of the allrounders if the batting needed strengthening, and Stewart would be the reserve opener.

White or Irani could come in for the all rounders like Blackwell or Hollioake if the bowling needed strengthening, or again in case of injury or poor form.

Trescothick could take the gloves in an emergency, the thinking being that there isn't enough room in the squad for another specialist keeper, and that you would be unlucky if anything happened to Stewie.

I think this side has a long, strong and flexible batting line up, with a couple of players at the top who can anchor and a few further down to get on with things later on (obviously they could be promoted depending on the match situation).

Caddick and Hoggard would open the bowling with Flintoff, Hollioake as back up, Giles is the spinner and Blackwell could bowl also. In fact given his recent performances you may wish to drop Giles and put in Shah or Collingwood who can bowl a few overs along with Vaughan if the bowling goes wrong.

Basically this side can bat down to 8 or 9 and has both depth and variety in the bowling department.

Anyway comments and opinions are welcome, but I would like to point out in no way am I saying this side will win the world cup, but merely that I feel it is the strongest one available to England currently and that if I was in charge of selection this is the 15 I would take to South Africa...

 

[chris.hinton]

To be Honest i agree but i would take the following:-

Older: Stewart, Trescothick,Vaughan,Hussain,Knight, Caddick, Irani,Giles,White

Younger players: Batty,Blackwell, Ali, Harminson, Anderson, Shah, Collingwood,

No Hoggard has he will not be good enough, No Kirkley who i have not been impressed with Flintoff i would not take because he gets injured . Hollioake has missed the boat

But i Changed my Mind over Batty he is 25 and will be good back up to Blackwell and Giles

Three spinners may be too much but we have some all-rounders like Irani,white, Colingwood

I will take Anderson and Harmision becasue they could unsettle batsman

My team for the first game would be

Trescothick
Knight
Hussain
Vaughan
Irani
Stewart
Collingwood
Blackwell
Caddick
Anderson
Harmison

So i would leave out Ali,Giles,Shah and Batty for the first game


We could use this as a Base for 2007 where at least 11 of the 15 will be included

[Edited on 17/12/2002 by chris.hinton]

 

[Rik]

I like Batty as a bowler and he shows fight and certainly has a future in the game, but he has done nothing so far to show that he is ready for an entire world up. They will end up picking Vaughan even though an average of 19.66 from 17 Matches is not good enough in my book. The same could be said of Shah but I don't know why he's in the ODI squad at all...he's churning out the runs in the Championship and not as many in the domestic OD leagues...yet they pick him for the ODI squad and he's never even thought of as Test material! Why?

 

[Rich2001]

I noticed that in all your squads you have Shah down....

However in commentary last night Ian Bothman was saying how Shah shouldn't even go to the world cup... his a average batsman by far better in the longer version of the game... slow in the field....and cannot bowl. In his place he feel a 3 Deimesional player such as V.Solanki should be there, Good batsman, Good Part time bowler.. and althletic in the field.....

All this after all that praising in the natwest series with Aus / Pak last year

Do you agree?

 

[Rik]

I have Shah down in my Test Teams if I can but he isn't really a ODI player. Solanki would be a good choice but there are players like if or when Pietersen becomes qualified for England then GET HIM IN!

In reply to your sig...Scotland...hmmm...nope...I mean they've got Dravid but he sometimes gets bogged down...Next year for Scotland maybe they can get "Big Hitting" Sanjay Bangar

 

[cozmiccoyoete]

Originally posted by Bazzaroodoo
Now then - the thinking is a first choice XI would look a bit like this:

Knight
Trescothick
Hussain
Vaughan
Stewart
Flintoff
Blackwell
Hollioake
Giles
Caddick
Hoggard

Hoggard as the first choice onedayer bowler?? Well i rest my case with that!


peace!

[Edited on 17/12/2002 by cozmiccoyoete]

 

[marc71178]

They will end up picking Vaughan even though an average of 19.66 from 17 Matches is not good enough in my book.

Don't base it all on stats - 17 games isn't anywhere near enough games to base an opinion on - and that stat is definitely false.

 

[wahindiawah]

Originally posted by marc71178

They will end up picking Vaughan even though an average of 19.66 from 17 Matches is not good enough in my book.

Don't base it all on stats - 17 games isn't anywhere near enough games to base an opinion on - and that stat is definitely false.

This from someone who has been judging bowlers from just 4 overs!! my my, what a turn around!

 

[marc71178]

Hoggard as the first choice onedayer bowler?? Well i rest my case with that!

27 wickets at 27.62 and an eco rate of 4.91.

Doesn't look too bad to me...

Especially when you consider that only 1 regular in the Indian ODI side averages better than that...

Look at your own quarter before slagging off others.

 

[Rik]

Originally posted by marc71178

They will end up picking Vaughan even though an average of 19.66 from 17 Matches is not good enough in my book.

Don't base it all on stats - 17 games isn't anywhere near enough games to base an opinion on - and that stat is definitely false.

Nope, the stat is correct, look at his Cricinfo Profile and you will see: 17 Matches, 16 Innings, 295 runs at 19.66

[Edited on 17/12/2002 by Rik]

 

[wahindiawah]

Originally posted by marc71178

Hoggard as the first choice onedayer bowler?? Well i rest my case with that!

27 wickets at 27.62 and an eco rate of 4.91.

Doesn't look too bad to me...

Especially when you consider that only 1 regular in the Indian ODI side averages better than that...

Look at your own quarter before slagging off others.

You missed the whole point, you quite rightly criticised other for writting off a bowler after just 17 matches, but you yourself happen to be someone who has written off player after just 4 overs!!

 

[Rik]

Originally posted by wahindiawah You missed the whole point, you quite rightly criticised other for writting off a bowler after just 17 matches, but you yourself happen to be someone who has written off player after just 4 overs!!

Yes but those 4 overs went for 44 runs...that's even worse figures than my Indoor League...

 

[marc71178]

Don't base it all on stats - 17 games isn't anywhere near enough games to base an opinion on - and that stat is definitely false.

Nope, the stat is correct, look at his Cricinfo Profile and you will see: 17 Matches, 16 Innings, 295 runs at 19.66

[Edited on 17/12/2002 by Rik] [/quote]

I meant relative to his actual ability.

 

[marc71178]

You missed the whole point, you quite rightly criticised other for writting off a bowler after just 17 matches, but you yourself happen to be someone who has written off player after just 4 overs!!

I was defending a batsman, and if you mean the great Balaji - I seem to remember someone claiming that add him to the India side and it'd be the best in the world...

I was just rebutting the statement.

 

[masterblaster]

How about Jamie Troughton, Ian Bell, Andrew Strauss?? They cant fit into this team???

 

[Rik]

Originally posted by masterblaster
How about Jamie Troughton, Ian Bell, Andrew Strauss?? They cant fit into this team???

Strauss isn't really a OD Player. Troughton they need more proof of (although it's odd that Anderson has been picked and he's 3 years younger than Troughton). With Bell, they need to see if he can recover from his "Annus Horriblus" last year.

 

[wahindiawah]

Originally posted by Rik

Yes but those 4 overs went for 44 runs...that's even worse figures than my Indoor League...

It doesn't matter as to whether those 4 overs went for 44 runs or 80 runs, the point is that a cricketer CANNOT be judge by his performance in less than 20 odds ODI (thats the norm), leave alone 4 overs.There are examples of great bowlers going for 8-10 runs per over in ODI, and that lad happen to have been playing in just his first match.

 

[wahindiawah]

Originally posted by marc71178

You missed the whole point, you quite rightly criticised other for writting off a bowler after just 17 matches, but you yourself happen to be someone who has written off player after just 4 overs!!

I was defending a batsman, and if you mean the great Balaji - I seem to remember someone claiming that add him to the India side and it'd be the best in the world...

I was just rebutting the statement.

Wrong! You said that Balaji is crap and simply cannot be taken seriously.Infact you added Balaji's name in the "overrated bowlers" list just on the basis of 24 balls.

 

[marc71178]

(although it's odd that Anderson has been picked and he's 3 years younger than Troughton).

Well, Troughton's injured and a batsman, whereas Anderson isn't (yet!) and is a bowler, so it's not that odd!

 

[marc71178]

Originally posted by wahindiawah

Originally posted by marc71178

You missed the whole point, you quite rightly criticised other for writting off a bowler after just 17 matches, but you yourself happen to be someone who has written off player after just 4 overs!!

I was defending a batsman, and if you mean the great Balaji - I seem to remember someone claiming that add him to the India side and it'd be the best in the world...

I was just rebutting the statement.

Wrong! You said that Balaji is crap and simply cannot be taken seriously.Infact you added Balaji's name in the "overrated bowlers" list just on the basis of 24 balls.