*Unofficial* England ODI team thread

[tooextracool]

gayle is very west indian, if you know what i mean. you wouldn't teach anyone to bat that way.

Well of course not, but its an interesting point you bring up. In places like India, Pakistan and SL where ODI cricket is so much more popular amongst the cricketing community, kids and young players grow up learning to bat with the sort of technique that would make them successful in the shorter format. In places like England where test cricket is more popular, most grow up aspiring to be the next Geoff Boycott or Ian Botham rather than the next Neil Fairbrother or Marcus Trescothick. Obviously that affects the quality of players produced and that sort of attitude is reflected in the quality of players we see playing for England today.

 

[analyst]

Well of course not, but its an interesting point you bring up. In places like India, Pakistan and SL where ODI cricket is so much more popular amongst the cricketing community, kids and young players grow up learning to bat with the sort of technique that would make them successful in the shorter format. In places like England where test cricket is more popular, most grow up aspiring to be the next Geoff Boycott or Ian Botham rather than the next Neil Fairbrother or Marcus Trescothick. Obviously that affects the quality of players produced and that sort of attitude is reflected in the quality of players we see playing for England today.

Actually its all about Flintoff and Pietersen these days and Monty has a hugee following. I don't know anyone following Boycott much, a few dads might remember Botham's exploits.

 

[Rant0r]

and australia grew up on WSC, now they will be growing up on ponting, gilchrist etc

pity with the warne era 'saving legspin' hasn't actually produced anymore

 

[tooextracool]

Actually its all about Flintoff and Pietersen these days and Monty has a hugee following. I don't know anyone following Boycott much, a few dads might remember Botham's exploits.

Monty does have a huge following, which is great for the fellow but is rather baseless for someone of his caliber.
You get the drift though, more young players want to win the next Ashes than win the next world cup and that sort of attitude translates to the kind of players produced.

 

[analyst]

It basically boils down to winning doesn't it ? And England are sort of hopeless at it apart from the fortunate 2005 Ashes win. If England win the cricket world cup or an ICC trophy, I think that would generate a lot of public support for cricket atleast for a few weeks, similar to the rugby.

 

[Rant0r]

It basically boils down to winning doesn't it ? And England are sort of hopeless at it apart from the fortunate 2005 Ashes win. If England win the cricket world cup or an ICC trophy, I think that would generate a lot of public support for cricket atleast for a few weeks, similar to the rugby.

they did win the CB series, which i thought was kind of a big deal, but no one seemed to care

 

[analyst]

Well actually I believe they kind of gave up after the tests and sort of passed out.

 

[Rant0r]

the barmy army including ronnie irani went home and forgot to celebrate

 

[analyst]

the barmy army including ronnie irani went home and forgot to celebrate

I am sure you were inconsolable too and passed on your warmest regards.

 

[Rant0r]

I am sure you were inconsolable too and passed on your warmest regards.

that test series was one of the biggest letdowns in history, which kind of killed the gloss of the one day series that followed i guess, with all the englishmen hanging themselves in the grandstand.

mate ronnie irani is the best cricketer to ever come from the bar to the ground... until luke pomersbach... but that was actually a true strory

 

[analyst]

that test series was one of the biggest letdowns in history, which kind of killed the gloss of the one day series that followed i guess, with all the englishmen hanging themselves in the grandstand.

mate ronnie irani is the best cricketer to ever come from the bar to the ground... until luke pomersbach... but that was actually a true strory

He is a diamond is our Ronnie, great larger than life personality. Very few who could match him.

 

[Rant0r]

He is a diamond is our Ronnie, great larger than life personality. Very few who could match him.

so we've moved on from the subject of cricket entirely ?

 

[analyst]

Well not entirely, paying tribute to Ronnie. Well there is not much to reflect over when the series was so comprehensively one sided. I know they all talk about Warne but it was all about Mcgrath for me, if Australia didn't have Mcgrath, I reckon England might have still been in with a chance. Ofcourse they didn't really go into the series with common sense as usual, divided, typical English tour to Australia in other words.

 

[Rant0r]

refreshing to hear someone else other than me thinking that it wasn't all about warne, clark was awesome that series too

 

[Richard]

Misbah Ul Haq for Pakistan, Gautam Gambhir for India, I am talking about shifting 20/20 perfomance to 50 over cricket not test cricket itself. Ofcourse they all had a fair bit of talent and most of the English players do have this talent, all 20 over cricket does is allows batsmen to be more expressive with their shots than they normally are because they are forced to do so.

If you fail to see my point and are so cynical about the whole thing, who is the right choice to open for England ?

There isn't one. There is no-one who has any obvious case to open for England in ODIs currently. I've said this plenty recently.

The only option is moderate middle-order batsmen or rubbish county players. Neither of which are remotely likely to be successful.

 

[Richard]

i think they need a plan... at the moment i think they are taking the names of all the regular county players then just throwing 11 of them on the ground and going with it, then doing the same for the nxt game

You can't make poor players into good ones by planning.

The neccessary plan is very simple: pick the best players available who are likely to be around come 2010/11 (and who aren't proven ODI failures). The fact that the selectors are unable to do basic stuff like this and prefer proven useless county players like Sajid Mahmood and serial ODI failures like Owais Shah (albeit his performance has looked-up beyond all previous levels in his last 10 innings) tells you all you need to know about why England have been so utterly useless at ODIs in the last 8 years.

 

[Richard]

i remember this argument about the county system years ago, but it's been a bit clouded by the fact that as a general rule england have been half decent for a few years, compared to say the late 80's and early 90's.

England were actually a damn good ODI side in the late-1980s and early-1990s, as well as a pretty good Test one in the early-1990s. The sheer wretchedness of the Test side in the second half of the 1980s is a separate matter.

The county game is of a far better standard now than it was in the 1980s, where it was shambolically amateurish. The problem is more to do with the attitude to limited-overs cricket in this country IMO - there are simply very few players with the skill.

And as I say, what doesn't help is that several of those few who do have the skill are ignored in favour of hopeless players.

 

[Richard]

and trescothick coming into the team on the back of one good season doesn't really surprise me

Trescothick had actually had two good seasons, which is a much fairer means of selection. He averaged 39 for Somerset in 1999 and 2000 combined.

 

[Richard]

Actually its all about Flintoff and Pietersen these days and Monty has a hugee following. I don't know anyone following Boycott much, a few dads might remember Botham's exploits.

In case you haven't noticed, all those players are excellent Test players. And MSP is certainly a very poor ODI player.

The point is not about who but what game-form. Tests are overwhelmingly the preferred game-form in this country, and while I don't mind that at all ODIs are un-favoured far too much for my liking, and it's not remotely surprising that England have had so few good one-day players in recent years.

 

[Rant0r]

You can't make poor players into good ones by planning.

The neccessary plan is very simple: pick the best players available who are likely to be around come 2010/11 (and who aren't proven ODI failures). The fact that the selectors are unable to do basic stuff like this and prefer proven useless county players like Sajid Mahmood and serial ODI failures like Owais Shah (albeit his performance has looked-up beyond all previous levels in his last 10 innings) tells you all you need to know about why England have been so utterly useless at ODIs in the last 8 years.

sounds like a plan to me

Trescothick had actually had two good seasons, which is a much fairer means of selection. He averaged 39 for Somerset in 1999 and 2000 combined.

lets not nitpick, point is he succeeded when more obvious talents did not.

England were actually a damn good ODI side in the late-1980s and early-1990s, as well as a pretty good Test one in the early-1990s. The sheer wretchedness of the Test side in the second half of the 1980s is a separate matter.

The county game is of a far better standard now than it was in the 1980s, where it was shambolically amateurish. The problem is more to do with the attitude to limited-overs cricket in this country IMO - there are simply very few players with the skill.

And as I say, what doesn't help is that several of those few who do have the skill are ignored in favour of hopeless players.

the county game could still be a better breeding ground, do they still send out plenty of a-tours ?