Drop Vaughan, keep Strauss

[social]

I suggest letting him prove that he is a good one day batsman first. If he scores 200 test centuries in that time - or even if that time never comes - then so be it. If he continues to fail against county attacks in one day cricket, that should really tell you something...

So these are his one day figures for last season

http://aus.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2006/ENG_LOCAL/C+G/STATS/ENG_LOCAL_C+G_AVS_BAT_HIGHEST_AVS.html

How many more years of topping the national averages would you like to see before he's deemed to be good enough

And as for the county circuit being a decent barometer for ODIs, have a look at the second name on the list - Paul friggin' Nixon

 

[Prince EWS]

So these are his one day figures for last season

http://aus.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2006/ENG_LOCAL/C+G/STATS/ENG_LOCAL_C+G_AVS_BAT_HIGHEST_AVS.html

How many more years of topping the national averages would you like to see before he's deemed to be good enough

And as for the county circuit being a decent barometer for ODIs, have a look at the second name on the list - Paul friggin' Nixon

Well, he only played three games in that competition. Obviously he has some ability to play one day cricket - I'd just like to see him do it domestically and prove himself a bit more for another season. His overall OD stats are pretty dire.

 

[Perm]

I really think England need to drop both of them, obviously Trescothick will fill one of the vacancies when he comes back into the set-up (providing his mental state is good enough), while Ian Bell isn't a bad idea to partner him at the top of the order.

 

[Prince EWS]

I really think England need to drop both of them, obviously Trescothick will fill one of the vacancies when he comes back into the set-up (providing his mental state is good enough), while Ian Bell isn't a bad idea to partner him at the top of the order.

Then you have the question of who to bat at #3 though. (Or if someone is going to act smart and say Pietersen, then I'll rephrase to "who to replace Strauss with." )

 

[shortpitched713]

Then you have the question of who to bat at #3 though. (Or if someone is going to act smart and say Pietersen, then I'll rephrase to "who to replace Strauss with." )

How 'bout Strauss?

Seriously I think his game will improve heaps if he is given an extended run at 3. Also wouldn't be a bad idea to bring Pietersen in at 3 on occasions in which England want to continue attacking in the powerplays.

 

[Perm]

Then you have the question of who to bat at #3 though. (Or if someone is going to act smart and say Pietersen, then I'll rephrase to "who to replace Strauss with." )

1. Trescothick
2. Bell
3. Pietersen
4.
5. Collingwood
6. Flintoff
7. Bopara
8. Nixon

I wouldn't mind seeing how Bopara would do a little bit higher up the order, unfortunately I don't know enough of the English players to judge who a decent #4 would be. There are candidates though with Mal Loye and Alastair Cook being able to open, dropping Bell back to #4.

 

[vic_orthdox]

I did watch both dismissals - and both dragged-on nothing balls, playing with angled bats.

Tait may have bowled well but those 2 wickets (not so the Collingwood one) were terrible batting for which no credit can be attributed to the accuracy of the bowlers.

Haha, was watching the game and thought that you'd give no credit to the bowler.

Neither ball was wide enough to let the batsman free their arms. The only real way of scoring a boundary off it would be to pull him, and I think it's fair to say that Tait's as tough a bowler to pull in the world. The only way to keep a "straight bat" to that delivery would be to have their hands pushing away from their body, and would have just dead-batted it.

The mistake they made, I guess, was in playing at the ball in the first place. But you can't blame them too much for that in a one day game.

 

[Ash_A55]

If you think that's funny, it's not, so just stop it!

Did i intend it to be funny?

 

[Ash_A55]

1. Trescothick
2. Bell
3. Pietersen
4.
5. Collingwood
6. Flintoff
7. Bopara
8. Nixon

4. Cook

 

[Perm]

4. Cook

Possibly, but if Cook were to come into the side then I imagine Bell would drop down to #3 or #4, depending where the selectors want to play Pietersen.

 

[Ash_A55]

Possibly, but if Cook were to come into the side then I imagine Bell would drop down to #3 or #4, depending where the selectors want to play Pietersen.

Ye, that would make more sense. But Bell has impressed me opening.

 

[Perm]

Ye, that would make more sense. But Bell has impressed me opening.

Same here, but why change an opener into a middle order batsman, and vice versa?

 

[Ash_A55]

Same here, but why change an opener into a middle order batsman, and vice versa?

You got me there

 

[PhoenixFire]

Such a shame that a pretty ordinary ODI player like Vaughan has been given so many chances, whereas a player like Ali Brown was given just 16.

 

[Perm]

Such a shame that a pretty ordinary ODI player like Vaughan has been given so many chances, whereas a player like Ali Brown was given just 16.

But could Ali Brown captain with the same ability as Vaughan? Primary reason he's played so many games despite being crap at ODI's.

 

[PhoenixFire]

Hmm, I haven't really seen his tactical ability come through in ODIs. Surely there is a point where no matter how good a captain you are, averaging 26 is acceptable?

 

[Perm]

Hmm, I haven't really seen his tactical ability come through in ODIs. Surely there is a point where no matter how good a captain you are, averaging 26 is acceptable?

In most cases that would be correct, but England have basically had to stick with Vaughan, knowing that he's a quality Test player and captain and hoping he can convert form into ODI's. Hasn't happened and likely never will.

 

[marc71178]

Cook should be instructed to bat normally for 30-35 overs and assess the game from there - taking that approach will help his career and be a vast improvement over anything that Eng is dishing up at present

Problem is, when the likes of the current top 3 have done that, there's been a hell of a lot of criticism of them...

 

[Tomm NCCC]

Heh, wouldn't England be the laughing stock of the world if they dropped their captain? The thing is, Vaughan should keep his opener slot, and start to play aggresively. He cannot lose anything more, he's on the brink now, so give him a couple more games usuing a different plan of attack. I do agree that strauss should replace Joyce though

 

[open365]

Heh, wouldn't England be the laughing stock of the world if they dropped their captain? The thing is, Vaughan should keep his opener slot, and start to play aggresively. He cannot lose anything more, he's on the brink now, so give him a couple more games usuing a different plan of attack. I do agree that strauss should replace Joyce though

I've wondered about this, i know players have their own style and that, but Vaughan hasn't really tried to change his game in ODIs ever(that i've seen) and from a player with as poor a record as Vaughan i find this sightly odd.