England ODI Team

[Neil Pickup]

what has he ever done right?

Well, you can start with his batting, simply the best "finisher" we have in the team, look at the not-outs there when he gets set. Then there's his bowling which is a crucial and more-than-adequate backup, and the fact that he's the best fielder in the country, if not the world...

 

[kendall]

Well, you can start with his batting, simply the best "finisher" we have in the team, look at the not-outs there when he gets set. Then there's his bowling which is a crucial and more-than-adequate backup, and the fact that he's the best fielder in the country, if not the world...

but with 5 other bowlers he just isnt needed, and the only reason he gets not outs is because he comes in so low down the order and doesnt yhave timt to get out like in the recent series in aouth africa. it would be better to play a specialist batsman, rather than an allrounder that has mediocre batting and very mediocre bowling.

 

[Arjun]

Fielding has been a weak area in the recent past. Their bowlers can be more effective if they are supported well by the fielders, which makes the likes of Collingwood and Strauss more relevant.

 

[kendall]

Fielding has been a weak area in the recent past. Their bowlers can be more effective if they are supported well by the fielders, which makes the likes of Collingwood and Strauss more relevant.

what has this got to do with strauss ?

and regardless fiedling alone isnt enough to get you a place in the side, and solanki is an excellent fieder anyway.

 

[Arjun]

what has this got to do with strauss ?

and regardless fiedling alone isnt enough to get you a place in the side, and solanki is an excellent fieder anyway.

The middle-order contenders are not that special, so the better fielders should make the side. Besides, Strauss is one of the better fielders in the side. Trescothick is too slow, Vaughan drops a few sitters, Jones is a misfit behind the stumps, Ali is a bit slow in the outfield, while Harmison isn't the most useful either.

 

[kendall]

The middle-order contenders are not that special, so the better fielders should make the side. Besides, Strauss is one of the better fielders in the side. Trescothick is too slow, Vaughan drops a few sitters, Jones is a misfit behind the stumps, Ali is a bit slow in the outfield, while Harmison isn't the most useful either.

well quite frankly that is irrevlevant, the incluciosn of collingwood would not change any of the above, just weaken the batting and bowling line ups....

 

[Neil Pickup]

but with 5 other bowlers he just isnt needed, and the only reason he gets not outs is because he comes in so low down the order and doesnt yhave timt to get out like in the recent series in aouth africa. it would be better to play a specialist batsman, rather than an allrounder that has mediocre batting and very mediocre bowling.

A specialist batsman, like..?

 

[kendall]

A specialist batsman, like..?

there is no real answer to thaht because england do not possess such a player, even if england do the selectors do not try the alternatives because they persist with collingwood who is bascially a dead loss in the side, solanki would be a good option maybe bell although he would be wasted that low in the order, owais shah? michael powel?

although in fairness to collingwood i would rather see collingwood in the team ahead of ian blackwell and rikki clarke as they are both very poor and colly is by far their superior.

 

[Neil Pickup]

there is no real answer to thaht because england do not possess such a player, even if england do the selectors do not try the alternatives because they persist with collingwood who is bascially a dead loss in the side, solanki would be a good option maybe bell although he would be wasted that low in the order, owais shah? michael powel?

although in fairness to collingwood i would rather see collingwood in the team ahead of ian blackwell and rikki clarke as they are both very poor and colly is by far their superior.

It intrigues me as to how someone so poor can make so many half centuries...

 

[kendall]

It intrigues me as to how someone so poor can make so many half centuries...

solanki has had double the amount of hundreds that collingwood has had in half as many innings with a better strike rate, collingwoods bowling has an average above 40 and has only taken 28 wickets in 70 matches, thi does not warrant his selection in my view.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Double being 2 as opposed to 1, and one of those was against a Zimbabwe said who are not fit to count. Try a better argument.

 

[kendall]

Double being 2 as opposed to 1, and one of those was against a Zimbabwe said who are not fit to count. Try a better argument.

well its true is it not? and besides as i say better strike rate and collies poor bowling average do not deem well for his selection. solanki has more natural talent as well. not that should guarantee his selection alone.

 

[marc71178]

6. Solanki? (nobody suitable)

Bell?

Collingwood?

Rikki?

 

[marc71178]

He's a decent batsman (don't need another brutal clubbing batsman when we have Pietersen, Flintoff and G Jones there), his bowling was never intended to be more than backup (although he's added variations and is now fairly useful) and his fielding saves plenty of runs and earns the odd wicket. I think he adds plenty to the side and adds to the overall balance.

Blimey, if SP says something complementary about him, we know he must be good

 

[superkingdave]

or from the Northeast

 

[marc71178]

but solanki has shown that he can play very well and can be very impreesive,

As has Collingwood.

DIfference being Solanki has also failed on many an occasion, Collingwood less so.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

well its true is it not? and besides as i say better strike rate and collies poor bowling average do not deem well for his selection. solanki has more natural talent as well. not that should guarantee his selection alone.

Centuries are not important for a number six in an ODI side...what's important is being reliable, scoring 20-30-40 and not getting out to expose the tail, and whenever Solanki goes to the crease you get the feeling: "He's going out in the next half-hour, who have we got coming?" Yes, he can score the odd big knock - the important thing here being "the odd".

 

[aussie]

aussie

The structure for the england one day international side is quite frankly a joke, to open with jones whilst leaving strauss at 4 is quite simpley ludicrous. trying to open with jones is just a blatant attempt to copy australia and gilchrist and it is failing due to the fact that jones does not possess enough talent to perform the role effectively. although jones best shots the cut and the pull are most effective with the fiedling restrictions in place in the first 15 overs, but that is quite simply irrelevant and is a waste of a batsman.

i feel the best possible england is,

1. Trescothick
2. Strauss
3. Vaughn
4. Flintoff
5. Pietersen
6. Solanki? (nobody suitable)
7. Mascherenas
8. Read (wk)
9. Giles
10. Gough (replacement must be foud within 2 years, if anderson matures?)
11. Harmison

jones is a waste of a batsman in ODI's, and although vaughn is not at his best with the bat, he can add balance to the team and is a great captain to the side. There is no need for collingwood as he is a bit part player who is also a waste of a wicket as he cannot score high scores and his bowling is terrible. he is just a very mediocre player that ads nothing to the side. the number 6 in the batting line up is a problem position, but there is nobody suitable who can play that role well, ian bell is not good suitable to bat that lower down the order and would be wasted, if read is a failure then yes jones should be put back in the side and elevated to number 7.

hold up mate cant allow you to diss my players like that, u have to be crazy Collingwood is a excellent ODI terrific fieldsman he has frankly taken over from Jonty Rhodes has the best point fielder in world cricket, he has developed well has englands best batsman to finish an innings and his bowling is effective, while the debate would go on for who should be the keeper but i for one stand behind Jones

While Mr.Mascarenhas is an interesting option i saw him in a Twenty20 international last season and has followed his progress and he his definitely the second hardest hitter of the ball in the country behind my beloved Freddie, but it doesn't look like the ENG selectors will look in his direction soon and has Shane Warne said last season when he wasn't picked in england 30 provisional squad for the Champions Trophy ``THE SELECTORS ARE CRAZY`` fair chice but i dont think he is in the selectors thought he hasn't even been picked in Englad (A) squads, the selectors strangely still have Rikki Clarke in their thoughts

 

[aussie]

aussie

AT present this should be the best England Team

Trescothick
Strauss
Vaughan
Pietersen (could swap with collingwood)
Flintoff
Collingwood (could swap with pietersen)
Jones
Giles
Kabir Ali
Gough
Harmison

the reason why i say those two lads can swap is because looking at how Kev batted in SA, he could be a good player to come in after freddie later down in the innings and together they could destroy any side (bar australia unless the aussies bowlers are having a bad day ), while collingwood could go go up to 4 and play and innings cause Colly hasn't really got much oppurtunity with the bat in the ENG side but one can argue he does he Job at 6 well. Or you can view it the other way keep Colly at 6 and let him continue his role their and send Kev at four, i for one rather the first option. Whie Kabir Ali impressed me with both his batting and bowling in SA & i think he could be very valuable player for england in ODI cricket

 

[marc71178]

While Mr.Mascarenhas is an interesting option i saw him in a Twenty20 international last season and has followed his progress and he his definitely the second hardest hitter of the ball in the country behind my beloved Freddie,

Pietersen?