Major England ODI Overhaul Needed

[ozone]

I think some people are missing the point with the Gough thing. If the selectors were looking for some experience from a player who could have done a specific job, Gough was the obvious choice. As it was, England went with Mahmood and it didn't really work. IMO this was the wrong decision but its gone and it could help Mahmood develop. Alright, the best time to give players experience is not the WC, but for Mahmoods future it could help.

Also, Lewis would have been rubbish in the group stages with the short boundaries, but in the Super 8s, the ball has been swinging and it may have been good to have someone to bowl 10 overs straight up at the top of the innings and keep it fairly tight.

 

[open365]

Will people stop sterotyping Lewis as someone who can only bowl in helpful conditions?

Sure it helps him, but he's a good bowler full stop and miles better than mahmood.

I think the problem is that when lewis gets attacked people look at his lack of pace and see him as being helpless to stop it and an inferior player.

When Mahmood gets ****ed everywhere people justify it cause "He's quick and has potential".

It's ridiculous, Lewis is England's best ODI bowler, his stats both domesticly and internationaly are better than everyone else in the England ODI team, and he's got a better FC record than Hoggard for those of you saying he only does it when it swings.

Him not being picked is imo nothing short of disgraceful and yet more evidence that Fletchers selection policies are massively flawed.

 

[open365]

I think some people are missing the point with the Gough thing. If the selectors were looking for some experience from a player who could have done a specific job, Gough was the obvious choice. As it was, England went with Mahmood and it didn't really work. IMO this was the wrong decision but its gone and it could help Mahmood develop. Alright, the best time to give players experience is not the WC, but for Mahmoods future it could help.

Experience doesn't count for much when your so far past it as Gough is.

Did you watch him bowl in the past two years?

It's not there anymore, he's still accurate and not THAT slow but his zip has gone rather like Pollock's did a while ago. He was not up to the job, especialy after the injury, past form and experience only gets you so far, and i think "so far" isn't very far at all.

 

[ozone]

Experience doesn't count for much when your so far past it as Gough is.

Did you watch him bowl in the past two years?

It's not there anymore, he's still accurate and not THAT slow but his zip has gone rather like Pollock's did a while ago. He was not up to the job, especialy after the injury, past form and experience only gets you so far, and i think "so far" isn't very far at all.

Paul Nixon was picked purely for his spirit. Now ask anyone involved in the English setup and they will say Gough is of the same ilk. Add this to his experience and he is worth the gamble. More than that, he would have provided something different.

(Live) I've seen him bowl about 14 balls in an OD against Hampshire at the Rose Bowl in May last year. He went off injured (not a great example) with figures of 2.2 - 1 - 4 - 2.

Considering Pollock lost his zip a while back, he hasn't done that badly. Alright, Australia slapped him about, but I would put that down to the good form of Hayden more than bad bowling. If Gough could have done a similar job with the ball at medium pace, it would have been better than Mahmood or Plunkett definantly. He is also faster than Lewis and therefore would probably have been more useful throughout the tournament.

 

[open365]

Paul Nixon was picked purely for his spirit?

Rubish, he was picked because of his abilities as a player, you don't pick international players for their attitude and disreagard their skills as a player.

And did this so called "spirit" of Paul Nixon help us much? Did you see a different England team to me? Did you see a team that was confident and playing well? Because i sure didn't.

He took some wickets against Hampshire, whoo dee doo, he was getting smacked at international level which is what counts, plus he was injured and hadn't played cricket for ages, even reports he failed a fitness test.

And Pollock has got a hell of a lot better over the last two years compared to how he was bowling the year before than.

And it wasn't just Australia he got smacked by.

 

[Richard]

The ball that got Flintoff was clocked at 83 mph. Not bad at all, but honestly you have to be kidding yourself if you think it was acceptable to miss a ball like that by half a foot. I dont have anything againt Hall, but looking at some of Flintoff's dismissals this world cup- trying to hit a Fernando slower ball over the top, failing to pick Brad Hogg for the umpteenth time in his career (seriously you'd think by now he would do have learnt something about that), missing a mohammad rafique arm ball by another half mile- is simply not good enough for any FC cricketer, let alone one of the standing of Flintoff. Whether or not he takes his batting at all seriously, i dont know, but not being able to pick Mohammad Rafique is a crime of the first order.

My issue is not with Flintoff not being good enough at batting, I've said that a million times, I've never rated his batting too much (unlike *some people*) but purely with Hall. So what if it was "only" 83mph? A massive great inswinger like that at 83mph would dismiss virtually anyone, even if some might get a big closer.

Also, few if any can pick the Fernando slower-ball. Flintoff obviously does indeed have a problem picking slower-balls from most, but Fernando, for someone who in all other areas is usually pretty terrible, has as good a slower-ball as you could wish for.

 

[Richard]

Mahmood got spanked in the Sri Lanka series but in the Pakistan one where Gough got injured he wasn't that bad.

Mahmood was God-awful in every single game of Summer 2006 bar the very last one. And if Mahmood can take 10-24-2, Gough could certainly have taken decent figures in that game!

Add that to Gough's injury and his pretty dire form at the time, Mahmood was the better pick.

Gough's bowling went long ago, he could still do a job but he lost his pace and his spark and was going downhill, picking a player in that situation when coming back from an injury and hence having not played any proper cricket for ages isn't the right move.

Gough's bowling never "went", he simply often bowled at the wrong times. He was poor several times in 2005 and 2006, no disputing, but had he played more he might have done better at other times.

 

[Richard]

Lewis would have been rubbish in the group stages with the short boundaries, but in the Super 8s, the ball has been swinging and it may have been good to have someone to bowl 10 overs straight up at the top of the innings and keep it fairly tight.

You seriously think Lewis could not bowl-out Kenya and Canada when he's countless times bowled-out far better sides in English domestic cricket?

 

[Richard]

And Pollock has got a hell of a lot better over the last two years compared to how he was bowling the year before than.

And it wasn't just Australia he got smacked by.

Not really - Pollock's ODI form never really waned, at any point. His Test form did, and that fooled a fair few people (especially those who struggle to differentiate between the games) but in ODIs he's never really gone downhill.

He got the treatment in a couple of games this World Cup - big deal! Jayasuriya has done that countless times and Hayden has done nothing but in his last 4 or 5 innings.

 

[open365]

He bowled at the wrong times? Don't give me that nonsense to argue against, he's an opening bowler who used to be able to bowl at any bloody time in the innings.

His bowling quite obviously has gone downhill with age and injury, i would have thought that was apparent to anyone who watched him in 05-07 where he looked virtualy incapable of getting wickets at times.

And yes he "might" have done better, but so what? Anyone "might" have performed better had they played in those games, it's completely hypothetical.

He might have performed worse

 

[open365]

Not really - Pollock's ODI form never really waned, at any point. His Test form did, and that fooled a fair few people (especially those who struggle to differentiate between the games) but in ODIs he's never really gone downhill.

He got the treatment in a couple of games this World Cup - big deal! Jayasuriya has done that countless times and Hayden has done nothing but in his last 4 or 5 innings.

I'm not bloody arguing about Pollock! I just used him as an example, maybe McGrath might have been a better one but that's not the point.

 

[Richard]

He bowled at the wrong times? Don't give me that nonsense to argue against, he's an opening bowler who used to be able to bowl at any bloody time in the innings.

His bowling quite obviously has gone downhill with age and injury, i would have thought that was apparent to anyone who watched him in 05-07 where he looked virtualy incapable of getting wickets at times.

I honestly couldn't give a stuff about wicket-taking. He was still more than capable of bowling a good line and length at the start of an innings. He wasn't much of a death bowler from summer 2000 onwards, no, but Ian Bradshaw has never been a death bowler of any sort - doesn't mean he's not of huge value to the side if used properly. If a bowler can do a job at the start, you don't waste him at the end.

And yes he "might" have done better, but so what? Anyone "might" have performed better had they played in those games, it's completely hypothetical.

He might have performed worse

That's extremely unlikely, given what happened in said games. If you have to face the bad times, you should also get the benefits of the good.

 

[Richard]

I'm not bloody arguing about Pollock! I just used him as an example, maybe McGrath might have been a better one but that's not the point.

"Zip" full-stop is just not really something I'm in favour of. It's too imprecise. Pollock has never been quick, not since 1997 - and he's never really given that sensation of "bowling a heavy ball" either. But he's bowled good lines, and in all but a tiny majority of cases, that's enough if you're used properly.

 

[open365]

I honestly couldn't give a stuff about wicket-taking. He was still more than capable of bowling a good line and length at the start of an innings. He wasn't much of a death bowler from summer 2000 onwards, no, but Ian Bradshaw has never been a death bowler of any sort - doesn't mean he's not of huge value to the side if used properly. If a bowler can do a job at the start, you don't waste him at the end.

That's extremely unlikely, given what happened in said games. If you have to face the bad times, you should also get the benefits of the good.

But that was also the problem, his economy rate was also crap, he was just ineffective all round, do you even remember him bowling in this period?

Even when he did bowl a good line and length he was still going for 5/6 an over and not even picking up wickets to compensate for it.

 

[open365]

"Zip" full-stop is just not really something I'm in favour of. It's too imprecise. Pollock has never been quick, not since 1997 - and he's never really given that sensation of "bowling a heavy ball" either. But he's bowled good lines, and in all but a tiny majority of cases, that's enough if you're used properly.

I see zip as being slightly synonomous with potency, and in tests matches for a period Pollock was the least potent bowler in the team.

 

[Richard]

But that was also the problem, his economy rate was also crap, he was just ineffective all round, do you even remember him bowling in this period?

Even when he did bowl a good line and length he was still going for 5/6 an over and not even picking up wickets to compensate for it.

He wasn't bowling good lines, that's the thing.

Why not I don't know, because he was still for the most part doing so in the domestic game.

 

[Richard]

I see zip as being slightly synonomous with potency, and in tests matches for a period Pollock was the least potent bowler in the team.

But Gough wasn't playing Tests, so neither potency nor Pollock comparisons are needed.

 

[prakesh]

missing a mohammad rafique arm ball by another half mile- is simply not good enough for any FC cricketer, let alone one of the standing of Flintoff. Whether or not he takes his batting at all seriously, i dont know, but not being able to pick Mohammad Rafique is a crime of the first order.

At least he has an arm ball or variation to pick...unlike a certain straight forward Asian turbanator playing for England.

 

[tooextracool]

My issue is not with Flintoff not being good enough at batting, I've said that a million times, I've never rated his batting too much (unlike *some people*) but purely with Hall. So what if it was "only" 83mph? A massive great inswinger like that at 83mph would dismiss virtually anyone, even if some might get a big closer.

Also, few if any can pick the Fernando slower-ball. Flintoff obviously does indeed have a problem picking slower-balls from most, but Fernando, for someone who in all other areas is usually pretty terrible, has as good a slower-ball as you could wish for.

Look like i said, i dont have any problems with either of those bowlers. missing an inswinger by miles at 83 mph is a joke. I dont care who you are or what you've done, good players dont even miss 90 mph swingers by such a distance.

As far as the Fernando slower ball is concerned, its not just about not picking it, its about trying to hit a ball like that OTT which really was ridiculous in those circumstances. At the moment he has absolutely no idea whether to attack or defend and by and large hes looked pathetic when attempting to do either. I'll be incredibly disappointed if he doesnt play as much county cricket as possible before the first test against WI.

 

[tooextracool]

At least he has an arm ball or variation to pick...unlike a certain straight forward Asian turbanator playing for England.

For once you've actually made a decent post. Panesar's lack of variety is what makes him useless in ODIs, because without an arm ball and without being able to vary his flight and pace hes even more useless than Giles.