No - I'd have Broad at eight over "no wickets" Mascarenas. If we have Freddie and Bopara fit we don't need him. The rest of that team I wouldn't mind except for Bell opening.. Bell has played 47 ODIs now with a poor strike rate and no hundreds. He doesn't score quick cameos, and he doesn't bat for say, 45 overs to get an innings anchoring 100. An ODI opener has to do one or the other IMO. Wether Cook could do any better is debatable but he's had five matches. I don't think that's long enough to write him off as an ODI player alltogrther.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
***Official** West Indies in England***
- Thread starter GIMH
- Start date
FBU
International Debutant
It's amazing what attacking batting does to bowlers. Even the very best can be made to look useless. Powell was lucky to bowl to the England tentative batting line up. Had our bowlers the chance to face our top 6 I am sure they also would have also picked up very easy wickets. The West Indies have attacking batsmen all the way down the line not just one or two. They need to carry on playing like that whoever they face.
Swervy
International Captain
This is a very good point, and it is something worth bearing in mind when assessing the current state of bowling throughout the world when compared to previous times.
Aggressive/Attacking batting is very hard to bowl to, and through all formats of the game, batting is a much more aggressive thing these days, (for me THE catalyst for the way things have gone say in the test arena is the arrival of Gilchrist, he changed things probably more than many would like to give credit for). Its why I am not overly convinced that that standards have dropped as much as people think, I think there has been just a change in batting philosophy. ....I might be wrong of course
Re: England, I think they think about it TOO much...batting looks like such a chore for England
Scaly piscine
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Re: England, I think they think about it TOO much...batting looks like such a chore for England spectators
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Richard, I was wondering if you could tell me how you get to write match reports.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
And they would have been out, virtually every one of them - but for dropped catches...
It was dropped catches far more than "defensive" bowling that cost.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
IMO the biggest catalyst was Michael Slater, not Gilchrist.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Of course, it's so simple.Aggressive/Attacking batting is very hard to bowl to, and through all formats of the game, batting is a much more aggressive thing these days. Its why I am not overly convinced that that standards have dropped as much as people think, I think there has been just a change in batting philosophy. ....I might be wrong of course
You wonder, then, why people didn't do that absurdly easy thing of pick lots of strokeplayers before 2001, then?
Bowling standards at most times wouldn't have allowed such strokeplay. The bowler, not the batsman, controls the game. Without balls to play shots to, shots cannot be played.
It makes no sense, at all, for strokeplaying batting to have been the thing that's changed. Poorer bowling leads to more strokes being able to be played.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Can't see any point picking Lewis now, he's highly unlikely to be around in 2011.
Bopara, presumably, will come back in when fit but as I say, I'm not yet sold on him. If I had to pick him or Afzaal, I'd pick Afzaal every time.
Plunkett's currently got a more compelling case than Panesar, too.
Pup Clarke
Cricketer Of The Year
Always hate one day cricket as your just building to the World Cup. A present side should include Jon Lewis imo.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Richard, I was wondering if you could tell me how you get to write match reports.
BTW, to add to this... the boss is away for a short break at the moment so don't be surprised when you don't get a response for a week or so.
Pup Clarke
Cricketer Of The Year
Richard, I think you misread what I said. I suggested that I personally don't like one day cricket as you are always looking four years on from now to the next World Cup which is unlike Test match cricket of course.
Pup Clarke
Cricketer Of The Year
...I'm not havin that.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
No, no, I understood what you said. I just said I don't dislike it, I enjoy that unique nature of ODI cricket.
Not as much as I enjoy Tests, of course, and they're all about the here and now, but there is something enjoyable in trying to build a team for 4, 3, 2 and 1 years' time.
Pup Clarke
Cricketer Of The Year
You do know that things could spiral out of control now that James is away on a "short break"?.
Neil Pickup
Cricket Web Moderator
Please run it through a spell checker, use some paragraphs and resend it.
Neil Pickup
Cricket Web Moderator
No, someone's spent half an hour looking for a free flowchart program and another hour learning how to use it so that he doesn't teach crap science lessons for a week, on the back of 194 overs of cricket in the weekend, and as a result is knackered and not looking forward to 7am tomorrow morning.Jeez, someone's in a good mood this evening...