*Unofficial* England ODI team thread

[masterblaster]

I don't know why Cook and Strauss don't play for England in ODI's. They are class players and England's strategy of picking ODI players isn't doing them much good. If you have the talent and the toughness to play test cricket, chances are you'd be pretty good at 50 over cricket as well.

If I were India, I'd fear an opening partnership of Cook and Strauss or Strauss and Bell much more than say Prior and Bell.

 

[aussie]

1 Cook \ AN Other if he's still struggling in Tests
2 AN Other
3 Trott
4 Pietersen (three and four could be swapped)
5 Bopara \ Afzaal (if Bopara doesn't perform and Afzaal starts well again)
6 Davies (lower than I'd like, it really is, but there just doesn't seem much alternative)
7 Flintoff (as above)
8 Mascarenhas
9 Swann
10 Broad
11 Sidebottom.

Although i like this balance very much. Please explain give me cricket reason why Trott & Bopara can be in there ahead of Collingwood & Shah. Expect for the obvious fact that you don't rate them?

 

[GIMH]

Their ODI players are just pretty poor. Using the XI from the first series game:

Bell
Prior
Shah
Pietersen
Flintoff
Collingwood
Patel
Bopara
Broad
Harmison
Anderson

How many of those are better ODI players than test players? I'd say Pietersen, Flintoff and Broad. SA have a similar "issue" since Pollock's retirement, where their most talented players are suited to tests. NZ have the opposite.

If i were an England fan, the last thing i'd be doing is complaining.

Pietersen in tests>>>>>Pietersen in ODIs

 

[Rant0r]

I don't think so. Test cricket is a higher priority than ODIs, and I don't want anyone doing something to improve the ODI team that will damage the Test team. In any case, whatever Strauss does, he won't ever be a ODI-class player. Cook right now is struggling with his Test game.

why are you so worried that having strauss and/or cook in the team will kill their test game ? i'm sure you could find many examples of test and one day openers succeeding.

It is at the end of the day, still cricket

 

[Rant0r]

I don't neccessarily know that that's true, there've been no shortage of teams who've had relatively poor WC run-ins and ended-up performing well in the tournament itself.

australia lost heaps of games leading into the '07 WC and romped it in

 

[superkingdave]

If Luke Wright can somehow still hand around the squad, Steven Croft should come in for consideration if he keeps up his improvement

 

[Richard]

I don't know why Cook and Strauss don't play for England in ODI's. They are class players and England's strategy of picking ODI players isn't doing them much good. If you have the talent and the toughness to play test cricket, chances are you'd be pretty good at 50 over cricket as well.

If I were India, I'd fear an opening partnership of Cook and Strauss or Strauss and Bell much more than say Prior and Bell.

Strauss is a poor one-day batsman, has been so all career, and he's 31 years of age now so there's every chance he always will be. Cook I hope will one day turn-out to be a good ODI player in time but he isn't now.

Right now, Bell > either. Prior isn't, but Prior's useless.

 

[Richard]

Although i like this balance very much. Please explain give me cricket reason why Trott & Bopara can be in there ahead of Collingwood & Shah. Expect for the obvious fact that you don't rate them?

I'd say there's a very strong case Trott is better than both (it's pretty well beyond question that he's better than Shah) and Bopara might one day be better than Collingwood and is certainly no worse than Shah now.

 

[Richard]

why are you so worried that having strauss and/or cook in the team will kill their test game ? i'm sure you could find many examples of test and one day openers succeeding.

All players are not the same. We've already seen considerable evidence that such a thing has already happened once with Strauss.

Just because some players can compartmentalise both game-forms doesn't mean all batsmen will be able to and to assess each batsman on his own merits is the adviseable course of action.

It is at the end of the day, still cricket

So? It's totally different type of cricket and many players can play one form and not the other.

 

[wpdavid]

Given Anderson's ongoing inability to land 2 consecutive deliveries in the desired location, you have to wonder who on earth should open the bowling for us in these games, given Fred & Harmy are better first change and Sidebottom seems long term crocked..

 

[Richard]

I've never seen why Flintoff doesn't open the bowling. Unlike Harmison he doesn't have an obvious inability to do it - he has done it once or twice in the past and made a more than decent fist of it.

I'd be more than happy for Flintoff to open the bowling, personally. Longer-term beyond this series, I hope to see him opening with Sidebottom.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Given Anderson's ongoing inability to land 2 consecutive deliveries in the desired location, you have to wonder who on earth should open the bowling for us in these games, given Fred & Harmy are better first change and Sidebottom seems long term crocked..

The other options instill fear in the pit of my tummy tho, frankly.

List A bowling in England in 2008

Bresnan () looks to have the best case, with maybe Robbie Joseph (is he eligible yet?) an outside bet. Davies of Durham is accurate, but suspect his lack of pace would mean he's exposed a la Jon Lewis on all but greentops. Amjad Khan, Mahmood & Plunkers are all in the performance squad too, but make Jimmy's accuracy look McGrathesque by comparison.

 

[Jono]

Bring back Wharf!

 

[Uppercut]

I've never seen why Flintoff doesn't open the bowling. Unlike Harmison he doesn't have an obvious inability to do it - he has done it once or twice in the past and made a more than decent fist of it.

I'd be more than happy for Flintoff to open the bowling, personally. Longer-term beyond this series, I hope to see him opening with Sidebottom.

Could be because he's often just finished batting, but my guess is that it's just personal preference. Some people insist they can get a ball to swing better when it's 12 overs old and the shiny and dull sides are more pronounced. It could well be a mental thing, but even so, if it seems to work for them there's no point in changing it.

 

[Richard]

The other options instill fear in the pit of my tummy tho, frankly.

List A bowling in England in 2008

Bresnan () looks to have the best case, with maybe Robbie Joseph (is he eligible yet?) an outside bet. Davies of Durham is accurate, but suspect his lack of pace would mean he's exposed a la Jon Lewis on all but greentops. Amjad Khan, Mahmood & Plunkers are all in the performance squad too, but make Jimmy's accuracy look McGrathesque by comparison.

Davies is much the same pace as Bresnan, perhaps 2 or 3 mph slower.

Anyway, being exposed on all but greentops is better than being exposed on just about any surface, as the Andersons and Harmisons are prone to do.

And as far as I'm aware, Robbie Joseph has never been unavailable for England since playing for Kent. But ODIs, well... just no. If he's to get anywhere near international cricket it should be the longer form. He's essentially a poor man's Kabir Ali.

Dunno how on Earth I forgot Davies actually. Utterly criminal that he's not in the ODI side right now. Mascarenhas, no, but Davies, certainly.

And Davies is far, far more accurate than Jon Lewis, not that Lewis' ODI performances were exactly poor anyway. The "exposed on non-greentops" was always more a theory than an practice - it never actually happened.

 

[Richard]

Could be because he's often just finished batting, but my guess is that it's just personal preference. Some people insist they can get a ball to swing better when it's 12 overs old and the shiny and dull sides are more pronounced. It could well be a mental thing, but even so, if it seems to work for them there's no point in changing it.

A red ball maybe, but a white one? No chance. White balls quite often stop swinging after 8-10 overs - occasionally even sooner.

 

[grapedo]

All players are not the same. We've already seen considerable evidence that such a thing has already happened once with Strauss.

Just because some players can compartmentalise both game-forms doesn't mean all batsmen will be able to and to assess each batsman on his own merits is the adviseable course of action.

So? It's totally different type of cricket and many players can play one form and not the other.

Just look at Gary Kirsten and Graeme Smith always does well in both when he is in form it wouldn't affect them at all as they have 50 overs to bat not 20. They need to learn to bat faster anyway the rate they score in test at the moment is ridiculous to say the least.

 

[grapedo]

I was very impressed with samit patel against south africa. what do you guys think of him ?

 

[Furball]

I was very impressed with samit patel against south africa. what do you guys think of him ?

Unfair to judge him on his performances, given that he's being picked for a role which doesn't suit him.

His left arm spin is certainly useful, and I reckon if he has a prolonged ODI career that he'll take a decent number of wickets at an average of between 35 and 40. He's not a frontline spinner though, and shouldn't be getting picked as such.

Can't judge his batting yet at all, given that he's yet to come in when he's had the opportunity to build a proper innings. Every time he's come to the crease, the situation that he slog straight away. Has done ok when called upon, but it would be massively unfair to judge his batting at this point in time.

 

[Richard]

Just look at Gary Kirsten and Graeme Smith always does well in both when he is in form it wouldn't affect them at all as they have 50 overs to bat not 20. They need to learn to bat faster anyway the rate they score in test at the moment is ridiculous to say the least.

Utter rubbish. It's Test cricket, you can score slowly if needbe. It's not like Strauss or Cook are bumbling along at 20 runs per 100 balls anyway.

And saying "one player can translate his game from one format to the other so therefore all players can" is obvious stupidity.