Re: SUPER ENGLAND ASHES TOUR : Mon Jan 24, 2011 1:04 pm  

fc baldy wrote:

England havent got the right balance at all and bringing Prior back in has been a masterstroke .....why do we persist with a wicket-keeper at the top of the order,it clearly isnt working and why dont we go in with Strauss and Bell with Prior/Davis/Keiswetter down the order at 7.

The bowling should be bolsterd by the return of Broad,Anderson and Swann and add Bresnan too who is now injured.

Strauss
Bell
Trott
KP
Collingwood (lucky to be in)
Morgan
Prior/Davis/Keiswetter
Bresnan
Broad
Swann
Anderson

Would be scratching for a 5th bowler unless we leave colly out.

This is something that continues to wind me up. Seems that we feel we need to have the wicketkeeper open the batting, just because it worked for Gilchrist. Disregarding the fact that Gilchrist was one of the best batsmen in the world!

England's selection of the ODIs seems as confused as Australia's for the test series. What's Luke Wright's role in the team? He batted at 8 and bowled 2 overs in the last match.

I think we have to pick 5 frontline bowlers, with 3 of them capable with the bat. If everyone's available for the world cup I'd pick;

Strauss
Bell
Trott
Pieterson
Morgan
Prior
Broad
Bresnan
Yardy
Swann
Anderson


We just don't seem to produce any batting all rounders any more, which means picking only 4 bowlers means you risk the extra 10 overs going for 70/80+

Re: SUPER ENGLAND ASHES TOUR : Mon Jan 24, 2011 5:12 pm  

LeythIg wrote:

This is something that continues to wind me up. Seems that we feel we need to have the wicketkeeper open the batting, just because it worked for Gilchrist. Disregarding the fact that Gilchrist was one of the best batsmen in the world!

England's selection of the ODIs seems as confused as Australia's for the test series. What's Luke Wright's role in the team? He batted at 8 and bowled 2 overs in the last match.

I think we have to pick 5 frontline bowlers, with 3 of them capable with the bat. If everyone's available for the world cup I'd pick;

Strauss
Bell
Trott
Pieterson
Morgan
Prior
Broad
Bresnan
Yardy
Swann
Anderson


We just don't seem to produce any batting all rounders any more, which means picking only 4 bowlers means you risk the extra 10 overs going for 70/80+

Our best batting all-rounders are probably Samit Patel, Ian Blackwell and Ravi Bopara, all out of favour for whatever reason. (Well, we know why Patel & Blackwell are out of favour, they simply doesn't take their fitness seriously enough.) Yardy is a more talented batsman than bowler, but not an ideal ODI batsman. The non-bowling pair of Strauss & Trott shouldn't both be accommodated in this team, and as Strauss is captain (and the more pragmatic batsman) Trott really should be omitted; like Yardy (and Alistair Cook) he isn't really suited to this form of the game.

Agree with all the other points. Luke Wright bowls an average of less than four overs per match in his ODI appearances and isn't good enough to be in for his batting, and none of the wicketkeepers used in the past couple of years is suited to opening the batting, but most of them are good enough to keep wicket and bat at 6 or 7. England's selectors have got most calls right in recent times, but I can't for the life of me understand the strategy than the wicketkeeper must open the batting in ODIs.


This looks a better-balanced team to me than the one we're likely to see:

Strauss*
Bell
Pietersen
Morgan
Yardy/Patel/Blackwell
Collingwood/Bopara
Prior+
Broad
Bresnan
Swann
Anderson

Re: SUPER ENGLAND ASHES TOUR : Mon Jan 24, 2011 5:14 pm  

sorry double post.

Re: SUPER ENGLAND ASHES TOUR : Tue Jan 25, 2011 5:19 am  

Off to the Adelaide Oval me tomorrow to watch this. Only ever watched a '5 dayer' before, so looking forward to the quicker version of the game

Re: SUPER ENGLAND ASHES TOUR : Wed Jan 26, 2011 5:27 pm  

Prince of Denmark wrote: Our best batting all-rounders are probably Samit Patel, Ian Blackwell and Ravi Bopara, all out of favour for whatever reason. (Well, we know why Patel & Blackwell are out of favour, they simply doesn't take their fitness seriously enough.) Yardy is a more talented batsman than bowler, but not an ideal ODI batsman. The non-bowling pair of Strauss & Trott shouldn't both be accommodated in this team, and as Strauss is captain (and the more pragmatic batsman) Trott really should be omitted; like Yardy (and Alistair Cook) he isn't really suited to this form of the game. Agree with all the other points. Luke Wright bowls an average of less than four overs per match in his ODI appearances and isn't good enough to be in for his batting, and none of the wicketkeepers used in the past couple of years is suited to opening the batting, but most of them are good enough to keep wicket and bat at 6 or 7. England's selectors have got most calls right in recent times, but I can't for the life of me understand the strategy than the wicketkeeper must open the batting in ODIs. This looks a better-balanced team to me than the one we're likely to see: Strauss* Bell Pietersen Morgan Yardy/Patel/Blackwell Collingwood/Bopara Prior+ Broad Bresnan Swann Anderson it was made fairly clear why Samit Patel is out of favour last week http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/ja ... -world-cup which is a recurring theme http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/cricke ... d-axe.html

Prince of Denmark wrote: Our best batting all-rounders are probably Samit Patel, Ian Blackwell and Ravi Bopara, all out of favour for whatever reason. (Well, we know why Patel & Blackwell are out of favour, they simply doesn't take their fitness seriously enough.) Yardy is a more talented batsman than bowler, but not an ideal ODI batsman. The non-bowling pair of Strauss & Trott shouldn't both be accommodated in this team, and as Strauss is captain (and the more pragmatic batsman) Trott really should be omitted; like Yardy (and Alistair Cook) he isn't really suited to this form of the game. Agree with all the other points. Luke Wright bowls an average of less than four overs per match in his ODI appearances and isn't good enough to be in for his batting, and none of the wicketkeepers used in the past couple of years is suited to opening the batting, but most of them are good enough to keep wicket and bat at 6 or 7. England's selectors have got most calls right in recent times, but I can't for the life of me understand the strategy than the wicketkeeper must open the batting in ODIs. This looks a better-balanced team to me than the one we're likely to see: Strauss* Bell Pietersen Morgan Yardy/Patel/Blackwell Collingwood/Bopara Prior+ Broad Bresnan Swann Anderson it was made fairly clear why Samit Patel is out of favour last week http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/ja ... -world-cup which is a recurring theme http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/cricke ... d-axe.html

Re: SUPER ENGLAND ASHES TOUR : Sun Jan 30, 2011 10:26 am  

Back to 'Business as Usual' for the English batsman today, after the good display at Adelaide, slumping to a heavy defeat.

Aus 249

Eng 149/9 (39)

Australia 249, England 198 : Sun Jan 30, 2011 10:58 am  

Despite a record 10th Wicket Partnership of 53 from Finn and Anderson, England still lose by 51 runs with 5 overs of the innings remaining.

Re: SUPER ENGLAND ASHES TOUR : Wed Feb 02, 2011 10:49 am  

According to the radio commentators covering today's game Rashid is doing really well in the Aussie T20. They suggested that he might be a better bet than Treadwell.

Re: SUPER ENGLAND ASHES TOUR : Wed Feb 02, 2011 12:03 pm  

Cibaman wrote:

According to the radio commentators covering today's game Rashid is doing really well in the Aussie T20. They suggested that he might be a better bet than Treadwell.

he is doing great for the red backs.. dont you dare pinch him for international duty before the big bash final on saturday

Re: SUPER ENGLAND ASHES TOUR : Wed Feb 02, 2011 1:26 pm  

Cibaman wrote:

They suggested that he might be a better bet than Treadwell.

I think most sane people have known this for a fair while now. Even a Red Rose aficionado like me can see that Rashid is light years ahead of Tredwell in every single aspect of playing cricket. Whether he makes a better brew than him or not is another matter.