The England Thread

[Pup Clarke]

Dalrymple's place in the team is a strange one as you really couldn't call him international standard with either bat or ball but he is probably England's best bet at number 7.I say bring Gough back into the fold.I know it's a backward step but surely he's a more effective one day bowler than Mahmood,Plunkett or Tremlett.He actually knows how to bowl at the death and the only other death bowler is Flintoff.I would drop Strauss for the World Cup as I think Fletcher and Graveney have to make some bold decisions.
My World Cup X1
Loye
Vaughan
Bell
Pietersen
Collingwood
Flintoff
Dalrymple
Nixon
Gough
Panesar
Anderson

 

[Richard]

Strauss, Vaughan*, Bell, Pietersen, Flintoff, Collingwood, Dalrymple, Read+, Lewis, Panesar, Anderson ... looks like England's best bet at this point.

Currently Strauss looks likelier to bat four but you never know, they change their mind on him regularly.

Hardly surprising they do, either - the only other option would be to drop him, and given that your best Test players absolutely must be your best ODI players, that's absolutely and totally out of the question.

It's really, really annoying that Vaughan and Pietersen have been injured so late in the day.

 

[slogger555]

After englands performance in the one day tournament in Australia who do you reckon should be in the squad

1Vaughn(c)
2Cook
3Bell
4Pieterson
5Joyce
6Strauss
7Flintoff(i no its really low but where he comes in depends on how england s total's going)
8 Nixon
9 Hoggard
10 Anderson
11Paensar(awesome palyer)

12 Lewis
13 Plunkett
14 Paul Coliingwood(hanging on a thread)
15 Jamie Darlymple (hanging on a thread)

anyone somewhat agree

 

[Perm]

Trescothick unlucky to miss out, very under-rated ODI player and if he can get the mental side of his game worked out then he should definately be in there. Hoggard isn't an ODI bowler but I agree with most of your other selections with the exception of Flintoff probably being too low at #7. Alistair Cook deserves more of a chance to prove himself in the limited overs game for England.

 

[Prince EWS]

Lewis will be in the best XI and Hoggard won't be in the squad at all. I think Collingwood should bat at 7 with either Joyce or Dalrymple (if he can get his act together and put this bad form behind him) at 5. Trescothick should play if he's available. That'd leave:

1. Michael Vaughan
2. Marcus Trescothick
3. Ian Bell
4. Kevin Pietersen
5. Ed Joyce / Jamie Dalrymple
6. Andrew Flintoff
7. Paul Collingwood
8. Paul Nixon (They won't change it again IMO, even though they should).
9. Jon Lewis
10. Monty Panesar
11. James Anderson

12. Andrew Strauss
13. Jamie Dalrymple / Ed Joyce
14. Liam Plunkett
15. Chris Tremlett

I'd probably go a bit differently, but I don't think they'll change the squad too much really.

 

[slogger555]

Agree with the thersothick thing i just thought he wouldnt be avaible but they need his experience

 

[Pup Clarke]

My England World Cup Squad

Michael Vaughan
Ian Bell
Kevin Pietersen
Mal Loye
Paul Collingwood
Ed Joyce
Andrew Flintoff
Jamie Dalrymple
Andrew Strauss
Jon Lewis
James Anderson
Monty Panesar
Paul Nixon
Liam Plunkett
Chris Tremlett

And First X1
Michael Vaughan
Mal Loye/Ed Joyce
Ian Bell
Kevin Pietersen
Paul Collingwood
Andrew Flintoff
Jamie Dalrymple
Paul Nixon
Jon Lewis
Monty Panesar
James Anderson

I really believe that Kirtley and Gough should both be in there as they are far more effective one day bowlers than Tremlett and Plunkett.

 

[Pup Clarke]

Hardly surprising they do, either - the only other option would be to drop him, and given that your best Test players absolutely must be your best ODI players, that's absolutely and totally out of the question.

So you think just because Strauss is a nailed on test player means he must play in the world cup and you don't think that he might be dropped as he is going through a lean patch just because he's a good test match player?.

 

[Richard]

1. Michael Vaughan
2. Marcus Trescothick

No chance.

Has never happened and never will.

It's always:
1. Trescothick
2. Vaughan

 

[Richard]

After englands performance in the one day tournament in Australia who do you reckon should be in the squad

1Vaughn(c)
2Cook
3Bell
4Pieterson
5Joyce
6Strauss
7Flintoff(i no its really low but where he comes in depends on how england s total's going)
8 Nixon
9 Hoggard
10 Anderson
11Paensar(awesome palyer)

12 Lewis
13 Plunkett
14 Paul Coliingwood(hanging on a thread)
15 Jamie Darlymple (hanging on a thread)

anyone somewhat agree

Hoggard has had enough chances by now... Panesar is certainly not an "awesome player"...

All in all, really, England could go and pick Joe Smith on the street, they'd have as good a chance as with the likes of Plunkett, Strauss and Collingwood.

 

[Richard]

That post was sarcastic, pal... Jeez, I repeat what I said about sarcasm-radars...

I think there's precisely no chance of Strauss being dropped from the ODI team in the near future, because plenty of people just don't get that a good Test player can be rubbish in ODIs... Strauss is, wherever you bat him, whoever else is in the side besides... but the chances of the England management realising that any time soon are very, very slim.

 

[Pup Clarke]

All in all, really, England could go and pick Joe Smith on the street, they'd have as good a chance as with the likes of Plunkett, Strauss and Collingwood.

Out of the three Mahmood,Tremlett and Plunkett.Plunkett looks quite decent and will be worth perservering with and he seems more accurate then last year.The ball he bowled to Gilchrist was a peach first up.Lewis,Anderson,Plunkett,Flintoff and Panesar would be my bowling attck in the caribbean or maybe Dalrymple for one of the seamers.Probably either Lewis or Plunkett.

 

[tooextracool]

After englands performance in the one day tournament in Australia who do you reckon should be in the squad

1Vaughn(c)
2Cook
3Bell
4Pieterson
5Joyce
6Strauss
7Flintoff(i no its really low but where he comes in depends on how england s total's going)
8 Nixon
9 Hoggard
10 Anderson
11Paensar(awesome palyer)

12 Lewis
13 Plunkett
14 Paul Coliingwood(hanging on a thread)
15 Jamie Darlymple (hanging on a thread)

anyone somewhat agree

Cant really get myself to agree with a side that includes Collingwood, Strauss, Hoggard, Cook and Nixon in there.
Firstly Joyce needs to open, he has an air of Nick Knight about him and he likes to use his feet and hit the ball over the top and take advantage of the first 15. Cook will be rubbish in ODIs and i have absolutely no doubt about that, tested or not.
I'd like to see Mark Ramprakash in the side somewhere honestly, cant help but feel that we need players of class and experience at this stage in the side and we all know that Mark Ramprakash on any given day has both. A batting card including Trescothick(hopefully), Joyce, Bell/Vaughan, Ramprakash, Pietersen, Flintoff, Read might actually have some hope in the world cup.
For the bowling on the other hand honestly i see no hope. Plunkett, Anderson, lewis, Panesar or whoever else arent going to destroy too many sides. Id like to see Chapple and/or Mascarenhas added to the side as well. You can toss in a gough or a kirtley as well but honestly it aint going to make things much better

 

[Richard]

I certainly can't see James Kirtley making things any better!

 

[Pup Clarke]

I certainly can't see James Kirtley making things any better!

Did you see his performance in the C&G Final?.One of county cricket's best one day bowlers IMO and can actually bowl at the death.

 

[tooextracool]

So in other words you should never have tried comparing the Trescothick and Hick\Ramprakash cases.

Either way it doesnt change my argument or make it less significant. Because talent can sometimes supersede mental problems and result in something completely different. And like i said earlier,mental issues only become more exaggerated when players are going through a bad patch which Hick was in 1996.

Batting three is a lesser workload than opening, when you have the wicketkeeping gloves..

Umm one wicket is hardly going to make that much of a difference. Certainly if that was the reason, they would have batted him at 6(which they did later on in his career anyways) and they almost certainly have not swapped him with Butcher at 3 to open again soon after that.

 

[tooextracool]

What, against Pakistan in 1996?

What? I said that i've supprted England from 92 when i first got into cricket right until now, and that included when they were at their worst during the 90s.

 

[Richard]

That was what they said when he was selected last time.

I wasn't at all convinced, because I hadn't just watched 1 game where he did well, but had watched him several times and had seen him bowl very, very ordinarily in plenty of one-day games.

 

[Richard]

The only time England were at their worst in the 1990s was against Pakistan in 1996.

Well, actually in 1992\93 and 1993, too, but I don't know how closely you were watching then...

I started watching in 1992, too, and have no memories at all of the subcontinent disaster in 92\93 and only very limited memories of the 1993 capitulation.

 

[Richard]

Either way it doesnt change my argument or make it less significant. Because talent can sometimes supersede mental problems and result in something completely different. And like i said earlier,mental issues only become more exaggerated when players are going through a bad patch which Hick was in 1996.

They do, but the point I was making is that Trescothick wasn't going through any said in mid-season 2006, he'd temporarily gotten over his problems.

Umm one wicket is hardly going to make that much of a difference. Certainly if that was the reason, they would have batted him at 6(which they did later on in his career anyways) and they almost certainly have not swapped him with Butcher at 3 to open again soon after that.

If that 1 wicket lasts an hour it can make a hell of a difference. And that's what you're picking your openers hoping they'll do - at least. You can't then pick your middle-order on the presumption that your openers will fail.

And when they swapped him with Butcher he discarded the gloves.