Lack of English Batting Talent

[Ash_A55]

The way I have been coached at junoir level here should set us up nicely for ODI cricket. We play junoir 20/20 matches and 50 overs a side at senoir level. Maybe the system will take time to filter players through?

 

[andyc]

1. Stats from the last 2 season used to show consistency
2. Strike rate min of 80 in both the last 2 seasons. Need to be able to score quickly off Domestic attacks if you want to do it at International level
3. At least 1 century in each season. Ability to play a big, matchwinning innings rather than just cameos.
4. Average of over 35 in both of the last 2 seasons. Showing consistency and I believe 35 should be a rough approx. of the min. International calibre players should achieve

In all honesty, I didnt think the qualifying targets were that difficult to meet. And they weren't for foreign players.

The English Players List
Ali Brown
Marcus Trescothick

I was interested to see what it was for Australia, so, using the same statistics, I got a pretty impressive list...

The Australian Players List
David Hussey

Admittedly, the Aussies do have fewer games, and so a lot of players missed out due to having no centuries. All the same, I am pretty surprised by that.

 

[Richard]

Corrected.

Hyper-extending elbow != chucker.

 

[Richard]

This is an interesting thread imo. Given that England have struggled in the ODI area for so long (recent CB series in Oz aside), is it a structural/ developmental thing about the way their players are coached at an early age, or is it an unfortunate accident of history that that there just isn't the dynamism at the moment?
When I look at the England side, most of their batsmen aren't bad players, they're just the WRONG type of player for ODIs. There is an array of accumulators but little in the way of genuine belters of the ball (KP and Fred aside). The fact that they are currently ranked #2 in tests says that the players they have there can play, but they just don't seem dynamic enough imo for the shorter version. Further, the fact that KP and Fred are the only two really consistently devastating hitters means there is bulk pressure on them when, like this morning, the side needs to motor along in the innings - the opponents know they are the main men as well.
By contrast, Sri Lanka, NZ, SA and Australia seem to have an arsenal of power hitters who can semi-regularly deposit the ball over the boundary. The depth in this power means that those sides can go hard at the bowling virtually all the way through (barring a collapse) whereas it seems England feel the need to preserve early wickets more than other sides so that their two big hitters are protected from the new ball.
Those who are in England, are there really that many options to fill this void?

TBH, though you're 100% right about us not producing the "right" type of player, history shows time and again that the best ODI players are not the brute-strength biffers, but those who are capable of changing their style of play - like Pietersen. Playing according to the situation.

Not so sure about Lanka having power hitters, mind - it's their one weakness, especially with no Maharoof in the side.

The trouble in English cricket, IMO, is more the lack of accumulators like Fairbrother and Hick than the lack of biffers.

 

[Richard]

Fair points.

The problem is not that England don't produce dynamic and aggressive players but that they are not trusted, not selected and seen as 'un-English'. As I noted earlier in the thread, look at how Ali Brown has been classified and treated.

Players such as Loye and Benning can take attacks apart as can many others that struggle to maintain a decent average whilst doing so.

Don't give-up hope on Benning yet - he's still to get any real chance. He's already proven far more consistent than Brown ever managed to be.

 

[Richard]

A Destructive England ODI Batting XI would look something like this

Brown
Trescothick
Loye
Pietersen
Benning
Benham
Flintoff
Prior
Blackwell
Mascarenhas
Chapple

Now if you found a place for Collingwood, maybe changed the keeper and brought in 2 different seamers I dont think too many would argue that it wouldnt be better than the current XI (EDIT- Second thoughts, they probably would, but I wouldnt).

Christopher Benham, Ian Blackwell and Matthew Prior...

These are classic examples of how the simplistic approach of "pick big hitters" is NOT the answer - it's all well and good saying you need the power, but you need the talent to go with it - nay, you need the talent first, then the power. Ian Blackwell is one of the most worthless players ever picked as a batter (which he undeniably was, even if later on his bowling came to the forefront more) and, surprise surprise, he was picked because of 2 games (that just happened to be televised), not because of genuine long-term performance.

The simple fact of the matter, as I mentioned a couple of posts ago (yeah, yeah, I know - I've done it again ) is that to be successful at 50-over cricket you need to be able to embrace a range of styles.

 

[Richard]

I don't think boundary hitting is the problem, actually. I haven't done any stats on it, but I'd hazzard a guess to say their batsmen scored a similar percentage of runs in boundries to a lot of other sides (last ten overs of an innings aside, I guess.) It's the simple fact that none of them actually have a clue how to pace an innings in one day cricket, barring Pietersen and Collingwood. Batsmen that are over-reliant on boundries actually tend to struggle a bit in one day cricket as when they can't break the more defensive field, they just can't score at all. An obvious exception to this English problem is Collingwood really - he's the player that the likes of Bell, Vaughan and Strauss should look towards. There's nothing technically to suggest that Bell, Vaughan or Strauss couldn't be good ODI players, but they simply have no idea what they're supposed to be doing, so they'll play a few cracking shots to the fielders, take no singles and then get frustrated into doing something stupid. The problem with most batsmen who can't translate their test performances into one day cricket is too many dot balls - not a lack of boundries. Some of them, like Bell IMO, simply don't know exactly what they should be doing, while there are some like Vaughan who flatly just aren't good at rotating the strike and minimising dot balls.

Bell will eventually mature into a good ODI batsman IMO - although not a particularly special one by any means. Not too much hope for Vaughan or Strauss though as far as I'm concerned.

I've evidently been beaten to what I've said 4 times... should have read this post in entirity before replying...

 

[Poker Boy]

This just proves there is a shortage of "power players" in England. People look at our top three but if we wanted a power player we only really have absent friend Trescothick, Loye (should have been in WC squad to give an option and if Tait hadn't saved Joyce's place by dropping him in CB series probably would have been) or Ali Brown who I am convinced if he was from another country he would have had more of a run - don't tell me he's worse than Bosman. IMO this is because we play one-day cricket in April and May when the new white ball swings and seams and it is far too risky to be aggressive up fromt. Jayasuria and Gilchrist flopped in the '99 WC to prove my point. Until we play our domestic OD cricket only in June, July and August we won't produce the likes of Hayden, Gilchrist, Gayle or Jayasuria. And two of the three names I mentioned as English "power players"play their home cricket at Taunton and the Oval - probably the two best batting pitches in the country.

 

[Goughy]

don't tell me he's worse than Bosman. IMO .

Dont worry I wont.

Brown has TWO List A Double Hundreds (I believe the only person in the world to ever do so, though I could be proved wrong) and Bosman has ZERO List A hundreds (as in he has never made it past 99)

Brown is also more destructive. If he had come to England with a West Indian or South African accent he would have been lauded. Oh well. Another career lost

 

[Richard]

This just proves there is a shortage of "power players" in England. People look at our top three but if we wanted a power player we only really have absent friend Trescothick, Loye (should have been in WC squad to give an option and if Tait hadn't saved Joyce's place by dropping him in CB series probably would have been) or Ali Brown who I am convinced if he was from another country he would have had more of a run - don't tell me he's worse than Bosman. IMO this is because we play one-day cricket in April and May when the new white ball swings and seams and it is far too risky to be aggressive up fromt. Jayasuria and Gilchrist flopped in the '99 WC to prove my point. Until we play our domestic OD cricket only in June, July and August we won't produce the likes of Hayden, Gilchrist, Gayle or Jayasuria. And two of the three names I mentioned as English "power players"play their home cricket at Taunton and the Oval - probably the two best batting pitches in the country.

Playing at Taunton does no-one any good IMO.

It allows rubbish like Blackwell to be successful.

 

[Richard]

Brown is also more destructive. If he had come to England with a West Indian or South African accent he would have been lauded. Oh well. Another career lost

Come on, now, you don't seriously believe that?

 

[Goughy]

Come on, now, you don't seriously believe that?

Of course I do. I wouldnt have written it otherwise. It carries a certain cache and is fashionable and gets people talking.

Presentation is important and accents go a long way towards the image. Ive seen it from both sides of the fence. Ive been prejudiced against and benefited from it.

 

[silentstriker]

Completely OT, but thats true in other areas as well. Guys with British accents get naturally higher grades during presentations in US business schools. Accents affects image, and if it reinforces your current beliefs, you can definitely benefit (or be hurt) from it (Same reason why a lot of southerners spend a lot of time getting rid of the Appalachian accent). True in cricket as in anything else.

For my senior design projects, I always look for someone with a European/Australian accent to group up with.

 

[Richard]

Of course I do. I wouldnt have written it otherwise. It carries a certain cache and is fashionable and gets people talking.

Presentation is important and accents go a long way towards the image. Ive seen it from both sides of the fence. Ive been prejudiced against and benefited from it.

I see where you're coming from, but I honestly don't believe that being of SA or WI origin would have made Brown a better player. If he had got more chances, he'd probably have flopped IMO.

 

[Goughy]

I see where you're coming from, but I honestly don't believe that being of SA or WI origin would have made Brown a better player. If he had got more chances, he'd probably have flopped IMO.

Yeah, what a failure he was. Only played 16 games when noone wanted him there and was never confident in his place. That is hard and yet he scored more ODI hundreds in those 16 games then Vaughan and Bell have done combined in their 120 odd.

Also he would have have a clearly defined role in the team with a purpose. Not like many England players who seem to have no defined purpose and then proceed to do nothing more than faff around.

 

[Richard]

Would you open with him or play him at five or six?

I simply cannot see him doing much against Pollock, McGrath, Ambrose and so on.

 

[Goughy]

Would you open with him or play him at five or six?

I simply cannot see him doing much against Pollock, McGrath, Ambrose and so on.

They are the guys he has to go after. Let them bowl and they will dominate and kill you. Go after them and take the attack and suddenly a teams best weapon is not only neutralised but becomes a weakness and suddenly their is doubt over a teams best bowler and that has a huge psychological impact.

Witness Hayden against Pollock this WC and off the top of my head, how Baby Ben took on McGrath on ODI debut.

TBF, Brown could bat anywhere from 1-6 for me.

 

[Prince EWS]

They are the guys he has to go after. Let them bowl and they will dominate and kill you. Go after them and take the attack and suddenly a teams best weapon is not only neutralised but becomes a weakness and suddenly their is doubt over a teams best bowler and that has a huge psychological impact.

Witness Hayden against Pollock this WC and off the top of my head, how Baby Ben took on McGrath on ODI debut.

TBF, Brown could bat anywhere from 1-6 for me.

Would probably have to open or bat 3 in the current set-up. Pietersen, Collingwood, Flintoff is pretty set from 4-6.

 

[Goughy]

Despite all my defence of him, I would be pointless picking Brown now. He is on the verge of retirement and would only play a few games.

The point was always that he should have been in the set-up and been in the WC squad.

Just a shame how he was 5 years before his time. Id hate to think how KP would have been percieved in the mid-90s.

 

[Richard]

If he was bashing First-Class runs at 55 and OD runs at 40-odd, I honestly believe it wouldn't matter how he was perceived.