Where do England go from here?

[honestbharani]

I'm quite a fan of Dalrymple to be honest, but I think he'd be fairly useless batting any lower than 6. He'd be most effective at 5 IMO. Bopara seems similar. England need Flintoff to bat 7 and be given free licence to hit out after the top 6 bat out the first 40 or so overs.

Well, if he is good enough, of course have him at 5 and add Bopara at 7. It balances out the side so much more that way.... The important thing is for Flintoff to bat well. Not scoring 100s or stuff but score good 40s and 50s as much as possible at a healthy strike rate. He would really help out the team that way.

 

[Barney Rubble]

Ugh. The thought of Jamie Dalrymple ever playing a Test is fairly horrifying, TBH.

EDIT: Oops, just realised honestbharani and Prince EWS were back to talking about ODIs. Ignore me.

 

[open365]

Dalrymple is poor, he had a good run of form at the start of his career that kept him in the side for a while but he isn't good enough and i think his domestic stats show that

 

[Nishant]

Dalrymple is poor, he had a good run of form at the start of his career that kept him in the side for a while but he isn't good enough and i think his domestic stats show that

i just think he hasnt been playing in the right position TBH!

 

[Barney Rubble]

i just think he hasnt been playing in the right position TBH!

He's been playing as a bits-and-pieces all-rounder, which is exactly what he is. He's not good enough to bat in the top 6, and he's not good enough to bowl 10 overs every game. End of.

 

[open365]

Matt's right, you can blame his poor performance on lack of oppurtunity or you can face the facts that he's just not good enough.

 

[viktor]

Last night on TMS they said the power plays weren't going to be used.

What is the point in not playing with the same rules as are used at the Int'l level.
Four-day matches, I can understand that with so many teams, there might be scheduling issues.

 

[social]

First of all, I don't think the Aussie way is something that guarantees success. They do a lot of good things with the way they run their cricket but they do a lot of mistakes as well. Dropping Bevan that early was one of them. I guess they had enough fire power in the side to cover for him but it still wasn't a great move.


For England, they need to find a decent opener or get Strauss back to form or Tresco back to his old comitted self sooner than later. Also, they need to find someone that can keep and bat decently. As long as that doesn't happen, they will always struggle to be consistently competitive. Flintoff needs to get his form back and it remains to be seen whether becoming captain will help him. Seriously can't see Vaughan playing after the WC in ODIs.

Bell
another opener
Pieterson
Collingwood
a batsman
Flintoff
Dalrymple
3 seamers or 2 seamers + Panesar


That side doesn't look that bad, but it all depends on who the 3 "other" players are.

Australia dont do everything right but you cant argue about their success in WCs

Bevan's omission might've caused a bit of short term pain but that's all forgotten now as results of the last 4 years are largely irrelevant in the scheme of things

Anyway, they headed into this WC with an experienced and successful middle order because the selectors bit the bullet early

 

[honestbharani]

Australia dont do everything right but you cant argue about their success in WCs

Bevan's omission might've caused a bit of short term pain but that's all forgotten now as results of the last 4 years are largely irrelevant in the scheme of things

Anyway, they headed into this WC with an experienced and successful middle order because the selectors bit the bullet early

yeah, I agree but I still think that certain players could have been groomed even with Bevan around........


I was just trying to point out that just because Australia have been successful doesn't mean that England should try and copy everything they do. Australia's way has been good in most issues but not all and there is also the thing that what works in Australia need not necessarily work in England....


Anyways, England do need to unearth 2 to 3 competent ODI players rather soon if they are to become consistently competitive.

 

[pup11]

Now if you want to be successfull you have got to make some harsh decisions down the line, you can't please everyone can you??



At the end of the day its the results that matter the most and Australia certainly has produced the results to back their decisions.


If i am not wrong Bevan was dropped to make way for Clarkie and we all know what a superb first year Pup had in international cricket.

 

[Prince EWS]

Matt's right, you can blame his poor performance on lack of oppurtunity or you can face the facts that he's just not good enough.

I posted about Dalrymple before in another thread with some stats so I won't repeat myself with them, but when given a decent length of time to bat, Dalrymple actually has a pretty good record (well, by English ODI standards, anyway).

 

[honestbharani]

Now if you want to be successfull you have got to make some harsh decisions down the line, you can't please everyone can you??



At the end of the day its the results that matter the most and Australia certainly has produced the results to back their decisions.


If i am not wrong Bevan was dropped to make way for Clarkie and we all know what a superb first year Pup had in international cricket.

There were other players who could have been dropped. And Clark didn't do something that Bevan hadn't already done. Anyways, the team had superbly talented players and they got away with it. IT is not easy to argue that the team was poorer without him when they kept winning everything.

 

[Bob Bamber]

Test Side Vs West Indies in the first test. This is how I would have it , not how it will probably happen.

1. Andrew Strauss - A poor winter for Strauss , but his batting suits the English surfaces and has the potential to be a very good opener for England.

2. Alistair Cook - Hes a real talent , no doubt about that , and he's showed it over the past 18 months. Lets hope it continues

3. Ian Bell - He'll get his form together sometime. He lacked , what was a probably deserved century in the winter. But has shown some real signs of talent , and number 3 isn't the easiet position.

4. Kevin Pietersen - He has to bat at 4 , no question. He's too good to bat at 5.

5. Paul Collingwood (C) - Hes still got years in him yet , and last winter showed his ability.

6. Nic Pothas + - - Hes the sort of player that England have missed. He can score runs , which England have lacked. I don't see any major point in giving the gloves to Steven Davies just yet , hes too young. We gave Read and Foster the gloves too early.

7. Andrew Flintoff - - This position would probably more reflect his batting ablity. And with Pothas (hopefully) scoring runs , then it'll take some of the pressure off him.

8. Monty Panesar - - If he bats here , he'll have a real chance of becoming a pretty decent batsman. He's the only England player, who actually played Murali well.

9. Stuart Broad - Its time to give this kid a serious run , he bowls with control , and could develop into a seriously good player.

10. Matthew Hoggard - The only question here would be whether to bat him at 10 or 11. By far Englands best bowler over the past few years.

11. Steve Harmison - Probably the best option here,

Ill do the One Day team tomorrow.

 

[Richard]

ECB formed a review team to find the reasons why England performed so badly in the recent Ashes series and the ECB were making big claims that England is targeting global-domination by 2011.



I mean was all that just a face saving act or are they doing anything serious about it, because if a team has made up its mind to ignore Odi cricket then how can they think of global-domination.

The whole thing is complete nonsense, there was a previous target date of this very moment; and there've been review-groups many times before.

Absolute and utter waste of time IMO - just a facade to make it look like they're doing something big. And when a respectible guy like Gus Fraser does something as stupid as takes a position on said group at the same time as being a journo, well...

 

[Richard]

Its been a pretty tortureous time for England over the last 6 months. Few would have invisiged the Commonwealth Bank series win. But a 5-0 mullering in Austrailia followed by some pretty horrible and unconvincing performances in the carribean. Just wondering what you guys think England should do this summer.

I think Vaughan needs to go. Its been the main problem with the side over the past year , they've always been captained by the 'stand in'. And Vaughan as ive been saying is now in there in as a specialist captain , particularly evident in the One Dayers. Drop him , he hasn't been in form since the 2002 - 03 Ashes series. And is still riding on that series.

I'm not too sure about the keeping situation. I have faith in Nixon as a One Day keeper , but Id much prefer Nic Pothas as the test keeper , because it takes some of the pressure of an underperforming Andrew Flintoff.

Trescothick , is now causing problems. And there not really good. Hes missed 2 consectutive winters through stress related illness. And is talking up his return in similar ways than he did last year. I don't see the point in having Tresco in the side if hes only going to play in England.

The one day openers. They've been a problem for a while now. And without Pietersen I think a proper strategy would have been long sorted by know. I still think Mal Loye is the man for the job. Either with Trescothick , or if hes still got stress related issues , someone like Jonathan Batty (would solve the keeping problem) , James Benning or Darren Maddy. I'm not convinced with this whole 'piddle around at the start' thing at the moment. Austrailia and Sri Lanka are sucessful for two reasons. One because they've got good bowlers who can bowl straight. But they take advantage of the the early overs.

Just wondering how you guys would sort out Englands problems at the moment.

This thread has got to be the most fascinating of recent times. to Bowman pretty much throughout, and a qualified to Pitt, too.

I still think there's far too much mistaken goal-setting and lack of understanding that the two game-forms need to be treated completely separately, in general.

First thing to say is that it'll be a hell of a letdown if we don't win both Test series this summer, especially if Vaughan and Trescothick are back. For me, the side I'd be happiest to see in a couple of weeks' time, bearing in mind all things that need to be borne in mind (eg the 13th commandment - "Harmison will play for England when fit"), is this:
Trescothick
Strauss
Vaughan (c)
Collingwood
Pietersen
Bell
Foster (w)
Flintoff
Hoggard
Harmison (Jones is an outside chance)
MSP
Yes, Flintoff does indeed not deserve to be any higher than eight IMO, and if Collingwood's going to play we have to see what he's made of, and you might as well put Pietersen in his favoured position.

As for ODIs, I'm quite happy to stick the thing on the back-burner for now - give me a nice sunny few May days, some cricket that we're actually reasonably good at and a thrashing of West Indies and things will seem well in The World again - at least, as well as they ever are in English cricket. We're unlikely to improve overnight in ODIs and we will beyond question never do so as long as we keep picking talentless nobodies like Mahmood and Bresnan who are scarecely good enough for domestic cricket. However, I'm pessimistic enough to say I can't see that changing in the near future either. And that's not a problem with the management, it's a problem with the general psyche of the English game. This board is generally a bit of an exception (due principally IMO to the age of the participants, those of us in this age bracket tend to have a better perspective on one-day cricket than the older lot) and if anything that makes it all the more frustrating.

There's a million things I could say responding to others in this thread, yeah, but I'll be nice. One general thing I'll say is that there's no future in Nixon playing any longer. He's done himself proud IMO, no disputes there any more, but I'm hoping he was picked with the footnote that it was only for these 2 comps. If not, well, I'll us into oblivion, our chances for 2011, and, heck, 2019 as well in all likelihood, are gone.

 

[tooextracool]

Test Side Vs West Indies in the first test. This is how I would have it , not how it will probably happen.

1. Andrew Strauss - A poor winter for Strauss , but his batting suits the English surfaces and has the potential to be a very good opener for England.

4. Kevin Pietersen - He has to bat at 4 , no question. He's too good to bat at 5.
.

I think Strauss' position really has to come under scrutiny. For one thing if you discount his series against pakistan he has been very very ordinary a while. As such any team that can pitch the ball up and get it to swing with a semblance of accuracy has caused him plenty of problems, and his record against spin is hardly anything worth talking about.
If Trescothick is fit for the summer, i'll have him back in a heartbeat, and i'd also consider having Owais Shah around the squad if hes performing well enough.

As far as KP is concerned, honestly, good players bat where they want to. There is absolutely no reason for him to bat above 5, collingwood can take over 4. Moreover the further away he is from the new ball the better.

 

[PhoenixFire]

I'd go with this tbh.

1) Strauss
2) Trescothick
3) Cook
4) Pietersen
5) Collingwood
6) Bell
7) Flintoff
8) Davies
9) Panesar
10) Hoggard
11) Harmison

 

[Richard]

Said it a few times, but I don't think Davies should be pitched in there yet, nor do I feel that Cook should be picked ahead of Vaughan.

 

[social]

Said it a few times, but I don't think Davies should be pitched in there yet, nor do I feel that Cook should be picked ahead of Vaughan.

Of more relevance is the question of whether Vaughan should be picked at all.

Picking him in front to a player like Cook would be representative of everything that is wrong with the English game

 

[Richard]

No, it'd be reprisentative of picking the player who deserved the spot most.

Take a look at this. It is not the record of someone who deserves to be dropped.

Vaughan has unfinished business in Test cricket and those judging him by his ODI form would be best ignored.

Cook, on the other hand, has many, many years ahead of him - it can't possibly do either him or the team any harm to have a year or so out of the side.