***Official** West Indies in England***

[Woodster]

I just never knew who it was that's all.

Oh I see, I thought my reasonably limited appearances on the forum was about to be brought into question!

 

[Bob Bamber]

An excellant game. West Indies throughly deserved their victory.

England however paid the price. For once again poor ODI selection. Cook doesn't deserve his place at the top of a 20/20 order. He doesn't score quickly enough , and as Nasser pointed out , he wasn't sure what to do when it came on what shots to play. How England can justify playing such a defensivly minded batsmen I have no idea.

Englands bowlers. Well I admit two of my selections were in the side. I would have picked Sidebottom and Broad. I wouldn't have picked Anderson. But even so , they were all as bad as eachother. Bowling way too much length on a bouncy track.

My problem with the selections were that England should have picked a 20/20 squad. OK my pick bowlers didn't do their jobs properly , but how so few of the batsmen were picked on their ability to play 20/20's. How the likes of Maddy , Loye , Samit Patel and others weren't given a call up when they rightly should of.

But if all that wasn't taking the piss , how anyone could justify not playing Monty Panesar is beyond me. A man who optimises control , and could have caused the Windies real problems today. And how other spinners werent considered either such as Nayan Doshi aswell.

Considering all that though , England did put up a good fight. Collingwood imparticular. But all against a (lets not forget) weak West Indies side , if that would have been a good side facing England tonight , the story could have been so much worse.

 

[Woodster]

I agree that if England were to select an out and out Twenty20 side, then it would have a very different look to the one that took the field tonight. Surely they are looking at these games as warm ups to the proper ODI's. A chance for Trott to get some batting and settle in, likewise Mascarenhas.

Regards Cook, even though I believe there is definitely a place for him in 50 over cricket, he would not be in my Twenty20 squad, again an example, I feel, at the selectors getting the 50 over guys in to play together, rather than selecting 2 squads involving Twenty20 specialists.

 

[Bob Bamber]

I agree that if England were to select an out and out Twenty20 side, then it would have a very different look to the one that took the field tonight. Surely they are looking at these games as warm ups to the proper ODI's. A chance for Trott to get some batting and settle in, likewise Mascarenhas.

Regards Cook, even though I believe there is definitely a place for him in 50 over cricket, he would not be in my Twenty20 squad, again an example, I feel, at the selectors getting the 50 over guys in to play together, rather than selecting 2 squads involving Twenty20 specialists.

But that doesn't make any sense. We have a 20/20 tournement coming up in 4 months time. The 50 over side has plenty of time to sort themselves out before the champions trophy next year. If the selectors were taking these two games seriously , and for that matter the Twenty20 World Cup in September , the would start preperations now. After all , after tomorrow Englands next 20/20 game will be in the World Cup itself. The selections were poor , OK as I said before , the bowlers (at least in the seam department) , were the same that I would have picked apart from Anderson , and they didn't bowl well. But how Engladn can justify not picking a spinner (Yardy bowled OK , but not to the standard that we need) , when England have Monty Panesar in the squad , but not selected , and guys like Nayan Doshi and Jeremy Snape unselected.

England didn't properly exploit the opening overs, Cook looked out of his depth , not knowing whether to stick or twist. Prior showed us (briefly) what can be done , when people take on the opening overs. But how much better the likes of Loye , Maddy and dare I say it Benning could have done in the same conditions. Owais Shah and Jonathan Trott didn't feel like they were ever going to threat , their persona doesn't breathe fear into the enenmy and the looked average.

My point being is that England made the wrong selections and they could well pay the price. They have tomorrow a chance for some sort of redemption. And I'm sure after what I just said Cook will hit a 44 ball hundred , Yardy will take 6fer and England will take the game by storm. I guess I live in hope sometimes.

One other mention should go to Collingwood , who handled the captaincy well. 20/20 is hectic at the best of times , and on his first showing I don't have any major complaints. And his batting was nothing short of excellance. Well done Colly , keep it up mate.

 

[gio]

Am I the only one that doesn't really care about the 20/20 internationals? If England wanted to, they could pick a squad that would really compete at 20/20 level, but what is the point? Yes, Jeremy Snape, Darren Maddy, Adam Hollioake can all suceed, but they're never going to do anything in an ODI line-up (anymore) so there's no point in picking them. Losing at 20/20 isn't going to affect anyone, it's purley a gimmick to make an extra few grand (at international level anyway, domestically, it's a whole other issue.)

I'm not going to dismiss a player after 1,2,5 or 10 20/20 internationals, as after all it's not a fair arena to jude a players credentials. Just lok at today, WI most sucessful bowler was Dwayne Smith - a horrible bits n' peices dobbler that bowls this and that at 60-80mph. There's no real need for that outside the 20/20 scene, so developing cricketers for the 20/20 seems utterly pointless to me, therefore there is no point in taking results or performances too seriously.

 

[grecian]

Am I the only one that doesn't really care about the 20/20 internationals? If England wanted to, they could pick a squad that would really compete at 20/20 level, but what is the point? Yes, Jeremy Snape, Darren Maddy, Adam Hollioake can all suceed, but they're never going to do anything in an ODI line-up (anymore) so there's no point in picking them. Losing at 20/20 isn't going to affect anyone, it's purley a gimmick to make an extra few grand (at international level anyway, domestically, it's a whole other issue.)

I'm not going to dismiss a player after 1,2,5 or 10 20/20 internationals, as after all it's not a fair arena to jude a players credentials. Just lok at today, WI most sucessful bowler was Dwayne Smith - a horrible bits n' peices dobbler that bowls this and that at 60-80mph. There's no real need for that outside the 20/20 scene, so developing cricketers for the 20/20 seems utterly pointless to me, therefore there is no point in taking results or performances too seriously.

I agree, same with ODIs, mind. Pointless and silly. Isn't Dwayne Smith quite a good bowler in them too.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Am I the only one that doesn't really care about the 20/20 internationals? If England wanted to, they could pick a squad that would really compete at 20/20 level, but what is the point? Yes, Jeremy Snape, Darren Maddy, Adam Hollioake can all suceed, but they're never going to do anything in an ODI line-up (anymore) so there's no point in picking them. Losing at 20/20 isn't going to affect anyone, it's purley a gimmick to make an extra few grand (at international level anyway, domestically, it's a whole other issue.)

I'm not going to dismiss a player after 1,2,5 or 10 20/20 internationals, as after all it's not a fair arena to jude a players credentials. Just lok at today, WI most sucessful bowler was Dwayne Smith - a horrible bits n' peices dobbler that bowls this and that at 60-80mph. There's no real need for that outside the 20/20 scene, so developing cricketers for the 20/20 seems utterly pointless to me, therefore there is no point in taking results or performances too seriously.

Dwayne Smith is more of a bowler than a batsman these days and is effective in certain situations (which is what you'd expect for a bowler like him - nice of you to nail his pace down as well to between Panesar and McGrath). For instance in the World Cup he took 3-36 against Pakistan - taking the wickets of Mohammed Yousuf, Inzamam and Kamran Akmal. Meanwhile his career ODI ER is respectable and he has a decent record for last year in ODI cricket.

So you're pretty much talking rubbish on the whole.

 

[gio]

Dwayne Smith is more of a bowler than a batsman these days and is effective in certain situations (which is what you'd expect for a bowler like him - nice of you to nail his pace down as well to between Panesar and McGrath). For instance in the World Cup he took 3-36 against Pakistan - taking the wickets of Mohammed Yousuf, Inzamam and Kamran Akmal. Meanwhile his career ODI ER is respectable and he has a decent record for last year in ODI cricket.

So you're pretty much talking rubbish on the whole.

Not at all, I don't believe bowling like that has any place in international cricket. It is bad to watch and takes minimal talent. And it's funny you should say that I 'didn't nail his pace down' because funnily enough, you can't! He bowls exactly as I descirbed and, in my opinion, it is horrendously dull.

 

[grecian]

He's played 65 international one-dayers, so decry ODIs along with 20/twenty then please Gio

 

[gio]

He's played 65 international one-dayers, so decry ODIs along with 20/twenty then please Gio

Meh, can't say I'm a fan of ODIs either to be honest. Happy?

 

[grecian]

Meh, can't say I'm a fan of ODIs either to be honest. Happy?

Very. Yet you did use Dwayne Smiths bowling to directly say how rubbish 20/twenty was, saying how it doesn't effect ODI cricket.

Its just a laugh 20/twenty, lets remember that, and hope members of the hilarious 2TISBS don't tell me to **** off, as has happened before.

 

[gio]

Very. Yet you did use Dwayne Smiths bowling to directly say how rubbish 20/twenty was, saying how it doesn't effect ODI cricket.

Its just a laugh 20/twenty, lets remember that, and hope members of the hilarious 2TISBS don't tell me to **** off, as has happened before.

I don't believe it does effect ODI cricket to a major extent. Certain players will suceed at both, certain will only excel in one form. I just don't think its worth sweating over, as a bad 20/20 player doesn't make a bad ODI player.

 

[gio]

When it comes down to it, Tests are far more important, to me at least, than ODIs. And if Dwayne Smith ever becomes a successful Test bowler, I'll chop my off my left b*****k and eat it for brunch.

 

[CricketMan01]

When it comes down to it, Tests are far more important, to me at least, than ODIs. And if Dwayne Smith ever becomes a successful Test bowler, I'll chop my off my left b*****k and eat it for brunch.

Yeah i have to agree with you there m8. Test matches are more important than ODI's especially twenty20 it would be nice to see England win an ODI though.

 

[Perm]

Good win for the West Indies. Chanderpaul, Devon Smith and Samuels batted really well and Dwayne Smith bowled well also, shame that England weren't more competitive as Collingwood was pretty much the only one to stand up.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Collingwood might have been able to win it if it hadn't been for Cook, I still can't believe he was picked to open in a Twenty20 - completely farcical. Add 10 runs to the score for Cook's fannying about (25 off 16 would still be nothing particularly flash) and it would have really tested the WI bowling at the end.

 

[Prince EWS]

f the selectors were taking these two games seriously , and for that matter the Twenty20 World Cup in September , the would start preperations now

That is precisely the point though. They aren't taking it seriously - and nor should they IMO.

 

[Prince EWS]

He's played 65 international one-dayers, so decry ODIs along with 20/twenty then please Gio

He's never done very well in that format though, is the point.

 

[gio]

Dwayne Smith is more of a bowler than a batsman these days and is effective in certain situations (which is what you'd expect for a bowler like him - nice of you to nail his pace down as well to between Panesar and McGrath). For instance in the World Cup he took 3-36 against Pakistan - taking the wickets of Mohammed Yousuf, Inzamam and Kamran Akmal. Meanwhile his career ODI ER is respectable and he has a decent record for last year in ODI cricket.

So you're pretty much talking rubbish on the whole.

(6 ball overs)       Mat    O       R   W   BB1    BB2     Ave  Econ    SR 4w 5w

unfiltered            65  334.2  1600  43  5/45   4/29   37.20  4.78  46.6  2  1
filtered              23  145     663  16  4/31   3/36   41.43  4.57  54.3  1  0


Mat    O       R   W    BBI    Ave 4w 5w  W/R   I Match

  1    9      39   2  2/39   19.50  0  0  2/39  1 DLF Cup   v Aus 2006/07 [2413]
  2   16      82   3  2/39   27.33  0  0  1/43  1 DLF Cup   v Ind 2006/07 [2414]
  3   23     120   3  2/39   40.00  0  0  0/38  1 DLF Cup   v Aus 2006/07 [2417]
  4   33     151   7  4/31   21.57  1  0  4/31  1 DLF Cup   v Ind 2006/07 [2419]
  5   41     186   7  4/31   26.57  1  0  0/35  1 DLF Cup   v Aus 2006/07 [2422]
  6   47     200   9  4/31   22.22  1  0  2/14  1 ICC CT    v Zim 2006/07 [2424]
  7   50     229   9  4/31   25.44  1  0  0/29  2 ICC CT    v SL  2006/07 [2428]
  8   53     245   9  4/31   27.22  1  0  0/16  2 ICC CT    v Aus 2006/07 [2432]
  9   63     282   9  4/31   31.33  1  0  0/37  1 ICC CT    v Ind 2006/07 [2437]
 10   67     294   9  4/31   32.66  1  0  0/12  1 ICC CT    v SA  2006/07 [2442]
 11   77     327   9  4/31   36.33  1  0  0/33  2 2nd ODI   v Pak 2006/07 [2460]
 12   83     374   9  4/31   41.55  1  0  0/47  2 3rd ODI   v Pak 2006/07 [2463]
 13   93     403  11  4/31   36.63  1  0  2/29  1 4th ODI   v Pak 2006/07 [2464]
 14   99     435  11  4/31   39.54  1  0  0/32  2 5th ODI   v Pak 2006/07 [2466]
 15  105     469  11  4/31   42.63  1  0  0/34  1 1st ODI   v Ind 2006/07 [2480]
 16  114     503  12  4/31   41.91  1  0  1/34  1 2nd ODI   v Ind 2006/07 [2485]
 17  122     552  12  4/31   46.00  1  0  0/49  1 4th ODI   v Ind 2006/07 [2493]
 18  132     588  15  4/31   39.20  1  0  3/36  2 World Cup v Pak 2006/07 [2531]
 19  137     616  16  4/31   38.50  1  0  1/28  1 World Cup v Zim 2006/07 [2543]
 20  137     616  16  4/31   38.50  1  0   -    - World Cup v Ire 2006/07 [2551]
 21  137     616  16  4/31   38.50  1  0   -    - World Cup v Aus 2006/07 [2555]
 22  142     640  16  4/31   40.00  1  0  0/24  2 World Cup v NZ  2006/07 [2557]
 23  145     663  16  4/31   41.43  1  0  0/23  1 World Cup v SL  2006/07 [2560]

Filtered to show his record in ODIs since 06/07. So you're pretty much talking rubbish on the whole.

 

[GIMH]

That is precisely the point though. They aren't taking it seriously - and nor should they IMO.

Disagree. All matches should be treated seriously, otherwise why play them? Regardless of the format, people are still paying to watch, the players are getting paid a fair sum, AND if they are treating them as warm-ups for the ODIs then they should definitely be treated seriously. It'd be nice to start winning an ODI series here and there and as such they should prepare thoroughly.