***Official*** England in Sri Lanka

[wpdavid]

So far Prior has given 12 byes in ODI's.

In 10 games when he's been WK? Not a huge problem, unlike his tendency to drop Tendulkar from time to time. As someone said earlier, the fact that he doesn't have a central contract suggests this winter is last chance saloon for the guy.

It's not the worst squad in the world, and obviously the bulk of the side picks itself after the India win. Let's hope the batting does better than the last few time out there - IIRC we haven't passed 200 in an odi since 1982.

btw has Swann been opening the batting in oneday games for Notts? If so, Prior might have a new partner.

 

[Poker Boy]

In 10 games when he's been WK? Not a huge problem, unlike his tendency to drop Tendulkar from time to time. As someone said earlier, the fact that he doesn't have a central contract suggests this winter is last chance saloon for the guy.

It's not the worst squad in the world, and obviously the bulk of the side picks itself after the India win. Let's hope the batting does better than the last few time out there - IIRC we haven't passed 200 in an odi since 1982.

btw has Swann been opening the batting in oneday games for Notts? If so, Prior might have a new partner.

Yes, but IMO you ned a Test quality opener in ODIs (don't forget SL have Vass and Malinga) and I would like a prior/Swann partnership about as much as the prior/Wright one we came up with in the last match.

 

[Perm]

This Graeme Swann looks like a decent player, an economy rate of 4.45 isn't bad for a spinner and he has a healthy average. Wouldn't mind seeing his wickets to match ratio between improved though, currently it's only about 1 per game. Been rewarded for a good season it seems, let's hope his form carries to England colours.

Really dissapointed at this Prior-bashing going on. I fully agree with the comments about him in the ODI side, but as a Test wicket-keeper he is certainly serviceable and has had a good series and a poor one. Seems harsh to not give him a central contract though, particularly as the selectors seem to want to persist with him opening in the shorter form.

 

[jammay123]

imo england should have brought another WK on the tour as i feel this will keep prior on his toes someone like foster or davies. it will also mean if he has mare of a start of the series we can put the other WK in which will maybe make prior pull his finger out

 

[Perm]

imo england should have brought another WK on the tour as i feel this will keep prior on his toes someone like foster or davies. it will also mean if he has mare of a start of the series we can put the other WK in which will maybe make prior pull his finger out

Not really enough room in the squad, especially if you didn't intend to play the extra wicket-keeper unless Prior was woefully out of form.

 

[Prince EWS]

Not really enough room in the squad, especially if you didn't intend to play the extra wicket-keeper unless Prior was woefully out of form.

The number of players in the squad isn't inflexible, though. England could have sent over another player if they thought it'd help.

 

[Prince EWS]

Yep.

http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/england/content/current/story/310246.html

Thanks. I've been a bit behind in the last day or so.

 

[Prince EWS]

So far Prior has given 12 byes in ODI's.

That number is a bit misleading, though. He's conceded heaps of wides which better (or even international standard..) keepers would have stopped; they were called wide due to the harsh ODI interpretations. Similarly, he's let a lof of edges that have bounced short of him etc through to the boundary as well.

Prior's wicket keeping has cost around that number of runs per game in ODIs, IMO.

 

[Perm]

The number of players in the squad isn't inflexible, though. England could have sent over another player if they thought it'd help.

For sure, but I don't really see the point of sending over another player unless you have intentions of playing him, which I don't think the selectors would if they chose Foster or Davies.

 

[SpaceMonkey]

If a backup is needed due to injury they will probably call someone up from the Academy squad which is bound to have a few keepers in.

 

[Nishant]

For sure, but I don't really see the point of sending over another player unless you have intentions of playing him, which I don't think the selectors would if they chose Foster or Davies.

That does introduce a good point: Do you think that its fair for players to be selected on tours when it is obvious that they would not be played. Would it demotivate them because they were not played or would it provide them with necessary experience?

IMHO...i think players who are not gonna play should be left out of the squad and only called up if actually required.

 

[Richard]

It's too difficult to say, really - and TBF, there are undoubtedly players who, while clearly not ready to be playing Tests, have benefited from time on tour with a senior side.

And on the flipside of this, there are cases when players have been taken on tour blatantly not with the intention of playing, but due to crisis circumstances have been pitched into the fray when clearly not yet good enough. This is always rather a shame.

 

[Richard]

This Graeme Swann looks like a decent player, an economy rate of 4.45 isn't bad for a spinner and he has a healthy average. Wouldn't mind seeing his wickets to match ratio between improved though, currently it's only about 1 per game. Been rewarded for a good season it seems, let's hope his form carries to England colours.

The great thing is that he's actually been going pretty darn well for 4 seasons now. Perhaps a little surprising that the Blackwells, Yardys, Dalrymples and Battys have ever been picked ahead of him, even though Yardy and Dalrymple are principally batsmen (though picked more for bowling) and Blackwell was thought to be when first selected.

Certainly ridiculous that anyone should possibly believe Panesar to be a better one-day spinner than Swann.

 

[Richard]

Yes, but IMO you ned a Test quality opener in ODIs (don't forget SL have Vass and Malinga) and I would like a prior/Swann partnership about as much as the prior/Wright one we came up with in the last match.

This is something I've been thinking for quite a while, TBH...

When has the pinch-hitting opener ever worked for England? It hasn't. All good ODI opening batsmen have been specialists who've also opened in the First-Class game. Will Alastair Cook join these ranks? The trouble is, it's difficult to say. The absolute last thing I want to see happen with Cook is for him to become the next Strauss. I hope, now he's in the ODI squad to go to Lanka, he plays (and ideally does well). I want to see a decision made soon, though - if he plays and doesn't do well, he must be dropped and not picked again until there's serious (and I don't mean just 3 or 4 games for Essex) evidence he has become the good ODI player which, to date, he doesn't seem to be.

Of course, what we all hope can happen is that Trescothick can return. I don't want to see Prior opening (or anywhere near the ODI side) and frankly I don't think Wright's chances of doing much there are all that high either. I'll wait until he does a bit more than slams 2 or 3 decent innings in the Pro40 before changing my mind.

The trouble is, as it has been since the start of 2006, we're in limbo: we all know that if Trescothick comes back our chances improve markedly. But we have to patch things up until then, and the trouble is there are so few candidates (as shown by the fact that a promising but totally unproven player like Cook and two no-case-for-selection-at-all types like Prior and Wright have got in). The last thing we need is more makeshift openers - it's a sure way to waste precious time, and as the previous 2 cases show, World Cups end-up coming round damn quickly.

 

[Perm]

The great thing is that he's actually been going pretty darn well for 4 seasons now. Perhaps a little surprising that the Blackwells, Yardys, Dalrymples and Battys have ever been picked ahead of him, even though Yardy and Dalrymple are principally batsmen (though picked more for bowling) and Blackwell was thought to be when first selected.

Certainly ridiculous that anyone should possibly believe Panesar to be a better one-day spinner than Swann.

Indeed, I just had a look at his record over the last couple seasons, just to see how well he had been performing. I thought that if he'd been bowling well for any longer then his name might've been mentioned a bit more often around England circles, and I don't think that's been the case.

 

[Richard]

Well he first played, of course, back in 1999\2000, at a time when it was nothing more than a "token young player" selection. He only played the 1 ODI (5 overs for 24) and with the combination of a questionable attitude (some called him a young Tufnell) and distinctly moderate returns in 2000 and 2001 (plus the re-establishment of the more talented Robert Croft and the establishment of the left-arm of Ashley Giles) he disappeared again.

Now, as often with those brought in too early, they have to do that bit more to get back in the picture.

 

[aussie]

Feeling confident of a whitewash, even without Murali.

You may eat those words at the end of the series, then again maybe me too. I'll wait and see..

 

[Perm]

That does introduce a good point: Do you think that its fair for players to be selected on tours when it is obvious that they would not be played. Would it demotivate them because they were not played or would it provide them with necessary experience?

IMHO...i think players who are not gonna play should be left out of the squad and only called up if actually required.

I don't think there should be any need to include a player in the squad if he has no realistic chances of playing.

 

[Richard]

You may eat those words at the end of the series, then again maybe me too. I'll wait and see..

That'd be a dead-cert Jimmy if the Awards weren't on hiatus!

 

[TT Boy]

Interesting to see if Swann plays as a pinch hitter in any of the one day games. Has had relatively decent success at Notts in that role and I can’t see the selectors giving Cook or Prior the whole five games (at the top) if neither one impresses early on.