***Official*** England in Sri Lanka

[DCC_legend]

Nah... Monty is just not good enough to be an odi player, he is a dire batsman and fielder and above all that he bowls flat in the odi's.

It's about having the confidence to bowl flighted deliveries in ODIs. It's easier to hit them if they're too short, having less pace and all that. If he gets the confidence to do it, he'll improve without a doubt.

 

[Richard]

pffft give England some credit. We're slowly sorting our One Day game out.

We've been doing that for most of the last 7 years.








Except we haven't really.

 

[Richard]

It really seems that way so far.
For the most part I like what I've seen from Schofield. I'd always have him in the side ahead of Panesar.

PLEAAAAAAAAAAAASE no! Schofield is about the least likely to be a good one-day bowler you'll ever see. I've seen him concede 20-odd in an over several times (especially when bowling at left-handers).

He works quite well in the Twenty20s where his unpredictability often means he gets wickets, but economy has never, ever been his forte and while unpredictability sometimes means bowlers get wickets in one-day cricket for a time, almost invariably it's a case of a faded golden-arm within a year.

The biggest trouble with that is, after wasting a year on a golden-arm bowler, you then tend to waste 2 more picking him (ahead of others who might be doing well to get a consistent run) hoping vainly for it to return.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

PLEAAAAAAAAAAAASE no! Schofield is about the least likely to be a good one-day bowler you'll ever see. I've seen him concede 20-odd in an over several times (especially when bowling at left-handers).

He works quite well in the Twenty20s where his unpredictability often means he gets wickets, but economy has never, ever been his forte and while unpredictability sometimes means bowlers get wickets in one-day cricket for a time, almost invariably it's a case of a faded golden-arm within a year.

The biggest trouble with that is, after wasting a year on a golden-arm bowler, you then tend to waste 2 more picking him (ahead of others who might be doing well to get a consistent run) hoping vainly for it to return.

For the most part he's been good when I've seen him recently though. Even in the Twenty20 recently he was the best England bowler again for the most part, and the batsmen, even the Aussies, struggled to get him away. He had one bad over per game, but that's the nature of Twenty20.

Besides, all I was saying is that I'd prefer Schofield to Panesar in ODIs. I firmly believe he would do better than 0-45+ per game.

 

[Richard]

And I honestly believe he'd do worse. Bowling 3 good overs isn't really much of an achievement in a ODI, and Schofield has actually often done that for much of his career. His problem - and it's actually one I share myself - is that he just can't keep it up, and usually later on in his spells he'll be all over the place. As I say - I've seen cases where he'll go for 20-odd in an over, and every time bar one (which was in a game where whoever-it-was - I forget now - was chasing something like 290 off 45 overs) it's been his 7th or 8th over or so.

So unless he was picked to bowl 5 overs, I don't like the idea of him playing ODIs. In fact, quite the opposite. Even if he gets gifted a couple of meaningless middle-over wickets (heck, even if he gets a couple of batsmen out in the middle of the innings) I don't think that offsets the likely damage he'd cause by losing it later on in a spell.

 

[JASON]

Looks like England and SL have an extra week of holliday....I wonder if they will decide to play a couple of 20/20s to fill the time, before the ODIs ....

 

[Richard]

Geys, how I hope not!

Another Test would be good, though, obviously.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

And I honestly believe he'd do worse. Bowling 3 good overs isn't really much of an achievement in a ODI, and Schofield has actually often done that for much of his career. His problem - and it's actually one I share myself - is that he just can't keep it up, and usually later on in his spells he'll be all over the place. As I say - I've seen cases where he'll go for 20-odd in an over, and every time bar one (which was in a game where whoever-it-was - I forget now - was chasing something like 290 off 45 overs) it's been his 7th or 8th over or so.

So unless he was picked to bowl 5 overs, I don't like the idea of him playing ODIs. In fact, quite the opposite. Even if he gets gifted a couple of meaningless middle-over wickets (heck, even if he gets a couple of batsmen out in the middle of the innings) I don't think that offsets the likely damage he'd cause by losing it later on in a spell.

A couple of things here.

I don't see the point in England picking a specialist spinner when there's no clear class option and the bowling attack is Anderson-Flintoff (when fit, of course)-Mascarenhas-Broad-Collingwood with Sidebottom in the mix too. And certainly not Monty Panesar, who certainly isn't going to score runs and isn't going to take wickets and can usually be milked for easy runs. So in those circumstances I'd pick the spinning allrounder.

And that's what I consider Schofield. The man can bat. At least a fair share better than Panesar. And in that role he would only be bowling a few overs to change things up when, given the 4+ options, the plan of attack is seam bowling. Of course if you're looking to play a specialist spinner, neither Panesar nor Schofield would come into contention.

 

[Richard]

I'm not for a second claiming MSP should be in the ODI side. I know beyond a doubt he will be, but I've known beyond a doubt that Harmison will be in the Test side for 3 years now too. Same thing applies (although at least early on in that 3-year period Harmison did actually have a case).

However, I don't really want Schofield in either. Yes, he can bat, beyond a doubt, he's been good enough of times to get into several county sides or at least be considered for them principally based on batting.

However, his technique has often instilled more anxiety in me than hope. I would honestly be quite surprised if he scored many runs in ODIs. In any case, if Flintoff and Mascarenhas are fit, that's two all-rounders already (and both principally bowlers) and there will be occasions when Mascarenhas won't complete 10 too, that's just to be expected.

I've never been in favour of picking someone for ODIs to "bat a bit, bowl a bit", TBH. Collingwood's been doing it for years anyway. You either have to be good enough to bowl 10 overs or to bat, properly. I don't feel Schofield can do either.

 

[JASON]

I feel sorry for Stuart Broad whose confidance must be pretty low coming into this series after being mauled by Yuvraj for 6 sixes.

I hope Sanath doesn't get stuck into him...

 

[pup11]

I think Broad should try to forget about the 6 sixes, but i don't think people would let him forget about it, this is something that would stay with him for the rest of his life.
But i have no sympathy what so ever for Broad in this regard because he just bowled a pathetic over and even if he would tried something a tad different he won't have got humiliated like that, but hats off to Yuvi its not easy to hit 6 sixes in a row.

 

[JASON]

http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/srilanka/content/story/311439.html

Murali doubtful for the ODI series...... SL will probably have to rely on Lokuaraachchi and Sanath ....

 

[Richard]

A shame, I hate playing SL - even in ODIs - sans-Murali. Just doesn't feel quite right.

Also a shame Chandana and Dharmasena aren't around any more, but Lokourachchi will never have a better chance to get himself a foothold in the ODI team.

 

[Richard]

I feel sorry for Stuart Broad whose confidance must be pretty low coming into this series after being mauled by Yuvraj for 6 sixes.

I hope Sanath doesn't get stuck into him...

I think Broad should try to forget about the 6 sixes, but i don't think people would let him forget about it, this is something that would stay with him for the rest of his life.
But i have no sympathy what so ever for Broad in this regard because he just bowled a pathetic over and even if he would tried something a tad different he won't have got humiliated like that, but hats off to Yuvi its not easy to hit 6 sixes in a row.

Knowing Broad, I doubt it'll play on his mind that much. However, I can still see him taking punishment from the Lankans, as I've never yet been truly convinced over his ODI bowling.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I've never been in favour of picking someone for ODIs to "bat a bit, bowl a bit", TBH. Collingwood's been doing it for years anyway. You either have to be good enough to bowl 10 overs or to bat, properly. I don't feel Schofield can do either.

Well then England shouldn't play a spinner at all in ODIs. Not just now at least.

 

[wpdavid]

Well then England shouldn't play a spinner at all in ODIs. Not just now at least.

In SL? Beg to differ.

Also, the thing about Panesar is that whilst I don't think he's justified his odi place in England, that may change in a country where conditions should make the spinner more of a wicket-taking option even in these games.

 

[Richard]

Even in Sri Lanka, Schofield I'd still reckon would get the treatment. While you'd imagine he'd turn the ball that's no use if you can't keep a length.

As for MSP in Sri Lanka, I don't know... I'd hope he'd get sufficient turn, and if he does he should bowl economically at the very least. But on a normal ODI pitch, I have never rated him yet, and I think the last thing we need is for a good tour of Sri Lanka to paper over the cracks for another 6 series.

In any case, while I agree that there are few if any (Blackwell? Possibly) English spinners to demand selection you know full well that one will be picked, as every time you don't pick a spinner and the seamers get the treatment it's "why didn't they pick a spinner", thus conveniently forgetting the multiple times when the seamers have got the treatment, the spinner's come on and got exactly the same.

 

[Woodster]

I think Blackwell deserves another shot in the ODI side, whilst his batting has generally been disappointing at that level, his bowling economy should not be underestimated.

He was our most economical bowler in his last two ODI series, in India and Pakistan.

 

[Richard]

Absolutely. While I certainly remain to be convinced, he's done far more of note than pretty much any spinner has of late in ODIs, and only lost his place (to the Jamie Dalrymples and Michael Yardys of this World - both of whom are principally batsmen) because of injury.

 

[Woodster]

One thing that could possibly be seen to go against Blackwell is that he does not take enough wickets, and therefore becomes a negative style bowler, as averse to a genuine wicket taking threat. However, that would not dissuade me from having him in my squad to tour Sri Lanka.