James
Cricket Web Owner
Welcome to the forum bombdaddy68er
Not forgetting his bowling, which is okay at this level, and his fielding which probably saves England between 10-20 runs each game.What's wrong with Collingwood? Scores a few against minnows, but has performed against top sides too.
There is nothing wrong with him.What's wrong with Collingwood? Scores a few against minnows, but has performed against top sides too.
There is nothing wrong with him at all. He is a really good complimentary player and can perform a number of different roles.What's wrong with Collingwood? Scores a few against minnows, but has performed against top sides too.
Collingwood, admittedly, has been better of late than he ever had been before. At the age of 30-31-32 you'd expect him to be at the peak of his powers, and so it's proved.What's wrong with Collingwood? Scores a few against minnows, but has performed against top sides too.
How about Kevin Forde?-Hay is awesome. Case closed.
-Haven't really seen Broom or Flynn but they're scoring some good runs domestically.
-More likely four years rather than two for Williamson in particular. Boult may get accelerated through though.
Still don't agree with the idea of Nicol opening when we have How and Guptill showing some promise. IMO the current side and the curent up and comers will gell and start to become a very good side from 2011 onwards, assuming the injury plague and the underachieving plague stay away and hopefully visit Australia instead.
Completely agree with the post above.
I think the future of our batting lineup is promising, but we will be very reliant on the progress of Southee, Sherlock and Boult in our bowling stocks.
__________________
Future Black Caps Test XI
Jamie How*, Martin Guptill, Ross Taylor*, Greg Hay, Kane Williamson, Jesse Ryder*, Corey Anderson*, Brendan McCullum, Tim Southee*, Roneel Hira*, Trent Boult* ,
12th Man : Te Ahu Davis*
Future Black Caps ODI XI
BJ Watling, Martin Guptill, Ross Taylor*, Kane Williamson, Jesse Ryder*, Daniel Flynn, Corey Anderson*, Brendan McCullum, Gareth Morgan*, Tim Southee*, Trent Boult*
12th Man : George Worker
My thoughts:
1st of all Flem
If you think hay is that awesome then i think you belong on the paddock with farm animals because quite frankly i prefer no hay or no grass, shaven haven all the way baby haha k so SERIOUS thoughts now
Broom- Top player, i traded my abs silk tee for his tee-shirt one night in velvet burger after heand aaron redmond flopped there joeys out casual...so i think he need a couple more years to mature or maybe a girlfriend that wont dump him...DEFINATE potential though
Flynn- Seems cool headed enough
Yougens- Southee is a potential star and 17 year old corey anderson has huge stature already, others are yet to show top performances at domestic level
And to the last guy that posted future teams:
Heres my FUTURE SQUAD (2012/13 season)
TESTS/ODI take your pick
Martin Guptill
Jesse Ryder
+Brendon McCullum*
Jamie How
Ross Taylor
Corey Anderson
Daniel Flynn
Kane Williamson
BJ Watling
Brad Rodden (19, Father had a fallout with NZ U19 selectors) check otago u17/u19 record!
Daniel Vettori
Dewayne Bowden
George Worker
Tim Southee
Roneel Hira
Leighton Burtt
Trent Boult
Richard Sherlock
Mr Unknown- Andy McKay?
Is this the return of Psxpro?-Hay is awesome. Case closed.
-Haven't really seen Broom or Flynn but they're scoring some good runs domestically.
-More likely four years rather than two for Williamson in particular. Boult may get accelerated through though.
Still don't agree with the idea of Nicol opening when we have How and Guptill showing some promise. IMO the current side and the curent up and comers will gell and start to become a very good side from 2011 onwards, assuming the injury plague and the underachieving plague stay away and hopefully visit Australia instead.
Completely agree with the post above.
I think the future of our batting lineup is promising, but we will be very reliant on the progress of Southee, Sherlock and Boult in our bowling stocks.
__________________
Future Black Caps Test XI
Jamie How*, Martin Guptill, Ross Taylor*, Greg Hay, Kane Williamson, Jesse Ryder*, Corey Anderson*, Brendan McCullum, Tim Southee*, Roneel Hira*, Trent Boult* ,
12th Man : Te Ahu Davis*
Future Black Caps ODI XI
BJ Watling, Martin Guptill, Ross Taylor*, Kane Williamson, Jesse Ryder*, Daniel Flynn, Corey Anderson*, Brendan McCullum, Gareth Morgan*, Tim Southee*, Trent Boult*
12th Man : George Worker
My thoughts:
1st of all Flem
If you think hay is that awesome then i think you belong on the paddock with farm animals because quite frankly i prefer no hay or no grass, shaven haven all the way baby haha k so SERIOUS thoughts now
Broom- Top player, i traded my abs silk tee for his tee-shirt one night in velvet burger after heand aaron redmond flopped there joeys out casual...so i think he need a couple more years to mature or maybe a girlfriend that wont dump him...DEFINATE potential though
Flynn- Seems cool headed enough
Yougens- Southee is a potential star and 17 year old corey anderson has huge stature already, others are yet to show top performances at domestic level
And to the last guy that posted future teams:
Heres my FUTURE SQUAD (2012/13 season)
TESTS/ODI take your pick
Martin Guptill
Jesse Ryder
+Brendon McCullum*
Jamie How
Ross Taylor
Corey Anderson
Daniel Flynn
Kane Williamson
BJ Watling
Brad Rodden (19, Father had a fallout with NZ U19 selectors) check otago u17/u19 record!
Daniel Vettori
Dewayne Bowden
George Worker
Tim Southee
Roneel Hira
Leighton Burtt
Trent Boult
Richard Sherlock
Mr Unknown- Andy McKay?
Depends on how we want the balance of the side in the lower middle order, I suppose. Which in turn probably depends on whether Flintoff is fit. It also depends on how Dimitri goes with the ball. I think perceptions of their roles may also be affatced by how poorly DM's done with the ball in NZ.There is simply no way Mascarenhas and Wright should ever be in direct competition. They're totally different players. Wright is a batsman (one who's been unutterably abysmal at batting for all bar half a season in the mickey-mouse 40-over competition) and Mascarenhas is a bowler.
Lewis will be 35 by the next WC and has never exactly convinced me in the one-day game, so I don't really want to see him back in there again either.
Actually, the "two lads" I mentioned were Plunkett & Mahmood - Anderson missed the winning run of 4 games. Beyond that, yes I know that there's an element of rose-tinted spectacles about my comment, hence Goughy's admirably restrained response. Looking at the cards last night, I'd forgotten their horrible performance in the final group game against NZ and probably over-played the number of wickets they actually took. But when you look at Anderson's performances on this tour, and struggle to name a viable alternative, you do wonder if we'd have been better sticking with one of the guys who'd played a decent part in our most impressive one day performance since about 1992. Cos at the end of the day, if not Anderson, Tremlett or Lewis, then who? (cue Scaly mentioning Onions' 7 for 39 in India the other day ..).Well Anderson's still playing, on the road (fast currently) to being shown-up as substandard, and Plunkett I think we all knew it was mostly simply enormous good fortune on his behalf that he took as many wickets as he did (4 out of the last 5 games in the CB Series he took 3-fors). He'll almost certainly play again, and I can only see his recent average (23.57 in his last 9 games against ODI-standard opposition) going up. His economy-rate in that time (5.68-an-over) remains as bad as ever. There was only 1 game where he bowled genuinely well (the SCG game on Feb 2 against Australia), plus 2 where he took advantage of stupidly helpful conditions (the second final, again at The SCG, and the Lord's game against West Indies).
Knight, Hick and Fairbrother?
You're having a laugh, surely? All 3 were fantastic against the best and the worst.
Flintoff, on the other hand, was not worth a light of any kind at that point. He was useless. He should never, ever have played a ODI until 2001\02.
Incidentally, I can't remember a better batting performance by an England side than that run-chase in Karachi. But the team had passed its peak by then. The team we had in 1999\2000 and 2000 was indeed a pretty damn good one. An eclectic team at that time (never actually played together due to various circumstances) would probably be something like: Trescothick, Knight, Hick, Hussain, Stewart, Thorpe, White, Ealham, Caddick, Gough, Mullally. And there might have been reasonable hope that it'd soon get together that winter or shortly after.
In 1999\2000 and 2000, England had possibly a better set of players available than in 1992. Since the winter of 2000\01, English ODI cricket has been in a non-stop rut, whatever any ridiculous building-up of the impossible number of rubbish players who've played since has suggested.
Well Caddick, Gough, Mullally and White all certianly possessed cutting-edge aplenty. All right, Caddick wasn't McGrath or Pollock, but the rest probably matched Aus and SA. The simple fact of the matter is that they didn't play together anywhere near enough, so we don't know how good they might have been on a longer-term basis.We should have been a good side around then, but we usually weren't. Partially that was because our bowling, although OK, didn't have quite the cutting edge of Aus of SA, so we were always at a disadvantage when playing those guys. As for the batting, yes there were some handy performers, but you rarely saw enough of them producing the goods when it mattered to compete with the best. They looked good on paper, but less so on scorecards, unfortunately.
Yep, can certainly see him getting the Ealham treatment, and have done since before this tour even.Depends on how we want the balance of the side in the lower middle order, I suppose. Which in turn probably depends on whether Flintoff is fit. It also depends on how Dimitri goes with the ball. I think perceptions of their roles may also be affatced by how poorly DM's done with the ball in NZ.
Nope, AFAIC Mahmood and Plunkett should never, ever have got anywhere near the side, nor did Mahmood play any remotely significant part in the CB Series victory. Nor, really, was winning 4 games at the tail-end of a series where we'd been completely and utterly dominated in all departments a terribly impressive performance, for mine - more a freak. The NWS of 2000 was more impressive.Actually, the "two lads" I mentioned were Plunkett & Mahmood - Anderson missed the winning run of 4 games. Beyond that, yes I know that there's an element of rose-tinted spectacles about my comment, hence Goughy's admirably restrained response. Looking at the cards last night, I'd forgotten their horrible performance in the final group game against NZ and probably over-played the number of wickets they actually took. But when you look at Anderson's performances on this tour, and struggle to name a viable alternative, you do wonder if we'd have been better sticking with one of the guys who'd played a decent part in our most impressive one day performance since about 1992. Cos at the end of the day, if not Anderson, Tremlett or Lewis, then who? (cue Scaly mentioning Onions' 7 for 39 in India the other day ..).
Er, the James Anderson that averages under 30, swings the ball well etc is not ODI class?Anderson is and always has been a concern. As I've said a few times recently - I'm fast running-out of faith in his ability to ever become a ODI-class bowler.
Sidebottom is currently on a different plane. As DB said earlier this thread - by far and away our best ODI bowler at the current time.
Well, he did drop Plunkett during the WC, so who knows. And IIRC he was bowling about 2nd change for Durham by the end of the season, so he wasn't looking good tbh. Mahmood's been crocked anyway.Yep, can certainly see him getting the Ealham treatment, and have done since before this tour even.
Nope, AFAIC Mahmood and Plunkett should never, ever have got anywhere near the side, nor did Mahmood play any remotely significant part in the CB Series victory. Nor, really, was winning 4 games at the tail-end of a series where we'd been completely and utterly dominated in all departments a terribly impressive performance, for mine - more a freak. The NWS of 2000 was more impressive.
That said, I do wonder, had Duncan Fletcher continued as coach, whether Plunkett at least might still have been in the side.
Yep. Anderson doesn't swing the ball like he used to, and most of his career relies on the golden (golden-armed, that is - he took wickets with good and bad deliveries by roughly equal amounts) summer of 2003.Er, the James Anderson that averages under 30, swings the ball well etc is not ODI class?
Snape was picked for England when he wasn't even playing, never mind bowling at good spots, for his county. I certainly think Plunkett may have stayed in the picture. He's barely good enough for Durham anyway.Well, he did drop Plunkett during the WC, so who knows. And IIRC he was bowling about 2nd change for Durham by the end of the season, so he wasn't looking good tbh. Mahmood's been crocked anyway.
Kirtley should never have played ODIs ITFP. And while I don't exactly see a wealth of outstanding options either, there are certainly plenty better than Mahmood and Plunkett, neither of whom are even county-standard bowlers (not that there's that many others who obviously are either, as I say). But you might at least pick someone like AP Davies or Graham Napier, who have taken wickets despite going around the park, rather than people who neither take wickets nor bowl economically.We aren't exactly spoilt for choice, as we? I'm about as impressed with Tremlett as you are - even when he can stay fit for a few weeks, his game just doesn't seem to have come on. Anderson appears to be going backwards. Lewis will be too old at the next WC. Ditto Kirtley, at least I think he will. Any suggestions?
Well - the ring is on the finger, so to speak. No date likely to be set any time soon.btw and completely OT - did I read somewhere that you're getting married in the forseeable future?