*Official* Australia in England T20s and ODIs

[GIMH]

Yeah, it was a good day to be an Englishman

 

[Pizzorno]

One of the similarities between 06 and 09 is that they both posess Tim Bresnan.

 

[Jarquis]

5th ODI: England v Sri Lanka at Leeds, Jul 1, 2006 | Cricket Scorecard | Cricinfo.com

Take out Dalrymple and it was 276 from 27.3 overs.

Only reason I knew is because I was looking at the scorecard on Monday IIRC

 

[GIMH]

Any prticular reason why you were doing that?

 

[superkingdave]

England. Stop the singles ffs. Get closer, letting them have singles every ball is just setting you up for failure, as a boundary ball is inevitible with our bowling.

A quick XI to add into the mix:

Craig Kieswetter +
Ravi Bopara
Alex Hales
Kevin Pietersen *
Jonathan Trott
Andrew Flintoff
Luke Wright
Stuart Broad
Adil Rashid
Graeme Swann
Ryan Sidebottom

I want to see this team when everyone's fit/qualified (Kieswetter). Bin as many of this team as possible and get some hitters into the side. Tell Bopara to play his proper game, get Hales in to give it a whack, Trott has to play and Anderson has to go. At least if this team's picked the cricket would be entertaining. Kieswetter, Bopara, Hales, Pietersen, Trott, Flintoff and Wright aren't going to hang around and strike at 60 runs per 100 balls. Well, Bopara under Strauss would, but if he plays properly, like he does for Essex he would do a far better job. Also, I don't really care if Hales isn't 'ready' for International cricket. He looks to have a decent technique and is seriously powerful.
You'll only know if he's good enough once he plays, I say give him a go.

Keisswetter , 1391@39.74 in his career
Davies in the same time frame 1810@47.63

Why do we need to fall over for the South African when there is a young English keeper scoring more runs and not playing his home games on the M5?

 

[Jarquis]

Any prticular reason why you were doing that?

I was liking someone to Mahmood and somebody was liking me to Dalrymple. Thought I'd show them that as I knew Mahmood got hammered and Dalrymple did better than most

 

[Pothas]

England. Stop the singles ffs. Get closer, letting them have singles every ball is just setting you up for failure, as a boundary ball is inevitible with our bowling.

A quick XI to add into the mix:

Craig Kieswetter +
Ravi Bopara
Alex Hales
Kevin Pietersen *
Jonathan Trott
Andrew Flintoff
Luke Wright
Stuart Broad
Adil Rashid
Graeme Swann
Ryan Sidebottom

I want to see this team when everyone's fit/qualified (Kieswetter). Bin as many of this team as possible and get some hitters into the side. Tell Bopara to play his proper game, get Hales in to give it a whack, Trott has to play and Anderson has to go. At least if this team's picked the cricket would be entertaining. Kieswetter, Bopara, Hales, Pietersen, Trott, Flintoff and Wright aren't going to hang around and strike at 60 runs per 100 balls. Well, Bopara under Strauss would, but if he plays properly, like he does for Essex he would do a far better job. Also, I don't really care if Hales isn't 'ready' for International cricket. He looks to have a decent technique and is seriously powerful. You'll only know if he's good enough once he plays, I say give him a go.

What has Strauss done wrong? He has done a really excellent job so far since coming back into side and is scoring at a perfectly acceptable rate. What he needs is a partner at the other end who can take sides apart in the early overs. Ravi is not at the momeny capable of playing this natural game you seem to believe he possess,it is nothing to do with Strauss,

 

[Craig]

One of the similarities between 06 and 09 is that they both posess Tim Bresnan.

At least you don't have Kabir Ali and Liam Plunkett in the same team again.

 

[Matt79]

Been a pretty strident defender of Clarke's spot in the team, but innings of 52of 90+ balls when most other batsmen scored at SRs of at least 66 doesn't help the argument. On the other hand really pleased White did so well. Good to see Watto getting some wickets as well.

Maybe Clarke is feeling too weighed down with the need, as skipper, to anchor the innings. I wouldn't mind, with Ponting coming back in, seeing Clarke droppEd down the order to six, where his role would be simpler and in line with the role he first made his name as an ODI player - come in and get on with it. Think White has shown enough to deserve to stay in the team, and the top order seems to suit him better than the lower order - give him a shot at four behind Punter.

 

[zaremba]

To be fair to Clarke (and I have to admit I didn't watch the whole thing) he stayed in and his partnership with White is what guided Australia home. He may have been slow but what was required was a solid innings - Australia always had plenty in hand given that they weren't losing wickets.

 

[Nate]

For me though, I don't buy 'support the other player' roles in LO Cricket. If White had of failed, then where are we at? We had that problem with Katich, I don't want it back.

Even if Clarke could step up when he didn't need to play a support role, than maybe that'd be fine. But he can't.

 

[Uppercut]

Dropped. These two teams are beyond dire.

Only England were tbf. Dire, dire cricket to watch, but a thoroughly professional all-round performance from the Aussies really.

 

[Uppercut]

That sort of attitude is indicative of our problems in one-day cricket. The people who are their age are the ones making the decisions about who plays, how we should play etc, and they think that that was a good innings.

Haha, nailed it. Btw, do you see my point regarding Colly as an ODI player after his 28 off 52 today?

 

[Pothas]

Only England were tbf. Dire, dire cricket to watch, but a thoroughly professional all-round performance from the Aussies really.

Agree with this, Australia were very solid today and given the amount of great one day players that they have lost or are unavailable for various reasons they are not playing badly, played the sort of cricket that will win a decent amount of limited overs matches.

 

[Uppercut]

Agree with this, Australia were very solid today and given the amount of great one day players that they have lost or are unavailable for various reasons they are not playing badly, played the sort of cricket that will win a decent amount of limited overs matches.

On top of that, you can only play what's in front of you. Onlookers will moan about how turgid Clarke's innings was, and quite rightly, but they were chasing a low score so it was perfectly acceptable in the circumstances. Should he hit a few shots just to entertain the spectators?

It does concern me, though, that his natural game involves such slow batting. When the situation gives you freedom to play whatever you want and you hum along at a strike rate of 50, it kinda looks like you're really not cut out for one-day cricket. Which is what has seemed to be the case with Clarke for ages now.

 

[oitoitoi]

Keisswetter , 1391@39.74 in his career
Davies in the same time frame 1810@47.63

Why do we need to fall over for the South African when there is a young English keeper scoring more runs and not playing his home games on the M5?

Because Kieswetter looks the better player, and more capable of making the jump to international cricket, Davies needs a wider range of strokes IMO. I'd pick Foster ahead of both of them and Prior ATM. Probably Read too though I don't know how he's been this season.

Regarding 06, only 2 players remain of that side (not a bad thing), and one of them's Bresnan, doesn't say much for building a team....was Colly injured that series? At least that 06 series was played on half decent surfaces, this slow sluggish stuff makes for abysmal viewing.

Also anyone catch Strauss leaving the field to allegedly talk to the coach? If that's what he was doing it's pretty out of order, I mean remember when Cronje was caught with the ear piece? People were up in arms, this is basically the same thing. I knew that stupid comfort break stuff would be a can of worms.

 

[Cruxdude]

On top of that, you can only play what's in front of you. Onlookers will moan about how turgid Clarke's innings was, and quite rightly, but they were chasing a low score so it was perfectly acceptable in the circumstances. Should he hit a few shots just to entertain the spectators?

It does concern me, though, that his natural game involves such slow batting. When the situation gives you freedom to play whatever you want and you hum along at a strike rate of 50, it kinda looks like you're really not cut out for one-day cricket. Which is what has seemed to be the case with Clarke for ages now.

I don't know how you find Clarke's innings acceptable. When a team is chasing 220 and has 8 wickets in hand, scoring at S/R of 50 is pretty dire. Seen in the context of his recent struggle to up the ante, it is a pretty poor innings.

 

[Pothas]

It was not a good innings by any means but it was acceptable in terms of the match. All Australia had to do to win that game was keep the score moving without losing any more wickets. With White scoring at a decent pace Clarke not loosing his wicket meant that Australia were always comfortably achieving their aims. When put in the wider context of his recent struggles in limited overs cricket it looks very poor in but in this particular match it was acceptable if not at all impressive.

 

[Uppercut]

I don't know how you find Clarke's innings acceptable. When a team is chasing 220 and has 8 wickets in hand, scoring at S/R of 50 is pretty dire. Seen in the context of his recent struggle to up the ante, it is a pretty poor innings.

By the time Clarke left the crease, Australia needed 34 runs from 38 balls with 7 wickets remaining. That's a bloody good position to leave your side in. It might not look pretty, and it might raise concerns about his ODI ability in the long-run. But it was good enough to win his side the game, which is what matters.

 

[Julian87]

The Clarke bashing is absolutely ridiculous here.