*Official* England in Australia (2 T20 & 7 ODIs)

[vcs]

Nope.

Liking your recent work.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Haddin's shot to get out was one of the more awful pieces of cricket I've seen. Well played Duss, very mature innings.

 

[Jono]

Liking your recent work.

Dussey and Yusuf Pathan haters deserve what they get

Both performing on the same day. So good.

 

[social]

I HATE (cant emphasise that enough as all of my "fans" on CW will realise ) meaningless odi series but this one is serving a purpose even if it is at least 2 games too long

Firstly, Brett Lee is completely showing up our test attack

Don't get me wrong, he is a fine bowler but, at best, he was our third choice bowler during our halcyon years and the fact that virtually every English batsmen is crapping themselves at the sight of him is a sorry indictement of our guys in the longer form of the game

Mind you, seeing Bell revert to type is hardly a surprise

Secondly, it has really shown up how daft selectors are

The selection of second keepers, no Hodge, Prior, Wright, etc is simply a nonsense

Thirdly, Clarke, Anderson, Broad etc need game time before the WC

Fourthly, players such as Hastings looks pretty good to me and the added experience will only add to our chances

In summary, whilst I have minimal interest in seeing a 7 game series, this one may have a point

 

[Jacknife]

The second string England bowlers haven't done a bad job at all, but have been let down by some kamikaze batting from the batsmen, who have let themselves down big time, especially in the last 2 Odi's.. They seriously need to get their heads sorted because they look mentally shot, in some of their shots, they've played.
The injuries list seems to be getting longer and longer, which is frustrating to say the least. Bresnan's gone home, but hopefully Anderson,Swanny and KP will be back and I know Broad's out there with the team now, but I doubt they would risk him.

 

[pup11]

Interesting point.

Its great how conveniently people are starting to pass the blame of the Ashes debacle onto the bowlers, are we forgetting that our batsmen kept getting out in the same moronic fashion over and again and struggled to put any runs whatsoever on the board, which more or less left the bowlers toiling in a lost cause.
I'm not saying our bowlers bowled outstanding or anything, but they weren't hugely worse than their English counterparts either. If the English batsmen had fished at outside off-stump balls like our batsmen did then Hilfy and Mitch would have been right up there among the highest wicket-takers.
The fact of the matter is England came well prepared for this Ashes series, they showed immense discipline in all aspects of the game and we as team certainly looked clueless and under the cosh through the Ashes and as a result of which England won the Ashes comprehensively.
So to compare what happened during the Ashes to what's now happening in these ODI's hardly makes any sense, England were obviously much more focused during the Ashes whereas atm they just seem to be going through the motions, several of their key players too are missing and despite all that they still have given us a tough time thus far in this ODI series.

 

[Jarquis]

Rubbish, he could have upped the pace when he was with the tail, but clearly wasn't his intention.

Mate, we didn't bat out 50. 4 an over from the last 10 is the same as 8 and over and being bowled out after 5. Got no issue with what he tried to do.

 

[Blaze 18]

I don't understand why Trott's innings is being criticised. It isn't like England had seven-eight wickets in hand and he just blocked to stay not-out.

 

[Furball]

I don't understand why Trott's innings is being criticised. It isn't like England had seven-eight wickets in hand and he just blocked to stay not-out.

Because DumbDumb doesn't understand cricket.

 

[Jacknife]

I don't understand why Trott's innings is being criticised. It isn't like England had seven-eight wickets in hand and he just blocked to stay not-out.

There is nothing wrong with Trott's innings, it's what Flower and co expect him to do, but England needed a few more run a ball 40's and 50's to put hem in a good position, which didn't happen, but more often than not you would expect that sort of innings to post a good score.

 

[Prince EWS]

Mate, we didn't bat out 50. 4 an over from the last 10 is the same as 8 and over and being bowled out after 5. Got no issue with what he tried to do.

Because DumbDumb doesn't understand cricket.

While I agree with you both that Trott's innings was perfectly fine in the circumstances, there still remaining lingering doubts as to Trott's utility when those circumstances don't arise. He hasn't played a lot of ODIs, but averaging 50 and striking at 72 does tend to suggest he could push it on a little more as a general rule, particularly when he's batting in PowerPlay overs.

His strike rate was fine in domestic one day cricket IIRC but that he hasn't shown the ability internationally to make a significant contribution at a strike rate of above 75 against anyone other than Bangladesh so far is still a concern, albeit a minor one when you consider England's other balance and form issues.

 

[Jarquis]

While I agree with you both that Trott's innings was perfectly fine in the circumstances, there still remaining lingering doubts as to Trott's utility when those circumstances don't arise. He hasn't played a lot of ODIs, but averaging 50 and striking at 72 does tend to suggest he could push it on a little more as a general rule, particularly when he's batting in PowerPlay overs.

His strike rate was fine in domestic one day cricket IIRC but that he hasn't shown the ability internationally to make a significant contribution at a strike rate of above 75 against anyone other than Bangladesh so far is still a concern, albeit a minor one when you consider England's other balance and form issues.

Yeah, however the point you're making is one different from TumTum and one that I don't disagree with. I've said as much myself before.

 

[Furball]

While I agree with you both that Trott's innings was perfectly fine in the circumstances, there still remaining lingering doubts as to Trott's utility when those circumstances don't arise. He hasn't played a lot of ODIs, but averaging 50 and striking at 72 does tend to suggest he could push it on a little more as a general rule, particularly when he's batting in PowerPlay overs.

His strike rate was fine in domestic one day cricket IIRC but that he hasn't shown the ability internationally to make a significant contribution at a strike rate of above 75 against anyone other than Bangladesh so far is still a concern, albeit a minor one when you consider England's other balance and form issues.

Wouldn't disagree with that. Basically what Marcuss said.

 

[Woodster]

First full game of these ODI's that I've seen today, and we batted very poorly. Have seen Trott's copped a bit of flack for his knock, but it was in very difficult circumstances with wickets falling constantly at the other end. Had he tried to blast it out of the park earlier, we may never had got over 200, and so the time for him to attempt to unfurl some expansive strokes was awkward to judge. Really only when he was batting with Tremlett could you say he perhaps could have done a bit more in the way of boundary hitting.

The problem with the timing of the batting powerplay was evident again. It should clearly have been taken earlier, that's not after the game hindsight, that is being flexible in your planning and realising that if we leave it till the 45th over, we may not make use of the full five overs and we may have tailenders in facing their end of innings specialists!

The feeling is that taking the powerplay induces wickets to fall with brainless strokeplay. Possible for sure. But in the situation England were in, they should have taken it earlier, at the very least forcing Aussies into using Lee and co to use overs they want them to use at the end. Also, it isn't a case of having to smash the ball, Trott could simply have worked the ball into the gaps and got better value for his shots, and take it when there is another batsman in capable of playing sensibly yet able to take advantage of the fielding restrictions, not Chris Tremlett, the number 11!

I'm sure it's been highlighted on here already, but some of the dismissals today were shambolic. The Strauss run out, The woefully out of form Colly, Morgan's long hop brainfade, Yardy's pleasant return catch, Shahzad trying to cream Brett Lee over the top, and Tremlett waving his bat. Poor, poor stuff.

 

[Redbacks]

Thought I would investigate Shazad's extras count so far this series:

Game 1: 1/51 (1W) 9.1ov

Game 2: 3/43 (5W) 10ov

Game 3: 1/45 (6W) 10ov

Leaking too many extras otherwise he could have excellent figures this series and given how close the games have been those extra 2 overs hurt in the long run. A few wides he pushed down leg seemed to slip out of his hand so perhaps it's his grip rather than his action that causes them. A few were from bouncers too to be fair.

 

[andyc]

I HATE (cant emphasise that enough as all of my "fans" on CW will realise ) meaningless odi series but this one is serving a purpose even if it is at least 2 games too long

Firstly, Brett Lee is completely showing up our test attack

Don't get me wrong, he is a fine bowler but, at best, he was our third choice bowler during our halcyon years and the fact that virtually every English batsmen is crapping themselves at the sight of him is a sorry indictement of our guys in the longer form of the game

Mind you, seeing Bell revert to type is hardly a surprise

Secondly, it has really shown up how daft selectors are

The selection of second keepers, no Hodge, Prior, Wright, etc is simply a nonsense

Thirdly, Clarke, Anderson, Broad etc need game time before the WC

Fourthly, players such as Hastings looks pretty good to me and the added experience will only add to our chances

In summary, whilst I have minimal interest in seeing a 7 game series, this one may have a point

Meh. It's no secret that Brett Lee himself was considerably better in ODIs than Tests. He may have been our third best Test paceman, but for a long time he was our #1 or #2 ODI bowler.

Agree about Hastings too. Seemed to overdo the slower balls a bit while bowling, but he kept his head with the bat and seems a decent one day cricketer.

 

[Riggins]

Would prefer to see dan christian in the team, but at least Hastings showed guts and composure at the end, big lad too so should be able to bomb them at the end on good pitches. How does he go against spin does anyone know? Bombing spinners is a massive plus for christian which could have been very useful especially in the subcontinent.

 

[Johnners]

Good thing we can always rely on Ben Dorries for a completely rubbish article

Clarke making a tweet of himself | Fox Sports

It's kinda no secret that it's Australias favourite past-time to criticise every facet of Clarkes life, but fmd this is a dire article. The bloke's in shocking form, of that there can be no doubt, but the way in which lecherous turds like Dorries have been relating every aspect of his life to the reasons why he's not up to the job etc. is just plain disgusting imo.

 

[Spark]

Dear god

 

[howardj]

Read that this morning, and it didn't quite hit the mark. I think the concern I have with Clarke is that for a vice-captain he tends to non-team centred things like:

- not spend enough time with his teammates (reference - Inside Cricket magazine December/January edition)
- as a vice captain, cruise to London in a Ferrari with your missus after a loss- while the rest of the team takes a bus
- as a vice captain, fly home in the middle of a tour for a reason that not illness related
- complain about CA sponsor comittments, and then go off and speak at functions for your friend on the morning of the Boxing day Test.

Very strange, self-important, behaviour IMO, particularly when the team is on the skids. .