***Official*** India and England in Australia ODI Tri-Series 2015

[viriya]

Woakes I can kind of understand (had better form coming in, right?) but Bopara, **** me. Has he ever done anything half decent in a big situation for England? You know what you're getting, and it ain't gonna win you a World Cup. I can't see how the rest of the country sees him as a vastly over-rated guy whose only up-side is he has two 'skills', but the selectors show undying faith.

Yea I used to be a Bopara fan and still think he should be given the ball more, but his batting numbers don't really give the impression that he's a good finisher or a rescue act. Right now he's neither and still just going by all that potential he had when he first came to the scene. Anyone else would've been replaced by now.

 

[hendrix]

I don't know if I'd have an issue with this. You have a country of x-million people, you field the best XI for every given day. There'd be nothing said about 4 seamers if you didn't have a decent spinner, so no reason you shouldn't be allowed 4 spinners if that's your strength.

I'd imagine the rule is more to do with players out of form, and the mickey mouse nature that would be swapping them in-tournament.

Yeah I know lots of people don't have an issue with it, I just think that in terms of depth:
- said team with x-million people is already advantaged by being able to pick from more players and presumably producing better players if they're a larger population. They don't need the extra advantage absolute specialisation.

 

[Spark]

Disagree. I think 15 member squads even the playing field just a touch. I don't like the idea of teams being able to play 5 spinners against one team than 5 pacers against the next. There has to be some all-round utility to a squad or it becomes like the NFL.

This doesn't happen in normal international cricket, so there's no reason to think it would happen in a WC..

 

[hendrix]

This doesn't happen in normal international cricket, so there's no reason to think it would happen in a WC..

Normal international cricket is bi-lateral series or at most trilateral.

 

[Jono]

Nothing more annoying than when a players poor shot in a horribly mistimed situation is excused because 'its just the way he plays'. Same in Tests as well.

My problem is With batsmen who fail to take into consideration the match situation and bat in a bubble and then criticism is just waved aside With the saying 'oh thats just the way he bats'. Be it from attack, defend or to consolidation.

Its bull****. A good batsman is Able to change gears according to how the match dictates. That includes guys like Chanderpaul to Warner.

Seriously annoys me when a guy plunders the bowlers early on in his innings but fails to kick on for his team due to a thoughtless shot.

And if these guys ****ing cant block a few balls...dont let them bat in the top order.

There is something more annoying. Those hypocrite commentators/analysts/fans who praise all the risky shots the players successfully play, but then criticise them when they get out playing that same shot.

Sehwag/Warner plundering 200 at a run a ball is great and everyone loves him, but if he hits it straight to point second ball he's played a stupid shot and should be told off by the captain. Nope, doesn't fly.

 

[Spikey]

There is something more annoying. Those hypocrite commentators/analysts/fans who praise all the risky shots the players play, but then criticise them when they get out playing that same shot.

See Mike Hussey. He was all "Maxwell really needs to put away the big shots" when he wasnt working and then he was all "WELL IF HE CAN TIME IT LIKE THAT KEEP GOING SON" ugh you ****ing suck hussey

 

[Jono]

future Indian coach Mike Hussey

 

[Antihippy]

Oh man, faulkner out with a side strain.

Hopefully he recovers before the world cup.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Still think even without Faulkner that Australia have by far the most firepower to take out the World Cup. England took out their top order cheaply, but that batting depth is ludicrous - and you have guys capable of accelerating the run rate all the way down - no one who's susceptible to clogging up an end. Gonna check out the TAB and put some dosh on the Aussies.

 

[91Jmay]

Ben Stokes calls are the most annoying thing in cricket .Stokes is in no form (7 with the bat and 47 with the ball in international cricket in last year) what so ever so gets dropped and puts in great performances in the A side and some good ones in Australia.

That's called good selection policy, you drop a bloke so he works hard to prove a point yet idiots like Collingwood are comparing it to dropping Ronaldo

 

[GotSpin]

There is something more annoying. Those hypocrite commentators/analysts/fans who praise all the risky shots the players successfully play, but then criticise them when they get out playing that same shot.

Sehwag/Warner plundering 200 at a run a ball is great and everyone loves him, but if he hits it straight to point second ball he's played a stupid shot and should be told off by the captain. Nope, doesn't fly.

I agree but its not something I support either. For me its entirely Dependant on the context of the match (im really talking Tests more here) as to whether an agressive batsmen has played an inappropiate shot or not.

For example, i would support Warner attacking from the start of a innings (especially the first) and would Therefore understand the risks associated With such shots early on the innings.

But if wickets fell from the other end I would expect Warner to adjust his game appropiately.

 

[Sporty1079]

A disappointing performance from the Indian team.

 

[Jono]

I agree but its not something I support either. For me its entirely Dependant on the context of the match (im really talking Tests more here) as to whether an agressive batsmen has played an inappropiate shot or not.

For example, i would support Warner attacking from the start of a innings (especially the first) and would Therefore understand the risks associated With such shots early on the innings.

But if wickets fell from the other end I would expect Warner to adjust his game appropiately.

And if he didn't but nevertheless hit his team to victory anyway, would you point out that his strategy was inappropriate? Great if you would, but plenty of people wouldn't. That's the annoying thing.

 

[Prince EWS]

And if he didn't but nevertheless hit his team to victory anyway, would you point out that his strategy was inappropriate?

Well, I'm pretty sure that exactly sums up what's happened here with Maxwell. His innings was really effective, Australia got a big score and they won, but people are questioning his approach anyway because they don't believe it'll work long term.

 

[Furball]

See in really green/spinning conditions where the bowling is on top, I actually think going defensive is the worst thing you can do. It'll do nothing for the team and you're bound to get one with your name on it anyway. You're as well just trying to smash the bowling and putting them on the back foot.

 

[GIMH]

And if he didn't but nevertheless hit his team to victory anyway, would you point out that his strategy was inappropriate? Great if you would, but plenty of people wouldn't. That's the annoying thing.

There has to be a balance though. Otherwise we get into Richard territory whereby decisions are entirely taken out of the result stratosphere and based only on what could reasonably have been considered as a likely outcome.

 

[Jono]

Well, I'm pretty sure that exactly sums up what's happened here with Maxwell. His innings was really effective, Australia got a big score and they won, but people are questioning his approach anyway because they don't believe it'll work long term.

Yep, I get Adders point completely, I think GS was speaking generally.

 

[Jono]

There has to be a balance though. Otherwise we get into Richard territory whereby decisions are entirely taken out of the result stratosphere and based only on what could reasonably have been considered as a likely outcome.

Not really, I'm not saying you necessarily do 20 posts about why said innings was ****. But you simply point out that on the law of averages that's going to fail more times than it works for said batsmen, and all you ****s praising him better not be criticising him next time he reverse sweeps a ball straight to short third man.

 

[marc71178]

uh um.. i know of a better rating system that still ranks him #55.. +17 places from that knock though.. also an ATG all-round performance (#57).

just saying.

It's not a better rating system at all.

 

[Antihippy]

The thing I don't get about the criticisms is that at least for this match he played himself in while not letting himself get bogged down by still putting away the bad balls, and only then does he unleashes. Which I feel is probably the best approach for him honestly in that kind of match situation.

Of course it remains to be seen if it's something that he would learn from but I'm somewhat optimistic about it.