thierry henry
International Coach
Those first few balls to Morgan not getting him out might signal a change of fortune?
Will have to try that one with the missus. Getting the timing just right with a wicket ball might prove difficult though.Coming inside to that wicket ball not knowing the score at all was great.
Not sure about his sporting prowess outside cricket, but I know what you mean about his movements. Almost that Javelin thrower athleticism.I love the way Boult moves. He looks a quality athlete. Did he play anything else apart from cricket?
made me chuckle.england have done alright to be only 3/60; they've batted much, much worse than that.
Don't think we've bowled all that well either tbh. Apart from two beauties from Southee, I think all 3 pacers have been marginally below their respective pars.england have done alright to be only 3/60; they've batted much, much worse than that.
Surviving the first 30 and launching has been our very successful strategy all summer. England definitely have the players to do something similar.I know Cook wasn't in great form, and he was cast as the millstone holding England's ODI side back, but I can't fathom how he isn't a better international ODI option at this stage than Gary Ballance. Bring in Cook, and you don't need to have such a poor compromise in Bell and Ali opening and the balance of the batting line up looks much better. Not saying necessarily that Cook would score more than Ballance, but the ODI game has changed and having openers score slowly (Guptill gambit) isn't a bad thing if you can preserve wickets to take advantage at the end of the innings. To that end, Cook would have been a better option. I think England's ODI batting planning is one World Cup too late as having some impetus up top was more important in past tournaments when run rate 10 over splits were more uniform.
Harsh IMO.Don't think we've bowled all that well either tbh. Apart from two beauties from Southee, I think all 3 pacers have been marginally below their respective pars.
Cook's a weird case because when he was playing well he was a better ODI player than any of the current top 3. But his form in all cricket has just been so awful for 18 months. A lot of people made it out to be him not being suited to modern ODI's, but that was never the issue.I know Cook wasn't in great form, and he was cast as the millstone holding England's ODI side back, but I can't fathom how he isn't a better international ODI option at this stage than Gary Ballance. Bring in Cook, and you don't need to have such a poor compromise in Bell and Ali opening and the balance of the batting line up looks much better. Not saying necessarily that Cook would score more than Ballance, but the ODI game has changed and having openers score slowly (Guptill gambit) isn't a bad thing if you can preserve wickets to take advantage at the end of the innings. To that end, Cook would have been a better option. I think England's ODI batting planning is one World Cup too late as having some impetus up top was more important in past tournaments when run rate 10 over splits were more uniform.
I did say marginally. Perhaps Southee's been at least as good as usual, but Boult & Milne both below their recent form.Harsh IMO.
Only Milne has looked below par.
This isn't really what you'd normally say is ideal conditions for either Southee or Boult. Boult started a bit poorly but has looked good on his recent overs.
I think Cook may have not been perfectly suited to pre-two new ball ODIs where the strategy for all teams was to pile on the runs in the first 20, keep them in hand and launch in the death.Cook's a weird case because when he was playing well he was a better ODI player than any of the current top 3. But his form in all cricket has just been so awful for 18 months. A lot of people made it out to be him not being suited to modern ODI's, but that was never the issue.