TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
How about you just stop passing personal comment on anyone's post quality. It's quite weird that you keep doing it.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Why has England become so good in ODIs
- Thread starter Victor Ian
- Start date
Mr Miyagi
Banned
Great cricket related post and on topic TJB.
Last edited:
Victor Ian
International Coach
Mr Miyagi.... Evidence that **** has evolved?
You have turned so many threads into a tiresome and tedious read Mr Miyagi. Congrats. You've even annoyed me enough to comment on it. Your insightful posts are unfortunately hidden behind a veneer of the most contemptible effort to get a rise out of people. You should act with the intellect you keep telling us you have and stop it. Just post directly on the cricket.
You have turned so many threads into a tiresome and tedious read Mr Miyagi. Congrats. You've even annoyed me enough to comment on it. Your insightful posts are unfortunately hidden behind a veneer of the most contemptible effort to get a rise out of people. You should act with the intellect you keep telling us you have and stop it. Just post directly on the cricket.
Mr Miyagi
Banned
So you don't like Boult and Santner of the NZ attack or their total attack, or don't like Woakes or the total English attack?
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 34141
Guest
CW, you either make it or you don’t make it. How it is here nearly 2 years for me and I still haven’t taken the hint. Good luck with your journey.
It is very simple. England are focused on balance and maximising 300 deliveries. They value strike rate very highly. Other teams don't seem to have very clever people picking their team. There is a science and a maths to picking the best limited overs sides in both formats. England are improving still at it and still haven't peaked. You want as many high strike rate men in there as possible whilst always lasting the 300 deliveries. Too many teams seem to be miles behind reality and the era cricket is in. We have more skilled batsmen than ever, certain teams aren't giving their skilled and innovative batters a chance to shine and a license. Not many teams have realised yet everyone has their role in a batting order and ideally you want one gun batter that is the anchor man (or emergency clause) and it's all you need to last the 300 balls with fast strike rate batters with handy averages around. Furthermore, good fielding throughout the side is a must and a team ethic. For me limited overs cricket is more of a team sport than test cricket which is individual battles more (and test cricket more of a team grind in the batting, the batting line up in test cricket must be on the same wavelength and make good decisions when to attack a season, or revert to survival ). ODI cricket for me is about the balance of a side and them playing for one another.
England try to get a flier and if needed they rebuild a little (whilst scoring as fast as possible) then go for it again as the overs run out near 12-15 overs to go. Too many teams aren't going for enough of a flier and are waiting too long to hit at the end of the innings too (and it's compounded when they don't pick their strongest team either). They also aren't getting their anchor man to score fast enough, this is something Root is getting better at. He's our best test batter and we want him as the anchor in the ODI side. But we also want him to be striking at 90 on average, if not higher, ideally. We have Bairstow and Roy at the top playing like pinch hitters and it's key to get a flier in limited overs cricket. England have the balance perfect right now and they are getting well backed up by the bowlers and in the field. They also have more than 11 good options for the team, it's a squad of options and the players seem happy to come in and out the side when necessary which is essential. Bairstow's ability to adapt and bat where he is told (and play a role for the team) has also been brilliant for us. His strike rate keeps going up and he has a very good average too.
For me strike rate is still undervalued even in t20 and a cricinfo article this week highlights this strongly. Please check Heath Steak's t20 batting stats and they are extremely good. Considering the era he played in he fully understood the requirement for high strike rate batting in t20 (he also wasn't utilised properly. He would have had better stats and helped the team even more as a pinch hitter in that format). As the batsmen are getting more skilled, practicing better and developing motor skills better the 50 over game has become a prolonged version of 20 over cricket. We have bowlers that can bat as well and bat all the way down, all our bowlers can hit boundaries too and keep the run rate up..all our bowlers can field well or well enough..it's key to our strategy as a side. You must play limited overs cricket as a team. Every individual must buy into the philosophy and bat, bowl and field for the team. Everyone must give their all in the field. If that doesn't all happen you can't maximise your potential as a side.
I have adjusted this slightly to correct mistakes and make it read a bit better. I think England's team will create a huge re-think in limited overs cricket for all sides. If it doesn't then there is something very wrong in cricket and the wrong minds are involved in team selection and tactics.
England try to get a flier and if needed they rebuild a little (whilst scoring as fast as possible) then go for it again as the overs run out near 12-15 overs to go. Too many teams aren't going for enough of a flier and are waiting too long to hit at the end of the innings too (and it's compounded when they don't pick their strongest team either). They also aren't getting their anchor man to score fast enough, this is something Root is getting better at. He's our best test batter and we want him as the anchor in the ODI side. But we also want him to be striking at 90 on average, if not higher, ideally. We have Bairstow and Roy at the top playing like pinch hitters and it's key to get a flier in limited overs cricket. England have the balance perfect right now and they are getting well backed up by the bowlers and in the field. They also have more than 11 good options for the team, it's a squad of options and the players seem happy to come in and out the side when necessary which is essential. Bairstow's ability to adapt and bat where he is told (and play a role for the team) has also been brilliant for us. His strike rate keeps going up and he has a very good average too.
For me strike rate is still undervalued even in t20 and a cricinfo article this week highlights this strongly. Please check Heath Steak's t20 batting stats and they are extremely good. Considering the era he played in he fully understood the requirement for high strike rate batting in t20 (he also wasn't utilised properly. He would have had better stats and helped the team even more as a pinch hitter in that format). As the batsmen are getting more skilled, practicing better and developing motor skills better the 50 over game has become a prolonged version of 20 over cricket. We have bowlers that can bat as well and bat all the way down, all our bowlers can hit boundaries too and keep the run rate up..all our bowlers can field well or well enough..it's key to our strategy as a side. You must play limited overs cricket as a team. Every individual must buy into the philosophy and bat, bowl and field for the team. Everyone must give their all in the field. If that doesn't all happen you can't maximise your potential as a side.
I have adjusted this slightly to correct mistakes and make it read a bit better. I think England's team will create a huge re-think in limited overs cricket for all sides. If it doesn't then there is something very wrong in cricket and the wrong minds are involved in team selection and tactics.
Last edited:
Moonsorrow999
U19 Debutant
Their batting is crazy good and their spin bowling is super strong. Morgan is a decent leader too, shame he isn't leading Ireland.
Their quicks when fully fit are not as bad as people say. Willey has done well at the moment, so an attack of Woakes, Willey, Plunkett, Mo and Rashid with Stokes to bowl a few if needed. They just need to send Wood back to Division Two so he can find his level.
Maybe England would even be better without Stokes at the moment, he is massively over-rated. Red hot or cold, mostly cold.
Oh, and one-three years ago England had this guy called Jos Buttler who was doing what Stokes does now. Then, he discovered the Lost City of Consistency and finally became the player people saying he was prematurely.
That, and teams like Australia and Sri Lanka seem to suck now. When the likes of Bell and Cook among various names mentioned in this thread were playing, anyone could win any match really. Whereas now it looks like India and particularly England are miles in front.
That said, they look like a complete team minus Wood. Some think they have peaked too soon, however in my opinion they keep getting better and better.
Oh, and Bayliss has done an amazing jobs, as clueless a pudding he is in tests.
Their quicks when fully fit are not as bad as people say. Willey has done well at the moment, so an attack of Woakes, Willey, Plunkett, Mo and Rashid with Stokes to bowl a few if needed. They just need to send Wood back to Division Two so he can find his level.
Maybe England would even be better without Stokes at the moment, he is massively over-rated. Red hot or cold, mostly cold.
Oh, and one-three years ago England had this guy called Jos Buttler who was doing what Stokes does now. Then, he discovered the Lost City of Consistency and finally became the player people saying he was prematurely.
That, and teams like Australia and Sri Lanka seem to suck now. When the likes of Bell and Cook among various names mentioned in this thread were playing, anyone could win any match really. Whereas now it looks like India and particularly England are miles in front.
That said, they look like a complete team minus Wood. Some think they have peaked too soon, however in my opinion they keep getting better and better.
Oh, and Bayliss has done an amazing jobs, as clueless a pudding he is in tests.
Bijed
International Regular
I think Rashid deserves a mention for his gradual but consistent improvement. Doesn't give away anywhere near as many easy runs as he used to and even on the days where he is getting hit around a bit, he seems much better at keeping his head and generally manages to end up at with figures more like 2-70 rather than 0-80. And his good days are more like 3-50 than 2-60. Basically he's having a lot more impact which is good to see as I've been fairly critical of him in the past.
Last edited:
ImpatientLime
International Regular
lol wtf is this
Mr Miyagi
Banned
Lol seems pretty self explanatory to me, wtf are you struggling with?
Starfighter
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
It's about as trite, useless a statement as you could get
cnerd123
likes this
England have definitely mastered the underrated ODI strategy of scoring more runs than their opponents in order to win games
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Other teams need to start trying to score more runs that England to beat them? It's so simple when you think about it. We're on to a winner here.
Mr Miyagi
Banned
You'd think? And yet Aus with all their great cricketing minds still turns up in England with Agar batting 7 and Paine ahead of him.
So why is England winning? Because it certainly isn't their Imran, Akram, Waqar, Mushtaq level bowling attack that is bowling sides out in 30 overs.
Last edited:
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Any team with Agar and Paine in it, in any position, is going to struggle
Mr Miyagi
Banned
By not scoring enough runs?
I mean it's so trite, it's so obvious, it's so simple, and still often underrated.
It is almost like the inventor of the post-it note wondering 'why did no-one make this before'?
Last edited:
Starfighter
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
The Australian selectors weren't selecting Agar and Paine because they were ignorant of the fact that we needed to score runs though. You're just creating a straw man, no-one here thinks that the Australian selectors are doing a good job or are great cricket brains. It's not underrated at all, the concept is known universally, it's just the execution that's the issue. The problem you have is that saying "Too many teams play right into England's hands by not scoring enough runs" is tantamount to saying that too many teams help England by losing. It's a statement of zero value, despite your attempt here to bluster otherwise. Stop trying to sound like the intellectual you're not.
Aus & Ind at their peak were doing just that, except facing an older bowl & 5 fielders outside the circle, after the first 15 overs.
England are getting away with it in part - due to their T20 mode batting in 50 overs, it works exceptionally well on flattish roads, but on tough surfaces you'll see this strategy unravel just as fast.
England are getting away with it in part - due to their T20 mode batting in 50 overs, it works exceptionally well on flattish roads, but on tough surfaces you'll see this strategy unravel just as fast.