• 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.

***Official***Match #29 - India vs England- October 29th - Lucknow (D/N)

M

ma1978

International Debutant
Ashes81 said:
Another woeful batting display.

Yes the pitch wasn't straight forward and India bowled well, but there was some pretty poor shot selection as well.

We can debate all day about why we've performed so poorly and there's no simple answer to that.

The batting line up is an excellent one - Malan, YJB, Root, Stokes, Buttler is as good as anything in the tournament - their records show that.

We can talk about age, about lack of preparation etc etc but that batting line has performed so poorly and the bottom line is, none of us on here know why. The players and management don't know why.

We knew our bowling was vulnerable, that we lack a top class finisher but nobody going in to this WC doubted our top 5.

We've been the best white ball team in the world in recent years - we won the T20 WC at a relative canter last year but for whatever reason our batting has fallen apart.

We need to be brutally honest to try to establish if we can, why this has happened and make sure it never happens again.
Click to expand...
a year is a long time for players in their 30s. They were good. They look done.
 
A

Ashes81

State Vice-Captain
ma1978 said:
a year is a long time for players in their 30s. They were good. They look done.
Click to expand...
They do look done but it's a confidence thing rather than they've gone over the top.

Root, Stokes and Bairstow were all still playing well in the Ashes. Malan and Butler have been in good white ball form.

I've no idea why we've performed so poorly but for me it's not that those players are no longer good enough.
 
trundler

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
GIMH said:
@trundler is making a lot of valid points but saying the defeats to Afghanistan and Sri Lanka weren’t upsets is just wrong. You’d have got very decent money betting on an Afghanistan win. Okay by the time of the SL game it’s less of a surprise but England were still favourites.
Click to expand...
SL are just a bogey team for England but imo Afghanistan is a bad match up for England in these conditions. I can see England going over Australia and Australia going over Afghanistan but Afghanistan beating England on a spinny deck. Don't think Afghanistan beating us was an upset either.
 
Owzat

Owzat

U19 Captain
trundler said:
To clarify, I think if you gave this same England side the Asia Cup + a series in Asia, they'd bat a lot better. Bairstow, Root and Stokes needed more ODI cricket under their belts. That's on the management for planning poorly. The pace attack + Mo would probably still suck in India though.
Click to expand...
poor selections, you simply don't need Atkinson, Willey, Woakes, Topley, Wood and Curran, took away balance and when they figured Ali was toothless and Livingstone scoring few runs they left even less viable options. Sure Willey and Woakes had a good day, pitch helped quicks a bit, otherwise papering over the cracks of a tournament in which for England only Topley and Rashid have cut it as bowlers

and yes preparation was poor, bizarrely threw in a T20i series in England which proves £££ is always a consideration at the expense of said preparation, and played kiwis in 4 was it ODIs (?!?!?) and then Ireland which wasn't preparation for anything, just some golden handshake which benefitted them more than England, total waste of a month whilst the Asian Cup was going on which in itself may have been crafty in offering few or no options to prepare in conditions might have been closer matched




also bizarre a fair few on beeb are just ranting about lack of 50 overs domestic cricket, usual swipes at the Tundra which didn't exist prior to England winning the World Cup in more suited conditions, quite a few of the same players and only a few of this squad are inexperienced, simple fact is the quicks don't fare well overseas, have little special about them if it doesn't swing and showed yet again in spite of the "deep batting" it is ineffective in conditions alien to said lower order - Livingstone top scoring with 27, well he should be doing more than that and more often, other than that much as forecast, although given how soon it was clear England wouldn't win, without the 30s and 40s laid on the other day


was fairly obvious early doors at 40/3 this wasn't your usual wham, bam thankyou mam pitch yet England blazed away nonetheless until they were in the same hole and still couldn't adapt. for all the praise might be aimed at Woakes and Willey I'd take a fair bit away from Butthead, got through overs, played from the same script most England captains do, overbowled Ali because he was economic, maybe had England pushed on from the 40/3 position they'd have had more of a shot

only looked a small target, but even in small targets you can have given away 50-100 runs through poor approach and letting the game trundle along. they say do what the opposition would like least, well I bet they welcomed 23-2-112-1 with open arms whilst Rashid, Woakes and Willey with 29-3-113-7 did all the damage.

England did score more than 100, but all 10 wickets went for 99 runs..... if I were the selectors I'd draw a line under the World Cup and discard anyone currently 30 or approaching, pick a young squad and build for the next World Cup, maybe even combined squad to cover the shorter formats, better than chop and change, try, discard, go back to, recall, retire, all kinds of nonsense. Give some of the younger players a run in the side(s), one of the key problems in finding a Test spinner was you'd see a dozen or more in a decade despite usually plodding on with one (Ali before, now Leach, no point giving others one series and discarding)
 
Owzat

Owzat

U19 Captain
trundler said:
SL are just a bogey team for England but imo Afghanistan is a bad match up for England in these conditions. I can see England going over Australia and Australia going over Afghanistan but Afghanistan beating England on a spinny deck. Don't think Afghanistan beating us was an upset either.
Click to expand...
apart from defending the 364 vs Bangladesh England have given too many away, especially in context

vs IND : 91 for the 4th wicket, 33 the next highest (5th wicket for India) in the match
vs SRL : were 23/2, no further wickets or remote pressure in adding 137 for the 3rd wicket
vs SAF : early lost wicket but 121 for the 2nd wicket and 151 for the 6th
vs AFG : 114 for the 1st wicket, 43 and 44 for the 7th and 8th respectively
vs NZL : 10/1, never took another wicket as the kiwis piled on 273 more runs without (further) loss


against Bangladesh they posted a big total and got them 49/4, were a flew slips eg 72 for the 5th wicket but pale in comparison to the above, four hundred partnerships, a 90+ in a relatively low scorer, and a double hundred in just five games. Not saying these should all have been avoided but clear evidence of no bowling control at all, the batting has hardly excelled either but can understand crumbling once there was no backing up of a total vs the kiwis and then giving away a hundred for the 1st wicket against Afghans and two hundred partnerships in one innings against South Africa.

and of course a tail that barely wags, couple of knocks when the game was dead and buried aside highest score before Livingstone (batsman) scored 27 was 20. You could excuse some of the top order, but in context on pitches where the average was like 280 for the 1st innings it's all comparative "success", and indeed there is the fact that only one innings really won any game, the other efforts barely got the side close at all so preserving own averages
 
Sunil1z

Sunil1z

International Regular
Today’s Shami spell reminded me of Nehra’s spell against England in 2003 WC in similar swinging conditions under lights
 
Shri

Shri

Mr. Glass
Jacks
Salt
Crawley (ew)
Smeed
Brook
Banton
Curran


eng could build with that as a core. give all of these guys 4 years and clear roles. so much ball striking talent in there
 
GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Shri said:
Jacks
Salt
Crawley (ew)
Smeed
Brook
Banton
Curran


eng could build with that as a core. give all of these guys 4 years and clear roles. so much ball striking talent in there
Click to expand...
Sam Curran ain’t batting top six in ODIs mate. (Edit I can’t count clearly)

Duckett, Hain some other names worth considering.

Jamie Smith and Ollie Robinson potential successors to Jos (with the gloves)?
 
A

Ashes81

State Vice-Captain
Shri said:
Jacks
Salt
Crawley (ew)
Smeed
Brook
Banton
Curran


eng could build with that as a core. give all of these guys 4 years and clear roles. so much ball striking talent in there
Click to expand...
That line up is a good T20 top 7.

If they are going to be used in ODIs then they're going to have to learn on the job as most of them have played very little 50 over cricket.

Having no domestic top class 50 over comp is ridiculous and that has to change or we risk being left behind.
 
K

kevinw

State Captain
Shri said:
Jacks
Salt
Crawley (ew)
Smeed
Brook
Banton
Curran


eng could build with that as a core. give all of these guys 4 years and clear roles. so much ball striking talent in there
Click to expand...
I think Zak Crawley is definitely being groomed as a future England captain. I wouldn't be surprised if he comes into the ODI side to eventually take over the captaincy. His List A record is OK but his SR is sub-80.

Sam Hain has to be in the ODI side going forward. That List A record is undeniable.

Smeed and Banton barely play any List A cricket - and Jacks has a pretty modest record in this format. I think Salt will get more chances and Duckett has to be a regular selection now.

A top five of Crawley, Salt, Hain, Duckett, and Brook, followed by Buttler may not be the worst reboot, but I think one of the top five needs to be able to turn their arm over.
 
mackembhoy

mackembhoy

International Regular
kevinw said:
I think Zak Crawley is definitely being groomed as a future England captain. I wouldn't be surprised if he comes into the ODI side to eventually take over the captaincy. His List A record is OK but his SR is sub-80.

Sam Hain has to be in the ODI side going forward. That List A record is undeniable.

Smeed and Banton barely play any List A cricket - and Jacks has a pretty modest record in this format. I think Salt will get more chances and Duckett has to be a regular selection now.

A top five of Crawley, Salt, Hain, Duckett, and Brook, followed by Buttler may not be the worst reboot, but I think one of the top five needs to be able to turn their arm over.
Click to expand...
We've got the problem the next lot are all best suited as opener.

Sam Hain was batting at 5 against Ireland which is utterly ridiculous. Jacks and Banton as well as the ones you've listed in the opener slot too. Jacks and Salt opened against Ireland. Going to have to find best way to fit them all in a side.

Robinson and Smith good middle order players too. Not Jos levels but replacements they are good keepers too. Seems they rate Smith higher as he was picked.
 
P

Pup Clarke

Cricketer Of The Year
Duckett's omission was the big eye raiser for me. In-form, busy player, good against spin and has had an extended run in the Test XI the past twelve months

Very weird
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top