***Official*** England in Pakistan

[Steulen]

England don't really play in that many tri-series anyway. The second ODI series was pointless, I said the same before it happened - it was immediately after the first ODI series, it was trialling the new supersub/fielding rules and it was just over a week before the first Test. You couldn't expect either side to give everything in those circumstances. As for the CT final it was more the 'back-up' bowling that killed England in the end, and I've always advocated getting rid of Gough anyway (Wharf has probably played his last ODI).

But that's exactly what makes them mediocre. England simply doesn't have a good enough bowling attack. A batting line-up including Trescothick, Strauss, Flintoff, and Pietersen is a near guarantee for competitive totals, but if you're then made to defend with a bowling line-up of Harmison, Flintoff, Trundler, Wobbler and Loser (note: bowlers 3-5 denote any mix of generic journeymen beloved by the England ODI set-up), you won't win consistently.

 

[Scaly piscine]

But that's exactly what makes them mediocre. England simply doesn't have a good enough bowling attack. A batting line-up including Trescothick, Strauss, Flintoff, and Pietersen is a near guarantee for competitive totals, but if you're then made to defend with a bowling line-up of Harmison, Flintoff, Trundler, Wobbler and Loser (note: bowlers 3-5 denote any mix of generic journeymen beloved by the England ODI set-up), you won't win consistently.

Any one of Simon Jones, Anderson and Plunkett are an improvement over Gough/Wharf. Also England didn't have KP in that CT final (wasn't qualified to play for England then), so the team should be better in terms of personnel nowadays - once they're all fit that is.

 

[deeps]

wats up with Tremlett? he seemed to be a good prospect?

 

[Barney Rubble]

wats up with Tremlett? he seemed to be a good prospect?

Injured.

 

[jack_sparrow]

carnage. I feel so bad for flintoff. The english have placed incredible pressure on him. More pressure then faith, I suspect. Yes he is phenomenal, but he can't win every game for them. At the rate and intensity pakistan is playing, not even warne and mcgrath couuld save their respective sides....

 

[Deja moo]

Alistair Campbell, move over. You've got competition.

 

[Scaly piscine]

wats up with Tremlett? he seemed to be a good prospect?

Yea Tremlett as well is an improvement over Gough/Wharf, I'm worried he might be another Richard Johnson in terms of injury problems tho. Hopefully it'll be something that is ironed out like with Harmison.

 

[greg]

England are just AWFUL at one day cricket. That is all there is to it. We can get lucky from time to time through good individual performances, but as far of having any idea of playing one day cricket in a percentage way on flat pitches (which is what is necessary to win enough games consistently to win a world cup) we basically stink.

We English don't need to get involved in arguments about this, and try and defend our performances. We're rubbish, and consistently playing a game with no thinking, or the thinking of 5 years ago.

 

[marc71178]

This is a meaningless ODI series, the one in SA was and most series are. England's first ODI series against Australia mattered because it was BEFORE the Test series and there were pyschological points for England to gain (not for Australia to lose - it didn't make much difference to them in the Tests because they'd believe whatever happened that they'd beat England in the Tests, but England needed to beat Australia at some point to give themselves belief that they could beat Australia in the Tests and win the Ashes). As I said when it comes to meaningless ODI series, England are in the pack with most other teams, when it comes to meaningful ODIs they're still the second best side because they go up several notches as they did against Australia.

There's a massive difference between meaningful ODIs and meaningless ODIs. If there was no distinct difference, India win their fair share of finals and Australia would lose their fair share of finals.

Do us all a favour, shut up and admit that we are rubbish in ODIs

 

[atlanta]

This is a meaningless ODI series, the one in SA was and most series are. England's first ODI series against Australia mattered because it was BEFORE the Test series and there were pyschological points for England to gain (not for Australia to lose - it didn't make much difference to them in the Tests because they'd believe whatever happened that they'd beat England in the Tests, but England needed to beat Australia at some point to give themselves belief that they could beat Australia in the Tests and win the Ashes). As I said when it comes to meaningless ODI series, England are in the pack with most other teams, when it comes to meaningful ODIs they're still the second best side because they go up several notches as they did against Australia.

There's a massive difference between meaningful ODIs and meaningless ODIs. If there was no distinct difference, India win their fair share of finals and Australia would lose their fair share of finals.

wow, I mean you've made some "interesting" comments in the past, but this one takes all the marble.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Do us all a favour, shut up and admit that we are rubbish in ODIs

Explain how England beat Australia twice this year, beat them in the CT and are the only side to have a remotely positive result against them in an ODI final for 5 years.

 

[BoyBrumby]

But that's exactly what makes them mediocre. England simply doesn't have a good enough bowling attack. A batting line-up including Trescothick, Strauss, Flintoff, and Pietersen is a near guarantee for competitive totals, but if you're then made to defend with a bowling line-up of Harmison, Flintoff, Trundler, Wobbler and Loser (note: bowlers 3-5 denote any mix of generic journeymen beloved by the England ODI set-up), you won't win consistently.

That's gold! I nearly spat a mouthful of coke over my keyboard when I read that! Trying to work out who best fits which!

Was Tresco's the worst insertion since Punter @ Edgbaston? It has to be up there. It's almost cruel to single anything out after today tho because the wheels came off very spectacularly in almost every facet of our game! Having said that, not bringing Ian Bell in until we were 8 down seems almost wilfully daft. Fair play to Pakistan, they gave us an absolute mullering & we had no answer.

Saw something in the paper over the weekend that depressed me no end. Guess who was our captain the last time we won a major (i.e.: not Bangladesh or Zimbabwe) ODI series abroad. Have a look yourselves!

 

[greg]

That's gold! I nearly spat a mouthful of coke over my keyboard when I read that! Trying to work out who best fits which!


Was Tresco's the worst insertion since Punter @ Edgbaston? It has to be up there. It's almost cruel to single anything out after today tho because the wheels came off very spectacularly in almost every facet of our game! Having said that, not bringing Ian Bell in until we were 8 down seems almost wilfully daft. Fair play to Pakistan, they gave us an absolute mullering & we had no answer.

Saw something in the paper over the weekend that depressed me no end. Guess who was our captain the last time we won a major (i.e.: not Bangladesh or Zimbabwe) ODI series abroad. Have a look yourselves!

Adam Hollioake?

Not including Sharjah, urm...

 

[superkingdave]

Goochie and Stewie (joint effort) in NZ 91-92?

 

[BoyBrumby]

Adam Hollioake?

Not including Sharjah, urm...

Sharjah was the one the quoted in the paper! I thought it couldn't be right, but no, it is!

It's strange how the split ODI/test captaincy went out of fashion after Hollioake, but if you look at what we've done since (the square root of Fanny Adams, basically!) maybe there's something to be said for it? I doubt Vaughan would seriously trouble the selectors if not for his leadership.

 

[greg]

Sharjah was the one the quoted in the paper! I thought it couldn't be right, but no, it is!

It's strange how the split ODI/test captaincy went out of fashion after Hollioake, but if you look at what we've done since (the square root of Fanny Adams, basically!) maybe there's something to be said for it? I doubt Vaughan would seriously trouble the selectors if not for his leadership.

Vaughan was a specialist one-day captain.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Vaughan was a specialist one-day captain.

For about a day!

 

[Gotchya]

Absolute carnage, Pakistan are playing like a team posessed.

I can't see England lifting their spirits after such a defeat (though one would love to see a contest). Its hard enough on Pakistani pitches, but if you put the ball half-way it can lead to results like these.

Great aggression by Akmal, even with wickets falling around him, he just kept going. The first promising opening pair since Anwar and Sohail?

 

[grecian]

I agree with Scaly piscine, nah not really

We're pish at ODIs, and we know we are. Really feel its time for the likes of Shah and Joyce to be giving a go. It just ain't working at the moment. We are good at test cricket because we've got the belief in our players we can win from any position. Yet it just seems like in ODIs, its same old England, negative thinking shrouded by the odd decent performance.

Still we're good at 20/20

 

[superkingdave]

For about a day!

actually 10 ODIers is a while for England