No, they don't. So they get to 70-1 after 20 overs and all the commentators are saying "England should've attacked more", and so those in position try to do it, and they can't, so they start scoring no runs, so they're dropped...
The fact that no Englishman has done it before is irrelevant. If Davies is good enough he's good enough, and his domestic performances suggest he is. And Worcs should only bat him where they want to, where they feel it would benefit them. And thus far they have.
So who is he going to replace in middle order, who is going to open. Don's see the point in overcomplicating it, the man had a brilliant season opening in OD's yet you feel the need to put him in what should be a senior position - 4. I think Davies is way more of an OD prospect than Prior and the only position for him where he can fit in the team is opener.
TBH, sometimes worse.
It'd benefit them to bat him four IMO. The fact no Englishman has done something before isn't irrelevant in my book TBH - it suggests there are pitfalls which pitfall for all. And there are - batting at the top of the order in England in ODIs is often more difficult than batting there elsewhere. Generally, you need to be good enough in FC cricket to do it in OD cricket.
Davies might well not fit in as opener though, that's the point. Whereas he could perfectly possibly do a better job at four - in the long-term - than the likes of Bopara.
Ridiculous logic IMO. Just because a player is likely to have a long term future in the side, doesn't mean you chuck him into a situation where he is unlikely to succeed. I would be very suprised to see him open in the series.
Is it, he's not any less likely to fail than Prior. I also, would be surprised if he even plays, although I do think this is the series to throw him in, Prior is a nothing player and don't see why he has a place in the side. Like I said about a million times its the Windies, did you not see our last OD game, this is the series to throw him in and test the guy's charecter no other WK is more deserving of a place.
Yeah, there is a need for a aggressive opener and therefore it makes no sense to play a young aggressive opener out of position and away from where they made their name and where the team need is.
Very wide of the mark.
Am i? Don't quite see what Prior adds to the OD squad, he himself doesn't even know his role, always looks undecided in ODI's and always gets out in stupid ways.
Well, he has clearly been given the job by England to pinch hit in the powerplays. I think, of all the players in the side, his role is one of the clearest. Whether he is good enough or not to perform his role is debatable...
Oh he's so lazily written off, time and again. Everyone loves to slate him and for that reason he's become an easy target. In fact he's a highly talented and accomplished batsman and a much more competent keeper than he is generally given credit for. He's a fighter with a good temperament. I'd like to see him drop down the order because I don't think opening is his best position in ODI cricket.
He certainly doesn't play as if he knows this, all he does is take one agricultural shot every three overs that barely ever works then goes back in to his shell.
Suppose my view of him has been influenced by the fact that he doesn't open well for England, but can't really drop him down the order without putting Bell up top and Strauss and Bell opening would be a recipe for a disaster without a doubt.
Thats just not true. That is the kind of view you'd expect to read in some ****ty article in one of the tabloids about why Prior is crap. People forget that he was a good enough batsman to be selected for as a batsman in a third of his ODI's, although he hasn't been for a couple of years.
Personally I quite like Bell at the top of the order. I don't think Prior's a particularly good bet as his opening partner but neither is Strauss. I'd have both of them in the middle order.
You've pretty much exhausted all opening options then, who would open with Bell then?