England thread

[Molehill]

Maybe we wouldn't have conceded 400 if we hadn't thought it was a good idea to bowl first in heat hotter than the fires of hell with only one frontline spin bowler, a part timer and 4 seam bowlers....

Oh yeah, that's a whole different story. Opting to bowl against both Afghanistan and SA was whole new levels of stupidity.

 

[Owzat]

Well I'm going to disagree. If you're packing one skill to make up for the deficiencies in another then it's never going to end well. We should pick a balanced side and back the players who were selected for their roles to perform better than they have so far.

I think a much hidden factor for England is that in England the bowling has conditions they are good bowlers in, overseas they simply can't adapt much like when bowling in Ashes series down under (usually, are odd exceptions and bowlers do bowl quite well in a series)

They're varying degrees of quick, ODI bowling averages below (home/overseas split in brackets)

Topley : 26.13 (19.00/30.31)
Woakes : 30.48 (27.91/32.33)
Willey : 31.22 (27.46/41.42)
Curran : 39.00 (26.79/49.69)
Wood : 39.19 (37.65/42.20)
Atkinson : 51.33 (94.00/30.00)


Obviously Gus has hardly played enough to read a lot into his figures, 94 or 30 (or overall) but included for "completeness"

Aside from Topley none has a top quality average, Woakes isn't bad and not as bad overseas as in eg Tests, but in Bangladesh 49.75, in India 41.90, helps that in England, New Zealand, Sri Lanka, UAE and West Indies he has decent figures (appalling in South Africa at 80.67, ordinary down under at 36.78) He's played a minimum 5 in any given country bar UAE (4) and Ireland (1)

Stokes, were he fit to bowl (much) averages 42.39 overall (43.08/41.70 ) so those crying over him not bowling probably don't realise he doesn't add much value with the ball in ODIs. His best efforts/performances don't exactly read strongly, 5/61 and 4/38 vs AUS and 9 3wis, his ER of 6.05 isn't fantastic either


So looking at the bowlers, quicks anyway, pretty ordinary bar Topley, Woakes and Willey, and Willey not great outside the UK. Any great surprise England are struggling, if you looked in depth at performances in countries like India etc would probably tell you loads, as much those never have.

England are prepared only to struggle overseas, too helpful conditions at home breed a kind of bowling that isn't great if you can't swing it nearly as much elsewhere. Was no sense taking that many quicks, or playing as many as eg vs South Africa. And where's the sense taking Ali if not going to use him?!?!?

 

[FBU]

I think a much hidden factor for England is that in England the bowling has conditions they are good bowlers in, overseas they simply can't adapt much like when bowling in Ashes series down under (usually, are odd exceptions and bowlers do bowl quite well in a series)

They're varying degrees of quick, ODI bowling averages below (home/overseas split in brackets)

Topley : 26.13 (19.00/30.31)
Woakes : 30.48 (27.91/32.33)
Willey : 31.22 (27.46/41.42)
Curran : 39.00 (26.79/49.69)
Wood : 39.19 (37.65/42.20)
Atkinson : 51.33 (94.00/30.00)


Obviously Gus has hardly played enough to read a lot into his figures, 94 or 30 (or overall) but included for "completeness"

Aside from Topley none has a top quality average, Woakes isn't bad and not as bad overseas as in eg Tests, but in Bangladesh 49.75, in India 41.90, helps that in England, New Zealand, Sri Lanka, UAE and West Indies he has decent figures (appalling in South Africa at 80.67, ordinary down under at 36.78) He's played a minimum 5 in any given country bar UAE (4) and Ireland (1)

Stokes, were he fit to bowl (much) averages 42.39 overall (43.08/41.70 ) so those crying over him not bowling probably don't realise he doesn't add much value with the ball in ODIs. His best efforts/performances don't exactly read strongly, 5/61 and 4/38 vs AUS and 9 3wis, his ER of 6.05 isn't fantastic either


So looking at the bowlers, quicks anyway, pretty ordinary bar Topley, Woakes and Willey, and Willey not great outside the UK. Any great surprise England are struggling, if you looked in depth at performances in countries like India etc would probably tell you loads, as much those never have.

England are prepared only to struggle overseas, too helpful conditions at home breed a kind of bowling that isn't great if you can't swing it nearly as much elsewhere. Was no sense taking that many quicks, or playing as many as eg vs South Africa. And where's the sense taking Ali if not going to use him?!?!?

Anderson 29.22 (26.48/31.81)
Broad 30.13 (30.17/30.09)

You could take these two anywhere
Flintoff 24.38 (21.32/26.60)
Gough 26.42 (27.26/25.70)

 

[dannythomas]

Malan
Bairstow
Root
Stokes
Brook
Buttler
Livingstone
Woakes
Rashid
Atkinson
Wood

I think this is how I’d go tomorrow. Just pray Woakes can find his line again.

It’s light on bowling but the only way forwards for us is play to our strengths which is the batting, and hope that they can click into form again.

If only Crawley, Duckett and Robinson were in the squad…….

 

[loterry1994]

They’ve got to try bat first in my opinion and build a good score. They did their first two games and posted decent scores. It’s harder to come out especially when your batters are out of form when you’ve been slogged for 320+ plus and been all sloppy in the field. If they bat first and get 300 plus that does their confidence a World of good. They’ve got the players to still fight for a top 4

 

[Prince EWS]

Fair to a degree, but we scored 170.

Root as sixth bowler is not any more of a liability than Curran at this point and frankly his off spin v Moeen is not a huge step in quality.

We’re only going to win by batting teams out of games.

Yeah the problem was much more the first five bowlers than Root as 6th. He's a perfectly fine 6th bowler IMO.

 

[Molehill]

Prediction:

We will hold a review to discover what went wrong. As a result, The Hundred will be extended to all of July/August.

 

[ankitj]

Moeen: 'If we're going out, we're going out with a bang'

England vice-captain says the team has been "overthinking" during this World Cup, instead of playing the "entertaining" brand of cricket they're known for

www.espncricinfo.com

"Our intent hasn't been there," Moeen said. "When you see it from the outside, it's just like that spark is missing; that thing is missing where they're enjoying taking bowlers down and enjoying going out to bat. The situations haven't always been easy but still: I feel like it's a game of cricket, at the end of the day, and I think we're probably taking it too seriously in certain ways.

"It's almost having that carefree kind of attitude: who cares? It's a game of cricket. If you're going to make mistakes, you might as well make them doing what you're good at doing. And we're making mistakes anyway, so do it with a smile on your face… I think we as a group have been overthinking too much."

What is this pseudo psychological analysis? Why is it acceptable to talk such gibberish rather than focus on cricketing reasons for your team's failures?

 

[Owzat]

I repeat my suggestion the title should have "hopes hanging by a" in the middle

 

[Owzat]

They’ve got to try bat first in my opinion and build a good score. They did their first two games and posted decent scores. It’s harder to come out especially when your batters are out of form when you’ve been slogged for 320+ plus and been all sloppy in the field. If they bat first and get 300 plus that does their confidence a World of good. They’ve got the players to still fight for a top 4

Not really much hope if half your bowlers average 40+ overseas in ODIs and none bar Topley carry much of a threat or have much about them - outside of English conditions, we see it in Tests down under, if not swinging, net bowlers

the balance of the squad, if it has any, is poor. I don't blame nor expect 7-11 to compensate for top order failings, but Ali, Woakes, Willey, Rashid and Wood is pretty weak and their bowling doesn't balance that lack of batting bar maybe Rashid.

Doesn't help when Root, Butthead and Livingstone contribute 12 runs off 22 balls and the top order go from 45/0 to 85/5 as if collapses were well in fashion. Making Sri Lanka look world class, well done England


And so much for the "bat first is the winning option", 50-50 wasn't it according to someone on beeb have your say (at game 24? pretty sure he said 12-12) and the dew on the grass, it stuck to my coat, and all that I knew was, the hole in my shoe, was letting in water (letting in water)

(over mentioning by many of what is a winning formula, bat first, dew dew dew, blah blah blah, there is no such pattern or fixed "rule" come formula)

 

[Molehill]

And so much for the "bat first is the winning option", 50-50 wasn't it according to someone on beeb have your say (at game 24? pretty sure he said 12-12) and the dew on the grass, it stuck to my coat, and all that I knew was, the hole in my shoe, was letting in water (letting in water)

(over mentioning by many of what is a winning formula, bat first, dew dew dew, blah blah blah, there is no such pattern or fixed "rule" come formula)

5 of the bat second wins have been India who would probably have won their matches from batting first too. It could easily be 17-7.

 

[Owzat]

Prediction:

We will hold a review to discover what went wrong. As a result, The Hundred will be extended to all of July/August.

much pointed blame at said competition, lack of 50 over cricket, blah blah blah, well 50 over domestic cricket has been in decline for years, Bairstow, Root, Stokes, Ali, Woakes and others played in the 50 over World Cup of 2019, won it as it happens, and how much 50 over DOMESTIC cricket do they play now or then? Who would have come through?

Fact is cricket is cricket, same skills just applied differently according to format, bat quicker, improvise, attack more etc If anything the suggestion it is down to too much T20 is absurd, or the 16.4, you need to have more bowling skills to excel there even than 50 overs given that can run along at 10 or more an over - oh and didn't England win that format World Cup last year?

Enough with the excuses, England's squad and selections were all at sea, the bowlers don't bowl well if it isn't in England, was never going to be a winning formula combined with players underperforming

 

[Owzat]

5 of the bat second wins have been India who would probably have won their matches from batting first too. It could easily be 17-7.

you can spin the same kind of thing all round, some sides batting first would have won batting second etc, wouldn't dive into selectivity if I were you

 

[Molehill]

you can spin the same kind of thing all round, some sides batting first would have won batting second etc, wouldn't dive into selectivity if I were you

I'm of the opinion that some teams can cope with bowling in 35c heat and then going out to bat, England are clearly not one of them.

 

[Molehill]

Fact is cricket is cricket, same skills just applied differently according to format, bat quicker, improvise, attack more etc If anything the suggestion it is down to too much T20 is absurd, or the 16.4, you need to have more bowling skills to excel there even than 50 overs given that can run along at 10 or more an over - oh and didn't England win that format World Cup last year?

Enough with the excuses, England's squad and selections were all at sea, the bowlers don't bowl well if it isn't in England, was never going to be a winning formula combined with players underperforming

50 over cricket should for the most part utilise Test skills, it is only the last 10 or so overs where T20 abilities come to the fore. The more Hundred Cricket we play, the worse we will get at ODI's.

 

[GIMH]

50 over cricket should for the most part utilise Test skills, it is only the last 10 or so overs where T20 abilities come to the fore. The more Hundred Cricket we play, the worse we will get at ODI's.

I mean the only successful England ODI side is a massive argument against this post. The golden generation are the T20 generation, the Pro40 generation. Roy was a joke in Tests, Morgan wasn’t much better and neither was Jos. Or Plunkett, Rashid etc.

 

[Pothas]

At this point the performances are just completely baffling really. I know there were huge doubts about the bowling but really nobody could have seen this coming with the bat.

 

[Molehill]

I mean the only successful England ODI side is a massive argument against this post. The golden generation are the T20 generation, the Pro40 generation. Roy was a joke in Tests, Morgan wasn’t much better and neither was Jos. Or Plunkett, Rashid etc.

I just think that was a small period of freakish talent where the emphasis was on limited overs (look how the Test team suffered during that period). I don't see the current set up being long term successful at finding either Test or ODI cricketers.

And just look at the India/Aus teams here, essentially Test sides with 3 or so limited overs specialists thrown in.

 

[Prince EWS]

@Spark Alright I retract what I said about that not being a thing on CW.

 

[GIMH]

I just think that was a small period of freakish talent where the emphasis was on limited overs (look how the Test team suffered during that period). I don't see the current set up being long term successful at finding either Test or ODI cricketers.

And just look at the India/Aus teams here, essentially Test sides with 3 or so limited overs specialists thrown in.

Play like tests until the last ten overs was literally the Peter Moores strategy