Well if you want to believe that that is fair enough but my point was that England were a fairly good one-day side until 1992 after which the wheels fell off.
Indeed, England were a very good ODI side throughout the 80s and ultimately up to 1992 BUT it wasn't just that our best players retired and the new ones couldn't quite match up, rather the state of the game changed. Pakistan popularised hitting out in the last 10 and have sheering pace and reverse while bowling, plus the inclusion of leg spin which was almost dying. In fact, spinners were thought of as dead meat in the smaller format but Mushy, Saq and co proved everyone wrong.
In the mid 90s, Sri Lanka popularised going hard early and tying batsmen up with...you guessed it...spinners, something England have rarely produced (currently we may have the best ODI side we've ever had and there are two useful spinners in it, say much?). England could not adapt to this and had plodders and dibbly dobbers throughout.
Showed some promise with Freddy and KP and no with Morgan and his cavalier men. Finally, England have entered the space age and taken a bit of Pak, SL and Aus with them. There's the hard hitting batsmen, from 1 to almost 7, theres the bit of pace and of course, spin. None of it has been luck, it has occurred as a result of a concerted effort to create and environment in which these types of players are created and succeed. Just watch a clip from a while back on buttler training, where he spend hours in the nets practising hitting boundaries and nothing else against specialised ball machines.
That intent and genuine care for the ODI game, which has largely been missing for 40 years, has turned England into a force. I say, long may it continue.
