***Official*** England in Pakistan

[greg]

Well you're a ray of sunshine today, aren't you?!? That's why I said IMHO (as in In My Humble Opinion). Strauss did well, solid foundation & all that, but it was KP, Fred & Colly who turned a promising start into a potentially match-winning position.

As for Blackwell, well he comfortably outbowled Malik & Kaneria who both played on the same turning pitch as he did. I say credit where it's due. If he'd have gone for nigh-on seven per over like Kaneria did instead of 4 and a half we could've seen a very different result.

Yeah, sorry I edited my post when i had read yours properly.

I think his was the most important innings though, so i thought it was fair enough.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Yeah, sorry I edited my post when i had read yours properly.

I think his was the most important innings though, so i thought it was fair enough.

Fair dos. No worries.

 

[greg]

I think Strauss innings and Blackwell's bowling were directly comparable in their impact on the game. Both set up their respective innings for others to finish the job.

 

[Jono]

I would have given Strauss MOM. If Flintoff picked up another top order batsman or was a little tighter maybe he could have got it.

Blackwell's performance IMO was crucial, but boy it would have been, on paper, a weird MOM choice.

Its not really that important anyway, there were just so many contributors that it could have gone to a few. Just like today in Aus vs. NZ really McCullum was the player that got NZ over the line, but because Styris set up that possibility he got the award for MOM.

 

[aussie]

great second half performance by england, backing up the superb batting performance with a good disciplined bowling performance after Pakistan had got off to a great start. Has we all would say Plunks & Blackie were very good & for me personally i hope Blackie can make some runs in this ODI's as well, since IMO it may make him a more valuable OD option that Gilo in the long run.

After today's game here what i suggest for a full strenght OD team with Strauss at 4:

Tres
Prior
Vaughan
Strauss
KP
Freddie
Colly
Blackie
G.Jones
Harmy
S.Jones
Super-sub: Anderson or Plunkett

 

[wpdavid]

great second half performance by england, backing up the superb batting performance with a good disciplined bowling performance after Pakistan had got off to a great start. Has we all would say Plunks & Blackie were very good & for me personally i hope Blackie can make some runs in this ODI's as well, since IMO it may make him a more valuable OD option that Gilo in the long run.

After today's game here what i suggest for a full strenght OD team with Strauss at 4:

Tres
Prior
Vaughan
Strauss
KP
Freddie
Colly
Blackie
G.Jones
Harmy
S.Jones
Super-sub: Anderson or Plunkett

If the supersub arrangment means that Anderson or Plunkett gets to play instead of one of the batters when we field, then fair enough. Otherwise, we're a bowler light, I reckon. I know Colly & Blackwell did well today, but would still want another frontline bowler in your 1st XI. I know that means making a hard choice about the top 4, but that's what selectors are paid to do.

 

[aussie]

If the supersub arrangment means that Anderson or Plunkett gets to play instead of one of the batters when we field, then fair enough. Otherwise, we're a bowler light, I reckon. I know Colly & Blackwell did well today, but would still want another frontline bowler in your 1st XI. I know that means making a hard choice about the top 4, but that's what selectors are paid to do.

well yea if we bat 1st then we can play all the batsmen, but if not a bowler should play then a batsman can be subbed. But the 12 that should be in the ODI XI should be around those 13 players

 

[Jono]

What's Geraint Jones' form been in ODIs over the past year? Has it been impressive. Could Prior keep and another batsman or all-rounder take Jones' spot, or has he been good enough. I remember his performance in the NWS final, but other than that his ODI form performances escape me other than the failed attempt to have him as opener in SA.

 

[greg]

well yea if we bat 1st then we can play all the batsmen, but if not a bowler should play then a batsman can be subbed. But the 12 that should be in the ODI XI should be around those 13 players

I prefer the method of picking the batsman initially, simply so we avoid the temptation of subbing the bowler for the batsman in the first innings a la the Oval ODI vs Australia.

 

[greg]

What's Geraint Jones' form been in ODIs over the past year? Has it been impressive. Could Prior keep and another batsman or all-rounder take Jones' spot, or has he been good enough. I remember his performance in the NWS final, but other than that his ODI form performances escape me other than the failed attempt to have him as opener in SA.

Geraint's keeping in ODIs has been outstanding

 

[UncleTheOne]

If our wicketkeeper, this match being Geraint Jones in the position, is going to bat so far down the order in one dayers, coming in at 8 then why can't we draft in someone more reliable with the gloves, Chris Read coming in at 8 would be much more to my liking, and he can be a very handy and explosive lower order batsman.

 

[greg]

If our wicketkeeper, this match being Geraint Jones in the position, is going to bat so far down the order in one dayers, coming in at 8 then why can't we draft in someone more reliable with the gloves, Chris Read coming in at 8 would be much more to my liking, and he can be a very handy and explosive lower order batsman.

I think the point is that he would have been batting at 7 if we had bowled first. (although i suppose he might have been subbed ) Although like i said, his keeping in ODIs has been beyond reproach. There have also been suggestions that his place above Read has to do with more than just his batting.

 

[aussie]

If our wicketkeeper, this match being Geraint Jones in the position, is going to bat so far down the order in one dayers, coming in at 8 then why can't we draft in someone more reliable with the gloves, Chris Read coming in at 8 would be much more to my liking, and he can be a very handy and explosive lower order batsman.

interesting option but knowing fletcher they will stick with Geraint, and IMO i think Read can be any more of a destructive hitter lower-down the order than Jones although he may be more reliable with the gloves. But having said that Jones has been pretty good with the gloves this year

 

[open365]

Jones' ODI keeping has been faultless,Prior's promotion to open makes the keeping debate a lot more intresting.

Read looks gone for good now,despite averaging 44 for the last 2 seasons

So its now either Jones or Prior and while Prior is an excellent one day batsman,better then Jones,his glovework is nothing special and his batting in the longer form of the game isn't sparkling either. Jones isn't worth his place in the ODI side as a pure batsman but he has more potential in test matches though he seems to have aquired Butcher's habbit of getting himself out after a good start.

Fletcher will almost defintely pick the same keeper in both forms of the game so it looks like Jones is safe for a while.

I don't think Vaughan should get back into the ODI side now,His captaincy defintely is not worth his match-losing batting abilities.

England's side looked a bit bat-heavy today and i'm very suprised that they picked Plunkett as the sub instead of Blackwell.

i reckon the best current England side would be-

1.Trescothick
2.Prior
3.Strauss
4.KP
5.Freddie
6.Collingwood
7.Solanki
8.Jones
9.Harmison
10.Anderson
11.Plunkett
12.Blackwell

i'm not sure what the point of Solanki is atm.

 

[greg]

Jones' ODI keeping has been faultless,Prior's promotion to open makes the keeping debate a lot more intresting.

Read looks gone for good now,despite averaging 44 for the last 2 seasons

So its now either Jones or Prior and while Prior is an excellent one day batsman,better then Jones,his glovework is nothing special and his batting in the longer form of the game isn't sparkling either. Jones isn't worth his place in the ODI side as a pure batsman but he has more potential in test matches though he seems to have aquired Butcher's habbit of getting himself out after a good start.

Fletcher will almost defintely pick the same keeper in both forms of the game so it looks like Jones is safe for a while.

I don't think Vaughan should get back into the ODI side now,His captaincy defintely is not worth his match-losing batting abilities.

England's side looked a bit bat-heavy today and i'm very suprised that they picked Plunkett as the sub instead of Blackwell.

i reckon the best current England side would be-

1.Trescothick
2.Prior
3.Strauss
4.KP
5.Freddie
6.Collingwood
7.Solanki
8.Jones
9.Harmison
10.Anderson
11.Plunkett
12.Blackwell

i'm not sure what the point of Solanki is atm.

The silly thing at the moment is that England are picking their supersub to magnify the effect of winning the toss, when really it should be used to limit the damage of losing it. In other words, if you are going to bat if you win the toss then you should initially pick the bowler, and if you are going to bowl you should pick the batsman. Then if you win the toss you just sacrifice your sub. (this is assuming you don't pick an "allrounder" as your supersub). The impact of what England are doing at the moment is to leave them to be hit by a double whammy if they lose the toss.

 

[greg]

I think the point of Solanki is to do nothing (apart from be a specialist fielder) and leave a place for Vaughan to get back into the side (as a specialist captain).

 

[open365]

I think the point of Solanki is to do nothing (apart from be a specialist fielder) and leave a place for Vaughan to get back into the side (as a specialist captain).

thats too true.

 

[Beleg]

Congragulations to England. They deserved the win.

What I don't understand for a moment is the choice of Arshad Khan as super-sub. With Malik and Kaneria already in the team and Rana slotted to bat at number eight, what the hell was Inzy thinking by picking another off-spinner who is worthless with the bat.

 

[pakster]

[whinge mode] Bah...totally unfair, piterson should have been given out, we were playing against 12 men, batting in the lights...in the mist, england used negative spin tactics, england got away with bowling wide, afridi was unfairly banned in ODI's. [/whinge]

In all seriousness...well played England. Particularly impressed with Plunket (not blackwell - im pretty sure he has the potential to suck, nothing special about him whatsoever). Anderson bowled well too - he should have played in at least one test.

Dissapointed with pakistan, particulary the lower middle order. I would like to see a proper opener playing with butt and move akmal down the order. Someone also ought to explain the super-sub rule to inzamam again, i dont think he's quite grasped the concept. Malik needs to learn to hit fours and someone has to take responsibility for playing a long innings...oh, and WE NEED AFRIDI!!

 

[greg]

[whinge mode] Bah...totally unfair, piterson should have been given out, we were playing against 12 men, batting in the lights...in the mist, england used negative spin tactics, england got away with bowling wide, afridi was unfairly banned in ODI's. [/whinge]

In all seriousness...well played England. Particularly impressed with Plunket (not blackwell - im pretty sure he has the potential to suck, nothing special about him whatsoever). Anderson bowled well too - he should have played in at least one test.

Dissapointed with pakistan, particulary the lower middle order. I would like to see a proper opener playing with butt and move akmal down the order. Someone also ought to explain the super-sub rule to inzamam again, i dont think he's quite grasped the concept. Malik needs to learn to hit fours and someone has to take responsibility for playing a long innings...oh, and WE NEED AFRIDI!!

Of course the supersub rules open the possibility of sides having to contend with playing againt 13! men (supersub + the umpire )