*Official* English Domestic Season (2004)

[Langeveldt]

Why think about today? What's to be gained?

I think a number of cricket sides spend so much time planning for the future, that they do not pick their best potential elevens for the time... Matches are lost, which destroys confidence, creates unrest etc.

I am a firm believer that if you pick your best side and give yourself the best chance of winning "today", the rest will fall into place more easily with confidance and success.. Success breeds success..

 

[Rich2001]

I think a number of cricket sides spend so much time planning for the future, that they do not pick their best potential elevens for the time... Matches are lost, which destroys confidence, creates unrest etc.

I am a firm believer that if you pick your best side and give yourself the best chance of winning "today", the rest will fall into place more easily with confidance and success.. Success breeds success..

That's certianly a fair point and like you say who is going to take cricket up if all we do is lose?

I think there could quite easily be a balance of today and tommorow, England went down the route of 2007 and the whole 11 was basically re-done... Iam sure there has to be room for a couple of experianced players just to guide the inexperianced guys through for a year or so then fade them out bit by bit changing all in one go was a risk if it paid off or not is for each to decide, but IMO I think England could live without McGrath/Clarke and have a couple of experianced player just to help the middle order after the two experianced players are gone at the top, as that's all we have (bar Flintoff and maybe Colly now).

 

[marc71178]

Why think about today? What's to be gained?

About as much as selecting a Surrey left hander whose one day record isn't that good.

 

[marc71178]

Tough one.. my two cents

1. M Trescothick
2. A Strauss
3. M Butcher
4. G Thorpe (if available?)
5. M Vaughan
6. A Flintoff
7. I Blackwell
8. G Jones
9. R Johnson
10. J Anderson
11. M Hoggard

No Collingwood, despite his continually being our consistent middle order player?

 

[Craig]

Any Thorpe has given away the ODI game. Pity how people keep forgetting that.

 

[twctopcat]

It's all about Flintoff, pietersen and Blackwell in the middle/low order for ODI by the end of the year. With a bit of batting maturity and Gaylesque bowling from Blackwell/Pietersen that would own in terms of fire power.

 

[marc71178]

Still needs a nurdler (as in Collingwood)

 

[tooextracool]

Tough one.. my two cents

1. M Trescothick
2. A Strauss
3. M Butcher
4. G Thorpe (if available?)
5. M Vaughan
6. A Flintoff
7. I Blackwell
8. G Jones
9. R Johnson
10. J Anderson
11. M Hoggard

No room for Harmison... There will be once he proves he is as good in ODI's as tests...
No room for Giles, the superior bat of Blackwell gets him in..
Butcher must really play ODI cricket before its too late.. Sod WC2007, lets think about today
Not sure about Thorpe's status.. If not get Collingwood, later Pietersen in

okay enough of this mark butcher crap, the guy needs to learn to field if he wants to play in the ODI side.
why G jones when clearly read has shown that he is capable enough at the ODI level. how many match winning knocks does he need to play to show that he's a good enough batsman at the ODI arena,let alone the fact that he is clearly a much better keeper.
and hoggard...in the ODI side?AFAIC he cant seem to bowl well when the ball dont move about in tests,let alone on those flat odi wickets. he pitches the ball too far up and in ODI cricket you're asking for trouble.
anderson - read hoggard +inaccuracy

 

[SpaceMonkey]

okay enough of this mark butcher crap, the guy needs to learn to field if he wants to play in the ODI side.
why G jones when clearly read has shown that he is capable enough at the ODI level. how many match winning knocks does he need to play to show that he's a good enough batsman at the ODI arena,let alone the fact that he is clearly a much better keeper.
and hoggard...in the ODI side?AFAIC he cant seem to bowl well when the ball dont move about in tests,let alone on those flat odi wickets. he pitches the ball too far up and in ODI cricket you're asking for trouble.
anderson - read hoggard +inaccuracy

Anderson moves the white ball about as much as anyone in world cricket. He has to play, even if he'll go for runs he'll get you wickets.

 

[jf2001]

Caddick For England?

Three topics at SouthWestCricket - www.southwestcricket.com for you:

Don't Pick Caddick - http://www.southwestcricket.com/headlinestory.php?headlineID=51

Club Criticism - http://www.southwestcricket.com/headlinestory.php?headlineID=52

Trescothick Back to His Best? - http://www.southwestcricket.com/headlinestory.php?headlineID=50

Don't be shy folks....take a look, John F

 

[tooextracool]

Anderson moves the white ball about as much as anyone in world cricket. He has to play, even if he'll go for runs he'll get you wickets.

so you dont mind figures of 2/65? ODI cricket is more about accuracy than it is about being able to swing the ball.

 

[Neil Pickup]

C&G Round 3 - Devon v Yorkshire - The Maer, Exmouth

Was originally intending on going down to watch, but something came up that I needed to go to this afternoon, and I'd already sacrificed Monday to cricket.

Looks like I've missed out...

Scorecard - Yorkshire 415-6 off 50 overs.

Matt Wood 160, Anthony McGrath 64* (35b, 4x4, 5x6).

I was down at the ground on Sunday with our Under 11s and it's not the smallest place in the world - as evidenced by the 165 all out of Leicester in the 2nd Round - but the outfield was lightning quick, and I guess the pitch was a belter.

I reckon that's the third highest in the C&G [after the Surrey v Glamorgan farce] and it'll take some chasing (understatement of the century).

 

[marc71178]

That hurts

 

[superkingdave]

blah

so you dont mind figures of 2/65? ODI cricket is more about accuracy than it is about being able to swing the ball.

Looking at his current record, its more like 2/47. And he has shown on occassions that he can keep it tight like 1-12 of 10 against the Aussies. He's not there for his economy and with an average of 23 i dont know how he can be left out.

 

[tooextracool]

Looking at his current record, its more like 2/47. And he has shown on occassions that he can keep it tight like 1-12 of 10 against the Aussies. He's not there for his economy and with an average of 23 i dont know how he can be left out.

the 1-12 came on one of the most seamer friendly wickets you'll ever see in an ODI game. AFAIC the wickets that he'll frequently encounter in an ODI game will be similar to the ones in the WI where he got hammered all over the park. anderson is not accurate, he struggles outside seaming conditions and he doesnt have much pace either....so remind me what does he have for him to be a part of the odi side??(luck dont count)

 

[twctopcat]

the 1-12 came on one of the most seamer friendly wickets you'll ever see in an ODI game. AFAIC the wickets that he'll frequently encounter in an ODI game will be similar to the ones in the WI where he got hammered all over the park. anderson is not accurate, he struggles outside seaming conditions and he doesnt have much pace either....so remind me what does he have for him to be a part of the odi side??(luck dont count)

#]

You're making far too many sweeping generalisations for your own good. True he may be wayward at times but its all part of learning. He doesn't rely totally on seaming conditions, he's performed well at the oval for example, which is tres country.

 

[chris.hinton]

Heavy Rain expected all next week

 

[badgerhair]

That's certianly a fair point and like you say who is going to take cricket up if all we do is lose?

I think there could quite easily be a balance of today and tommorow, England went down the route of 2007 and the whole 11 was basically re-done... Iam sure there has to be room for a couple of experianced players just to guide the inexperianced guys through for a year or so then fade them out bit by bit changing all in one go was a risk if it paid off or not is for each to decide, but IMO I think England could live without McGrath/Clarke and have a couple of experianced player just to help the middle order after the two experianced players are gone at the top, as that's all we have (bar Flintoff and maybe Colly now).

Can someone explain to me why they think the present side is so awful and has such a bad record and needs all this strengthening with expereienced players (not that there actually are any players with international one-day experience available even if you wanted to pick them)?

The side was revamped for the English summmer last season, when we comprehensively beat Pakistan, and won the triangular against South Africa and the Zimbos. Then we went on and beat the Bangles (wa-hey!), lost comprehensively to Sri Lanka, and drew with WI.

Their playing record is, in terms of games, a rather disappointing played 18, won 10, lost 8 (only a 56% success record), but in series terms, it's one triangular tournament win, two series wins, a draw and a loss, which is a record which stands comparison with anyone bar Australia.

I'm obviously missing something here. We have a side which loses only 20% of the series it plays, and we have loads of people saying they're terrible and need to have their hands held by players who have a long track record of playing in losing ODI sides and have anyway retired. Can anyone tell me why?

Cheers,

Mike

 

[Neil Pickup]

Simple answer - the country is full of pathological whingers.

 

[superkingdave]

so remind me what does he have for him to be a part of the odi side??(luck dont count)

50 wickets @23.78 only three players have a better average for england having taken at least 20 wickets. (Hendrick, Old, Underwood)

strike rate of 30.1 - no one with more than 10 wickets for england in ODI has a better strike rate. Only six players in world cricket have a better ODI strike rate

There must be something about him, becasue you don't get those figures from pie chucking.