• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

***Official*** NatWest Series/Challenge

G

greg

International Debutant
Select Solanki for Giles and bring in Gilo for one of the lesser fielders if we bat first?
Click to expand...
Yes, Gilo would make a decent sub. Neither his batting or bowling would be crucially missed if he only got to do one of them, but both are useful if needed. And his fielding wouldn't be missed! ;-)
 
Blaze

Blaze

Banned
Scaly piscine said:
England have gotta go after the 5th bowler, 7 overs from them left, if they get a bit of tap it at least gives Australia a relatively minor problem. 200-8 or something isn't going to be much better than 150 all out - both require a miracle.
Click to expand...

Looks like a miracle was performed then..
 
Neil Pickup

Neil Pickup

Request Your Custom Title Now!
greg said:
England aren't operating the sub rule to its maximum potential. With hindsight i'm sure they will realise that it makes more sense to name one of the bowlers as the sub, with Solanki in the team at the start. Basically it makes more sense to try and compensate for their obvious weakness (batting first) than to magnify their strength (chasing).

That's if they refuse to consider Rikki Clarke of course :ph34r:
Click to expand...
Good lad. You're learning quick.
 
Blaze

Blaze

Banned
If England want to become a force in ODI's then they have to bite the bullet and drop Michael Vaughan. He is not a one day player.
 
Neil Pickup

Neil Pickup

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Blaze said:
If England want to become a force in ODI's then they have to bite the bullet and drop Michael Vaughan. He is not a one day player.
Click to expand...
People said that about Rahul Dravid three/four years ago. I've seen Vaughan play brilliant OD innings for Yorkshire - plus it wouldn't help the whole team spirit and unity thing we have going on to have separate captains, possibly retarding the Test side.

He needs one thing and one thing alone - to just fine-tune placing the ball around the fielders. Then he'll be fine.
 
SpaceMonkey

SpaceMonkey

International Debutant
Neil Pickup said:
People said that about Rahul Dravid three/four years ago. I've seen Vaughan play brilliant OD innings for Yorkshire - plus it wouldn't help the whole team spirit and unity thing we have going on to have separate captains, possibly retarding the Test side.

He needs one thing and one thing alone - to just fine-tune placing the ball around the fielders. Then he'll be fine.
Click to expand...
He played pretty well today, just a stupid run out which has nothing to do with ODI ability.

Vaughan means too much to the team (Test team too) as captain to drop from the one dayers.
He averages 28, thats not THAT much below what you'd expect (say 35?). What he needs to do is get 100's from no3 or maybe think about dropping down the order and letting someone who can go in ahead of him.
 
Dydl

Dydl

International Debutant
Lol, if we'd batted the full 50, Gilchrist could/should have passed the highest score in a ODI....
 
Eclipse

Eclipse

International Debutant
Neil Pickup said:
People said that about Rahul Dravid three/four years ago. I've seen Vaughan play brilliant OD innings for Yorkshire - plus it wouldn't help the whole team spirit and unity thing we have going on to have separate captains, possibly retarding the Test side.

He needs one thing and one thing alone - to just fine-tune placing the ball around the fielders. Then he'll be fine.
Click to expand...

Dravid still averaged about 35 at that time though and had made hundreds.. and i don't think he was batting at 3 ? not sure..

anway Hussian is right number 3's must make 100s.. and Vaughan doesn't.. And his record for Yorkshire isn't really any better, even if he has played a few brilliant innings.
 
Top_Cat

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Vaughan should definitely not be dropped from the ODI side but dropping down to 4 and giving KP the 3 spot with Flintoff at 5 means a prety strong batting line-up.
 
SJS

SJS

Hall of Fame Member
luckyeddie said:
A wise old Englishman once said "Where there's no sense, there's no feeling"
Click to expand...
He should follow this Scottish parable

If at first you dont succeed
Pull your foreskin o'er your head (pronounced heed)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top