***Official*** Sri Lanka in England

[Neil Pickup]

I wonder how the ECB will treat this.

If he has no intention of playing for England, he shouldn't be classed as an England-qualifed player - same as happened to Symonds.

No chance of that - he's the same category as Nicky Knight, surely? English citizen, retired from International cricket?

 

[Autobahn]

and one must really question how long England are going to stick with collingwood when has hasnt done anything meaningful with the bat outside of his performances against india since the last world cup.

And replace with?

 

[tooextracool]

And replace with?

I'll give you a list of players who i think deserve to come under consideration for the world cup. i cant however pick or guarantee success for most of these players largely because of the fact that i dont have the opportunity to watch list A cricket, and am basing most of these selections on blind statistics and in some cases based on these players limited opportunities at the international level

Trescothick
Joyce
Bell
Pietersen
Flintoff
Dalrymple
Read
Chapple/Gough
Giles
Harmison
Anderson

that would be my starting XI at the moment. Then id throw in the possibility of Jon Trott( whenever hes eligible), Jon Lewis, Ed Smith, Usman Afzaal, Mal Loye, Richard Montgomerie, Mark Ealham, James Middlebrook, Chris Tremlett & David Harrison

 

[tooextracool]

I'd also throw in Michael Vaughan if trescothick is for some reason unwilling to take up the captaincy. and of course Nick Knight if he can be convinced to come out of retirement

 

[Goughy]

I'll give you a list of players who i think deserve to come under consideration for the world cup. i cant however pick or guarantee success for most of these players largely because of the fact that i dont have the opportunity to watch list A cricket, and am basing most of these selections on blind statistics and in some cases based on these players limited opportunities at the international level

Trescothick
Joyce
Bell
Pietersen
Flintoff
Dalrymple
Read
Chapple/Gough
Giles
Harmison
Anderson

that would be my starting XI at the moment. Then id throw in the possibility of Jon Trott( whenever hes eligible), Jon Lewis, Ed Smith, Usman Afzaal, Mal Loye, Richard Montgomerie, Mark Ealham, James Middlebrook, Chris Tremlett & David Harrison

4 specialist batsmen is atleast 1 or 2 too few. That line up is long in batting but very short of players capable of scoring 100s and as we have seen in this series 100s win you games.

 

[tooextracool]

4 specialist batsmen is atleast 1 or 2 too few. That line up is long in batting but very short of players capable of scoring 100s and as we have seen in this series 100s win you games.

There may indeed be place for one more batsman in that side, given that the side is heavy on bowlers anyways. Flintoff is a more than capable number 5 though and hes scored all of his 3 centuries in that position and averages a shade over 40 so im hardly worried about him not being able to take over that responsibility. 6 specialist batters however would be inane, a complete waste of flintoff at 7, as well as the distinct possibility that the specialist player @ 6 would be incapable of doing the job at the death

 

[Goughy]

Playing 6 batsmen is never about getting them all a game and Flintoff would not have to bat 7. I have personally mentioned Collingwood batting 7 many times. I know you disagree so lets not have that discussion now.

The reason you play 6 batsmen is far too often a couple or 3 early wickets can fall and a team needs to be able to recover in order to post a decent target or conduct a run chase.

I would be happy if the #6 and #7 never had to bat, but that does not make them a waste. In ODIs you can never have too much batting or too many partnerships between recognized batsmen.

 

[tooextracool]

Playing 6 batsmen is never about getting them all a game and Flintoff would not have to bat 7. I have personally mentioned Collingwood batting 7 many times. I know you disagree so lets not have that discussion now.

The reason you play 6 batsmen is far too often a couple or 3 early wickets can fall and a team needs to be able to recover in order to post a decent target or conduct a run chase.

I would be happy if the #6 and #7 never had to bat, but that does not make them a waste. In ODIs you can never have too much batting or too many partnerships between recognized batsmen.

Im assuming here that Flintoff bats at 6 and you have 5 other specialist batsmen then? I can only subscribe to the idea of going in with 6 specialist batsman when 6 and 7 are capable of late over slogging. I have no problems with Clarke or Hussey batting at 6 of Australia for example because the 2 of them are capable of doing absolutely anything, whether it be building an innings or coming in towards the end to play 'stop-start' innings.
The reason why i chose to have Flintoff at 5 was because thats where hes got the best out of himself at. You maybe happy for 6 and 7 not having to bat, but i would be disappointed if Flintoff only got 5 overs of the game to bat given thats hes probably a better ODI batsman that more than half the players of the current England batting lineup.

 

[silentstriker]

There may indeed be place for one more batsman in that side, given that the side is heavy on bowlers anyways. Flintoff is a more than capable number 5 though and hes scored all of his 3 centuries in that position and averages a shade over 40 so im hardly worried about him not being able to take over that responsibility. 6 specialist batters however would be inane, a complete waste of flintoff at 7, as well as the distinct possibility that the specialist player @ 6 would be incapable of doing the job at the death

I wouldn't call Flintoff a more than capable number five. He is a good number six, and only because he can bowl too. Flintoff is a good batsman, but a fantastic bowler. He wouldn't make the side on his batting alone, so thats why I wouldn't call him a more than capable number five.

 

[Dasa]

I wouldn't call Flintoff a more than capable number five. He is a good number six, and only because he can bowl too. Flintoff is a good batsman, but a fantastic bowler. He wouldn't make the side on his batting alone, so thats why I wouldn't call him a more than capable number five.

In ODIs, Flintoff probably would make the side on batting alone.

 

[tooextracool]

I wouldn't call Flintoff a more than capable number five. He is a good number six, and only because he can bowl too. Flintoff is a good batsman, but a fantastic bowler. He wouldn't make the side on his batting alone, so thats why I wouldn't call him a more than capable number five.

I dont see why someone who averages 40 at number 5 cannot be considered a capable number 5. Flintoff has always been a better player when hes played himself in, and its only after hes realised that that his career has sky rocketed with the bat, rather than just been given the opportunity to slog.

 

[marc71178]

In ODIs, Flintoff probably would make the side on batting alone.

Indeed he has done on a fair few occasions in the past when he wasn't fit to bowl.

 

[marc71178]

I dont see why someone who averages 40 at number 5 cannot be considered a capable number 5. Flintoff has always been a better player when hes played himself in, and its only after hes realised that that his career has sky rocketed with the bat, rather than just been given the opportunity to slog.

IIRC didn't his more mature approach to batting coincide with the move up the order to 5. He suddenly realised he had to play more sensibly.

 

[age_master]

i see Harmison has returned to the form which he had last tour of Australia

 

[wpdavid]

i see Harmison has returned to the form which he had last tour of Australia

Been on the cards for a while. Worryingly, that still makes him our most economical quick this summer, but the spate of wides is completely unprofessional.

 

[Tomm NCCC]

Its just embarrasing now, come on, its sri lanka. Yeah there's loadsa Injuries but 4-0 out of four is surely unnacceptable. w

 

[superkingdave]

when did he do that? im certain that not long ago both graveney and law expressed interest in the possibility of him playing for England once he was eligible.

In his column in the Manchester evening news at the start of the season he said that the reason he got British Citizenship was because of his wife(from round here) and it making it easier for him to stay here and that playing for England did not interest him and that they shouldn't be looking at people like him. He did outright say that he 'wouldn't' play for England but the inference is clear

 

[JASON]

One hopes this sudden Rich form of Sri Lanka's will persevere through 2007 World Cup.

* Who am I kidding !! * This will be all over by the time Sri Lanka start their next series !!

If only this form (particularly of Mahela J, Sanath J, Tharanga ) could be bottled and released again nearer to World Cup 2007 ..... If only the opposition was not a weak England Team and something really worthy....

 

[GIMH]

Surely their performances in England will bring much greater confidence to the side in the future. I mean, you were expecting whitewashes in both arenas but you've tied the Test series and destroyed us in the ODIs. I hope you keep this form going

 

[JASON]

While Sri Lanka's top 4 have done well, the middle order have not really had much of a chance to play longer innings in the middle and the middle 3 of Dilshan, Arnold and Kapugedera (who has only played 1 ODI so far) need to get some exposure in the middle and be given an opportunity to play a long innings if possible if Sri Lanka and Moody are serious about preparing the whole team for the World Cup.

Therefore using this last ODI against England to change the batting order and playing Kapugedera, Dilshan and Arnold ahead of Mahela and Sanga would be ideal IMO. Ruchira Perera needs to play as well IMO , since he has only played in the very first ODI. (admittedly coming in for some stick- but still needs to be given another go , IMO).