***Official*** Sri Lanka in England

[chaminda_00]

Do you ever give Credit to SL ? How exactly was England a depleted side ?

Flintoff, Jones, Vaughan, Anderson, Giles, Tremlett etc. Anderson and Tremlett may not be regulars, but they would have done a lot better then those pie throwers they had bowling today.

 

[Barney Rubble]

Do you ever give Credit to SL ? How exactly was England a depleted side ?

MP Vaughan
EC Joyce
----------------
----------------
A Flintoff
ID Blackwell
AF Giles
G Chapple
CT Tremlett
SP Jones
JM Anderson

That's the England "Injured IX" - here's hoping we never have enough to fill the two remaining spots.

 

[dinu23]

good win by SL. one down four to go.

 

[dinu23]

This was a depleted England side and SL cannot take too much credit from this win.

For the next ODI at the Oval on Tuesday , I wonder if SL should play Bandara in place of Malinga .

depleted side! what the heck! if only they bowled wicket to wicket without giving all those extras, england could have made match of it.
I give full cridit to the Sri lankans, they outperformed England in all departments.

 

[Top_Cat]

Is it me or do we appear to have gone back to the bad old days of picking bits and pieces players from 6 through to 8 or 9?

Dammit, I only came into this thread to say exactly that!

If NZ is any example, it's that bit and pieces players will only get you so far. Their own players have only really progressed when they picked the discipline they were best at and stuck with it.

I mean, Bresnan and Dalrymple? The batting with Strauss, Trescothick, Bell, KP, COlly and Jones was strong enough; why not blood a youngster (is Chris Tremlett injured?)?

As for them being depleted, only in terms of bowling (as the above batting line-up shows) and it was really their batting which failed to carry them home in this one. I mean even taking into account the millions of extras, only Tharanga got more than 24. Take his knock away and SL didn't bat very well at all.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Was Plunkett injured or something? I don't see why cannon fodder Mahmood should bowl more overs when he was getting smashed (as per usual).

Still all the Durham players were above par.

 

[marc71178]

how, its not as if he isn't showing signs of improvement.

Oh yes, I forgot he got that 22* in a pointless cause.

 

[marc71178]

Will they be showing the England v Sweden game on Giant Screen during the ODI on Tuesday ?

It's not a day nighter is it?

 

[marc71178]

Do you ever give Credit to SL ? How exactly was England a depleted side ?

To be fair England are missing a number of first choice players (At least 3 fifths of a bowling attack for one thing)

However even with them all in, we're not that good a side anyway, so the depletion hasn't had too much a bad effect.

 

[marc71178]

MP Vaughan
EC Joyce
----------------
----------------
A Flintoff
ID Blackwell
AF Giles
G Chapple
CT Tremlett
SP Jones
JM Anderson

That's the England "Injured IX" - here's hoping we never have enough to fill the two remaining spots.

To be fair though Barney, not all of those would be first choice players, certainly Blackwell and Chapple wouldn't be, and one of the other 3 quicks.

I wouldn't say Joyce is either.

 

[marc71178]

good win by SL. one down four to go.

4-1 SL if all matches completed I predict.

Pietersen will come off once to give us enough runs that even that bowling "attack" can't fail to defend.

 

[marc71178]

Still all the Durham players were above par.

Oh yes, the new ball par who completely wasted the conditions at the start - how above par they were It took them till the 8th over to manage to bowl one with only 6 balls in.

The only one of the 3 who could be said to have done well is Collingwood (and that with the ball, his 7 ball duck isn't what I'd call above par.

 

[TT Boy]

Was Plunkett injured or something? I don't see why cannon fodder Mahmood should bowl more overs when he was getting smashed (as per usual).

Still all the Durham players were above par.

Yes, the most important thing is the Durham boys did good. Harmison bowled beautifully on a green bouncy pitch, legside trite followed by the short wide and four ball but hey he was given three wickets by Sri Lanka, so he naturally did well. As for Plunkett, Strauss was correct in not bringing him back because Plunkett like Harmison was seemingly have a competition of who could ball the most wides, Plunkett unfortunately lost.
Given Collingwood did bowl well but his always bowled well against Sri Lanka for some peculiar reason and like a few posters on this forum said a while back, if Collingwood bats on a hard, quick wicket he we fail to score runs. A reason why many people will oppose his selection to tour Australia because whenever he has batted on such a wicket, last year at the Oval for instance he usually disappoints.

More of a general point in regard to Tim Bresnan, why is he in the team and why is he coming in so high up (especially in front of Plunkett). He was out about three times until the inevitable occurred. Bowling was not up too much also.

 

[TT Boy]

It's not a day nighter is it?

No kicks off at 10.30am (on Sky Sports) I believe.

 

[alternative]

A Good Victory by Lankans to back up their performances from Test matches, bowling seems to be improving by the game.. I didn't watch the game, so not aware how everyone batted or bowled, but from the scoreboard it seems to be Tharanga played well and Maling bowled superbly....

 

[luckyeddie]

Still all the Durham players were above par.

In a word, COBBLERS.

 

[JASON]

MP Vaughan
EC Joyce
----------------
----------------
A Flintoff
ID Blackwell
AF Giles
G Chapple
CT Tremlett
SP Jones
JM Anderson

That's the England "Injured IX" - here's hoping we never have enough to fill the two remaining spots.

Of those Vaughan, Flintoff, Giles, Tremlett , Jones and Anderson would be first choice, although Glen Chapple should be too given what a useful ODI allround performer he is at least in county cricket.
I think Gough is worth selection to this ODI XI given his huge experience and regardless of his interview (chastising selectors for not picking him -obviously a result of his frustration), I would urge England selectors to pick him because he is a worthy proven performer, who can only strengthen this side .

As for SL, as it has been pointed out already, while the win is creditable, none of the batsman made more than 24 runs bar Tharanga, although Mahela did help build the score in a solid partnership with Tharanga. Others really need to get their act together as they keep giving their wicket away against this (relatively depleted) bowling attack of England's (in an ODI) .

 

[marc71178]

Gough?

Not a chance for reasons already gone into (key one being that he's past it)

And not all of those 7 can be first choice players, since you've got Harmison, Pietersen, Flintoff, Trescothick, Collingwood and Jones - although maybe with 13 we'd stand a chance of getting a 50% win ratio.

 

[Sanz]

Flintoff, Jones, Vaughan, Anderson, Giles, Tremlett etc. Anderson and Tremlett may not be regulars, but they would have done a lot better then those pie throwers they had bowling today.

Except that Jones, Giles, Vaughan have been injured for a while now, you cant count them as regulars. Last ODI Tremlett played was about a year ago. So How are these guys regulars ? Wait Lanka was also without its regulars - Arvanida and Ranatunga.

Only regular that was missing was Freddie and England won because of its poor batting and failure of its top order.

 

[marc71178]

No Sanz, just because they've been injured a while doesn't stop them being regulars.