It's not so much late over batting as aggressive batting in general. To an extent it's a product of the system- the English value tests too much for someone with a technique as suited to ODIs as MS Dhoni's to emerge. But for a long time they just didn't seem to think scoring quickly mattered at all. Commentators and pundits are finally moving away from Boycott syndrome (the notion that getting out playing an attacking stroke is an inherently greater sin than getting out playing a defensive stroke) but frustratingly slowly, and they still often fail to resist the urge to label a shot "silly" or "stupid" when it doesn't come off. It's a problem that visibly affects the team- most notably on their visit to India in '08 when they were whitewashed settling for 260~ scores on 300+ pitches against a side with a monster batting lineup but somewhat hittable attack. That said, at the last World T20, England were the most positive team with the bat when other sides were erring by taking too long to rebuild or failing to rotate the strike. So it does at least look like things are changing for the better under Flower.To me England under-value late over batting. It's just as important if not moreso than the 10-40 over phase. Most of England's side could come in at say the 16th over and milk some runs, if you took the batting powerplay then I think it would help Bell (and someone like Broad/Swann) get in, you'd give them half a dozen balls first but it would help them get going I think.
While it's obviously to certain extent, Hussain is by and large correct.On a related note, the selectors are still far too attached to members of the test squad. Hussain repeatedly states that "your best players are normally your best players in all formats" and it seems to be an area where English selectors repeatedly make huge mistakes. I still can't quite believe Matt Prior went to the World Cup.
Yeah but there's an unshakeable orthodoxy that He Must Bat High Up The Order and for some reason he, and the England team, have given in to it. I'm not convinced by it. There's no shame in being a middle order batsman, even if you aspire to be the team's best player. KP started as a specialist number 5 and I don't see any reason why he shouldn't always bat there in both Tests and ODIs.Funnily enough the guy who would suit that finisher role would be KP, he can milk the runs as well as hit the long ball.
I agree with what your saying as far as being put down to come in at No5 in one day cricket would look like a demotion but I defo think it could be sold as a, your the best man for the job and for the team to go to the next level, you can be that go to finisher.Yeah but there's an unshakeable orthodoxy that He Must Bat High Up The Order and for some reason he, and the England team, have given in to it. I'm not convinced by it. There's no shame in being a middle order batsman, even if you aspire to be the team's best player. KP started as a specialist number 5 and I don't see any reason why he shouldn't always bat there in both Tests and ODIs.
In Tests I'd have Bell at 4 and KP at 5.
In ODIs I'd be looking for Bell to go in at 3 (or maybe even open) and KP either at 4 or, preferably, 5.
I'd quite like to see KP opening in LO matches.Yeah but there's an unshakeable orthodoxy that He Must Bat High Up The Order and for some reason he, and the England team, have given in to it. I'm not convinced by it. There's no shame in being a middle order batsman, even if you aspire to be the team's best player. KP started as a specialist number 5 and I don't see any reason why he shouldn't always bat there in both Tests and ODIs.
In Tests I'd have Bell at 4 and KP at 5.
In ODIs I'd be looking for Bell to go in at 3 (or maybe even open) and KP either at 4 or, preferably, 5.
I think they will open with patel, dravid would be in middle order. Rahane could stake a claim in playing XI if he scores a ton in T20 match otherwise I dont see management playing him ahead of patelWhat's the likely Indian lineup for the ODIs? Will they open with Patel or maybe even Dravid, given that Gambhir and Sehwag are out?
Yup. Certainly judging by teams that have actually flourished in WCs etc.While it's obviously to certain extent, Hussain is by and large correct (about your best players being the best in all formats).