What would be your England ODI XI ?

[dcnstntn]

I hardly ever agree with the England ODI side which is picked. If everyone was fit who would you play, 1-11 ?

I would go:

Trescothick
Prior
Bopara
Pietersen
Collingwood
Shah
Flintoff
Mascerenhas
S Jones
Plunkett
Panesar.

I feel this side would be attacking at the top of the order, with stability provided by Bopara at 3 (although still scoring at a quicker pace than Bell for example). Pietersen to come in at 4 and express himself with Collingwood ticking the runs along at 5. Shah could be interchangable with Collingwood but has shown excellent recent form with the bat. Flintoff lower down the order because his batting has been below par recently, however we all know what he can do. Coming in with maybe 10 overs remaining he could really have a swing of the bat low down. Mascerenhas is steady with the bat and again could help lower down the order. Jones, Plunkett and Panesar aren't completely rubbish with the bat and can all help a little in the tail.

Add to this the fact that we would have Panesar, Flintoff, S Jones, Plunkett, Mascerenhas, Collingwood, Pietersen, Bopara and Trescothick to bowl - I think it could be a great team!

 

[Richard]

The only players I'd say for certain, right now (bearing in mind the difference between long- and short-term injury concerns), should be in the ODI set-up are Trescothick, Pietersen, Flintoff and Mascarenhas. Clearly, for the moment, it's inevitable the likes of Cook, Bopara, Collingwood, Yardy, Plunkett, Bell, Anderson, Shah, Prior, Broad, Panesar, and one or two others are going to be in the picture. All bar three of the aforementioned (Cook, Collingwood and Bopara) I have serious doubts about and wouldn't want anywhere near the side if a World Cup were to start tomorrow.

The trouble, simply, is that there aren't enough good one-day cricketers in England at the current time. Too many have been given too many opportunities - worse still is that they've been given said chances ahead of better-qualified candidates. Usman Afzaal, for instance, has never played a ODI despite being one of the best OD batsmen in the country for years and years now. I still don't see a wicketkeeper with better credentials as a OD batsman than Chris Read, frankly. His Test career should be over now, but Prior has done nothing in his ODI career to date and his domestic record is terrible anyway.

There is much wrong with England and OD cricket, has been for years, and not all is down to how the pawns on the England chessboard are moved.

 

[Swervy]

The only players I'd say for certain, right now (bearing in mind the difference between long- and short-term injury concerns), should be in the ODI set-up are Trescothick, Pietersen, Flintoff and Mascarenhas. Clearly, for the moment, it's inevitable the likes of Cook, Bopara, Collingwood, Yardy, Plunkett, Bell, Anderson, Shah, Prior, Broad, Panesar, and one or two others are going to be in the picture. All bar three of the aforementioned (Cook, Collingwood and Bopara) I have serious doubts about and wouldn't want anywhere near the side if a World Cup were to start tomorrow.

The trouble, simply, is that there aren't enough good one-day cricketers in England at the current time. Too many have been given too many opportunities - worse still is that they've been given said chances ahead of better-qualified candidates. Usman Afzaal, for instance, has never played a ODI despite being one of the best OD batsmen in the country for years and years now. I still don't see a wicketkeeper with better credentials as a OD batsman than Chris Read, frankly. His Test career should be over now, but Prior has done nothing in his ODI career to date and his domestic record is terrible anyway.

There is much wrong with England and OD cricket, has been for years, and not all is down to how the pawns on the England chessboard are moved.

so you saying Mascarenhasshould be considered more of a sure bet than Collingwood?

 

[Richard]

I'm saying I think he's a better ODI bowler than Collingwood is batsman.

 

[Pup Clarke]

Best English one day team imo would be...

Marcus Trescothick
Ian Bell
Ravi Bopara
Kevin Pietersen
Paul Collingwood
Andrew Flintoff
Chris Read
Dmitri Masceranhas
Jon Lewis
Monty Panesar
James Anderson

 

[Richard]

Would prefer to see Cook in there than Bell and would prefer Lewis wasn't picked now because I don't want players playing now who won't be around in 2011. Otherwise, that'd probably be about the best I could expect right now.

 

[Swervy]

I'm saying I think he's a better ODI bowler than Collingwood is batsman.

really?

 

[Richard]

Indeed.

Let's take a look at the Collingwood case for a second, here. Just briefly, when he was playing those 2 sensational innings to win the CBS finals, I wondered if, at long, long last, he might actually be becoming a good ODI player. Since then, I've rowed back - he hasn't been, and we're back to square one as of the current time.

I never rated him much, up to those innings at the end of said series. Here's why:

It's a given that Collingwood was useless in his first series in summer 2001, that's no news and no great crime, as not only was he new the attacks were high-calibre. In his second, in Zimbabwe, against a lesser (but still not terrible) attack, he was much improved, and played very well indeed. However, later on, first in India then New Zealand, his (first-chance) scores went 21, 69, 13, 6, 8*, 2, 9, 0, 9*, 4, 21. This is very, very poor. So in the summer of 2002, he wasn't a first-choice, and did little to demand becoming one, scoring 38, 29, 9 and 3*. Nor did he start the winter well, (first-chance) scoring 37, 11, 1, 2, 18. However, towards the end of that VB Series and into the World Cup, he improved, scoring 63*, 43, 25* and 66*. He finished the WC poorly (18 and 10) and was injured for all the 2003 summer's ODIs. He came back in the winter but hardly set The World on fire, scoring 31, 10, 4, 38 and 46*. In the summer of 2004 it got worse still, with 5, 2, 20, 1. He safeguarded his place with 79* but then returned to paucity, with 4, 39, 6*, 16, and continued in the winter and the summer of 2005 and the first leg of the next winter, with 40, 22, 11, 4, 10, 14, 0, 53, 34, 9, 34*, 23, 19, 6, 33, 8, 5. All-in-all, between those last 2 innings in the WC and the Second ODI in India, he averaged less than 24. Over 33 innings.

However, midway through the India series his fortunes changed. He embarked on a run of consistency he'd never before attained. His scores were 93, 36, 23*, 64, 0, 56, 33, 14, 35, 61, 22, 38, 22*. This was through the summer of 2006 and into the start of the Champions Trophy. Over these 13 innings, he averaged 45.18. However, since then it's been, with the exception of those magnificent knocks in the CBS finals, back to the old story.

It began with the last game of the Trophy, starting a sequence of 0, 43, 10, 0, 10, 3, 17, 18, <*>, 31, 14, 2, 30, 6, 5, 1, 44. This runs into the summer of 2007. <* = intermission of finals innings>

So, in short, Collingwood has been very poor for a very substantial part of his career. Out of 97 innings, there has been one sustained good patch (Apr - Oct 2006) and two very short ones (3 innings at end of winter 2002\03 and 2 finals games in 2006\07).

Collingwood is an overrated ODI player. His scores against substandard sides (averages 64.29 against them) have inflated his career record and made it easy for the unwary to rate him highly.

 

[open365]

I really don't want Prior to open the innings in ODIs, it's stupid, he's obviously not good enough and we only put him there because Australia does it, which is a ****e way to run a side.

 

[Richard]

Well... the fact that Sussex put him there does have a bit to do with it, but we have indeed of late had somewhat of a fascination for wicketkeepers opening.

It's just coincidence that Gilchrist happens to be a wicketkeeper! His wicketkeeping makes no impact on his opening the batting! Wake-up guys!

 

[dcnstntn]

Could Flintoff open the batting and attempt to make use of the fielding restrictions?

 

[Richard]

Never been a fan of that, either. Flintoff has never been any success at the top of the order, but has been down it. And that's not really a surprise, TBH, with his technique.

I want two openers opening, personally. Trescothick and Cook, IMO, has definate potential if we can get them together. Hopefully, Trescothick can score and score quickly, allowing Cook to feel he needs score only quickly, rather than a-run-a-ball.

 

[open365]

No, Flintoff's been batting like a complete gorm recently.

 

[dcnstntn]

I'm not against Cook opening at all. He's a very good player, and I have witnessed many fine innings at Essex.

Maybe I've been listening to the SKY Sports panel too much, and so have dismissed him. They seem to be very much against him playing ODI's for England.

If he was just allowed to bat through and innings and get say 100 from 140 balls, let the others play around him, he could be very effective.

 

[open365]

The SKY sports panel is just one massive pundit cliche after another.

The buzzphrase for the last month has been "Got to have a pinch hitter for the powerplays"

At the start of the year it was "undercooked"

And ever since 2020 was invented it's been "MY GOD SPINNERS DONT GET SMACKED, shiver me timbers and call me Barbra"

You would think as 2020 was introduced 3 years ago they'd have got over it by now.

 

[Richard]

I'm not against Cook opening at all. He's a very good player, and I have witnessed many fine innings at Essex.

Maybe I've been listening to the SKY Sports panel too much, and so have dismissed him. They seem to be very much against him playing ODI's for England.

If he was just allowed to bat through and innings and get say 100 from 140 balls, let the others play around him, he could be very effective.

Interesting, the (little) comment I've heard seems to be backing him as a ODI player. In Twenty20s picking him (as with Bell) is stupid, nothing short of, all that can possibly happen is confusion and unwanted complication. And they all said that. About the only person I head talk about him regarding ODIs was Knight, and he (possibly seeing something of himself in Cook) backed him non-stop.

It's Panesar I'd be happy to be kept completely away from ODIs, myself.

 

[Richard]

The SKY sports panel is just one massive pundit cliche after another.

The buzzphrase for the last month has been "Got to have a pinch hitter for the powerplays"

TBF, it's been that near enough every time England have played ODIs for the last 2 years, with Trescothick mostly absent.

At the start of the year it was "undercooked"

And ever since 2020 was invented it's been "MY GOD SPINNERS DONT GET SMACKED, shiver me timbers and call me Barbra"

You would think as 2020 was introduced 3 years ago they'd have got over it by now.

3?

This is the 5th season of it.

 

[Swervy]

Collingwood is an overrated ODI player. His scores against substandard sides (averages 64.29 against them) have inflated his career record and made it easy for the unwary to rate him highly.

well I dont even know what his average (doctored or proper) is, but watching him play, I think he is a damned useful addition to the England ODI team

 

[open365]

I have a 400 word piece of Spanish coursework due in for tommorow, and i'm beggining to get rather concerned about the accuracy of freetranslation.com, leave me alone.

 

[Richard]

well I dont even know what his average (doctored or proper) is, but watching him play, I think he is a damned useful addition to the England ODI team

And I think, looking at his output, that he's not anywhere near as good as people talk him up to be.

I know both what his average proper (ie, against ODI-standard sides) and doctored (ie, with nonsense like Ireland, Canada and Bangladesh included) is, too. And that ain't impressive either.