The future of the England Cricket One-Day side

[Pavilionaire]

After tonight's debacle we're at the stage where, in a peverse way, it would be a positively GOOD thing to lose the final match and suffer a 7-0 whitewash.

Only by being comprehensively gubbed will the players and powers that be really address the problems that have beset the side. Here, I'm minded of Stuart Broad being hit for 6 sixes in his early England career, or 19-year old Jonny Wilkinson missing 2 penalties and being in the team that lost 76-0 to Australia in 1998.

To me the main fault seems to be a complete lack of cohesive team tactics, i.e. of identifying what strengths we have, then shaping our play around exploiting those strengths.

Compare the blind, clueless approach to the savvy tactics of Mark Robinson and Mike Yardy here at Sussex that have made us Kings of One-Day cricket.

Clearly, we miss Flintoff and Pietersen, but in a sport where if just one batsman or bowler has a really good day you're team is likely to win it's statistically incredible we're 6-0 down to a pretty ordinary Australia team by their high standards.

 

[chez]

Does it really matter?

We won the important matches didn't we.

 

[8ace]

Chris Broad?
I always make that mistake as well
Better than yesterday when I confused Jonathon and David Bairstow.

 

[Phil B]

Chris Broad ?

Shirley, you mean Stuart .....

:yahoo:

 

[REDLAND]

utterly woeful tonight, a massive embarrassment

 

[Pavilionaire]

Ok, it's late, whatever. You know who I mean.

Anyway, who the HELL do you pick?

 

[The Wizard]

Bell & Trott should be in the team IMO.

Englands one day side is a shambles at the moment, needs to have some steel in the batiing line up.

 

[Pavilionaire]

I agree with everything you've said TCB.

Furthermore, for how long can Strauss captain both sides AND score runs in both forms of the game? Sacking Collingwood, Shah and Bopara might make sense in terms of form, but will just heap more pressure on Strauss to keep on deliviering. I think in this series he's got 2 fifities and the rest of the team has one in the 6 matches.

A team of Strauss, Key, Pietersen, Trott, Yardy, Prior, Rashid, Broad, Swann, Woakes, Anderson would be a start.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

We have steady-eddie batsman and steady-eddie bowlers. That never wins matches against teams with really tight bowlers (harbajan), explosive batsman (dilshan) or explosive bowlers (malinga).

Our main problem though is that we don't give a shit about ODI cricket. Fans, players, journos, the lot. Its a distraction to the real stuff. I don't care about it, so why should I expect the players to care or be good at it. 50-over cricket is the most turgid, boring, part of cricket I know. I seem to remember it used to be exciting, but perhaps that was when test cricket went along at 2 an over. Now you often get a block of 15-20 overs of test cricket being played like a one-dayer, and T20 for the explosive stuff.

Just kill it.

 

[Billy the Fish]

Our main problem though is that we don't give a shit about ODI cricket. Fans, players, journos, the lot. Its a distraction to the real stuff. I don't care about it, so why should I expect the players to care or be good at it. 50-over cricket is the most turgid, boring, part of cricket I know. I seem to remember it used to be exciting, but perhaps that was when test cricket went along at 2 an over. Now you often get a block of 15-20 overs of test cricket being played like a one-dayer, and T20 for the explosive stuff.

Just kill it.

Have any of the games actually been sold out? There were loads of seats spare last night.

You can't just get rid of 50 over cricket though, the Indians LOVE it too much.

 

[Gwylan]

Major mistake number 1: Not playing enough spinners/slow bowlers. S

Australia seem to be doing OK with just one spinner

 

[Gazwag]

The wife and I were chatting about this last night and decided that the Sussex team could probably do better than England at the moment. I know we wouldnt get the foreign players but we could make a team of English players

 

[keaton]

Australia seem to be doing OK with just one spinner

But every other team in the world in limited overs plays at least 2 spinners.

 

[sten_super]

But every other team in the world in limited overs plays at least 2 spinners.

How else to you explain the shithouse Jeetan Patel getting games for NZ.

I agree entirely with TCB and Pav. The team balance is completely wrong, they should rip up the teamsheet and start again.

ODI batsmen need to be two-paced; they need to be able to rough it out if they come in at 4-2, but also hit out if they come in at 200-2.

 

[Gwylan]

But every other team in the world in limited overs plays at least 2 spinners.

Hmmm....so the Australian team is adopting the wrong strategy is it? Remind me again who the number one team in the ODI rankings is. And which team has won the past three World Cups...

If you're blessed with a clutch of decent spinners - like India or Sri Lanka - you play them. If you're not, then play your seamers. I see little point in playing someone because he's a spinner. For example, I don't see any reason for Eng to play Panesar in ODIs but I do see the point in playing Rashid as he can bat (and doesn't field like a carthorse).

 

[sten_super]

Hmmm....so the Australian team is adopting the wrong strategy is it? Remind me again who the number one team in the ODI rankings is. And which team has won the past three World Cups...

If you're blessed with a clutch of decent spinners - like India or Sri Lanka - you play them. If you're not, then play your seamers. I see little point in playing someone because he's a spinner. For example, I don't see any reason for Eng to play Panesar in ODIs but I do see the point in playing Rashid as he can bat (and doesn't field like a carthorse).

It's not necessarily spinners, but it's having a few options. Look at the Australian teams that won the world cup; in 06/07 they had Tait and Bracken as the attacking options, and then McGrath (bowling about RMF), Watson (about the same), Hogg (SLA), Clarke (SLA) and Symonds (OS). In 2002/3 McGrath and Lee were the attacking bowlers, backed up by Hogg (SLA), Lehmenn (SLA), Bichel (RFM) and Symonds (OS). What you need is a variation of speeds and options. The current side has a similar balance; Lee and Bracken/Johnson as the attacking options, backed by Siddle, Hopes and Hauritz.

 

[withdeanwombat]

Future ? This team has no future,and I suspect whoever on here said we don't really care enough about this form of cricket is correct.

Even the English pundit/commentators sound as if they'd rather be somewhere else doing something worthwhile.

In the meantime the English selectors pick teams stuffed with "other ranks" and watch them played off the park.The Australians are lapping it up,playing half speed and winning without effort.

Our "batters" don't bat,our bowlers are pie throwers,nobody cares.

So why pay to go ?

 

[CHAPPERS]

We've not missed any player more than Tresco, he's never been replaced.

I do think it's time for Key to come into the side and we should surely be playing Rashid and Swann in the same team. Sidebottom can f*** off, I actually hate him. Bopara isn't the answer so get rid of him. I think Wright should open up with Strauss and KP comes back in at 4.

I'd like to see something like...

Strauss
Wright
Key
Pieterson
Solanki/Collingwood/Joyce/Morgan
Prior
Broad
Rashid
Swann
Anderson
Tremlett

 

[simmo]

Bell & Trott should be in the team IMO.

Englands one day side is a shambles at the moment, needs to have some steel in the batiing line up.

Shah should be dropped for Trott now. Shah never really seems to get any runs and added to that anyone batting with him seems to think they are on the brink of being run out!

Prior should also open with Strauss, watching Prior he loves the ball coming onto the bat, like Alec Stewart, which you will get in the first 10/15 overs, this will open the middle order for a more specialist middle order one day batsman, like Bell maybe (and obviously Peterson when fit again)