Cricket 24/7  

Welcome to the Cricket 24/7.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. There are also more forums available to members, such as the Lounge - where members chat about just about anything under the sun except cricket!

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.


Go Back   Cricket 24/7 > Cricket Discussion Forums > Ex-International Player Forum
Register FAQDonate Members List Calendar Casino Articles Terms of Use Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 24th September 2007, 11:55   #341
Chin Music
Administrator
 
Chin Music's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: la sala de opinion equivocada
Team(s): ****
Posts: 24,308
it was all areas of cricket that we were under par. You could have added the missing an injured Bopara to the list of the missing. Doesn't make up for the fact that we simply weren't good enough as a unit.
__________________
Quote:
"One of the greatest problems of our time is that many are schooled but few are educated" - Thomas More
Chin Music is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 24th September 2007, 18:09   #342
sharky
Posting God
 
sharky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sunny Sussex
Team(s): Sussex, England
Posts: 10,885
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michelle Fivefer View Post
Ian Chappell obviously didn't realise that England picked the squad before Bell showed that he could score runs at a faster clip than Maddy - I am sure it was never in doubt that Bell had the ability to score a lot more runs than Maddy as an international batsman.
I don't really get why Ian Chappell has suddenly become such an expert on English cricket. He should keep his flippin' nose out of it (although I agree with him partly on this issue)

England were at a disadvantage in that they had to pick a new team from scratch for the twenty20 and amend it as they went along, whereas most other teams stuck with their one day XIs or alternatively just went for raw young talent to replace the rested established players. I think it was a mistake not to trust the ODI team but the lack of warm-up matches for the squad they did take was probably a big factor.

I can't see Bell batting anywhere other than 3, and I don't see much point. Cook should come back in the team as Wright is definitely better off down the order, but even then Bopara will play ahead of him. Cook, Mustard, Bell, KP, Colly, Shah, Bopara, Mascarenhas/Swann/Tremlett, Broad, Anderson and Monty will be the most likely team, and might just have a chance of beating Sri Lanka, albeit a small one
__________________
She was like a candle in the wind...Unreliable
sharky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th September 2007, 18:11   #343
daz
Posting God
 
daz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Team(s): Northamptonshire
Posts: 11,288
Quote:
Originally Posted by sharky View Post

England were at a disadvantage in that they had to pick a new team from scratch for the twenty20 and amend it as they went along,



Why is it a disavantage?? That is Englands fault they went down that road on selection.
__________________
Look out for my flag in Dhaka.
daz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th September 2007, 18:19   #344
sharky
Posting God
 
sharky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sunny Sussex
Team(s): Sussex, England
Posts: 10,885
Quote:
Originally Posted by daz View Post
Why is it a disavantage?? That is Englands fault they went down that road on selection.
I know, I was making the point that they shot themselves in the foot by not trusting the ODI players and thus had disadvantaged (is there such a word?) themselves in that they didn't know which XI to pick at the start so changed it every match. It was their own fault and with hindsight they shouldn't have gone that route but beforehand it was a reasonable tactic, especially when considering they had to pick the squad before the win against India. If they had had two or three warm ups like the other teams then they may have stumbled upon a well-balanced XI from the squad to go straight into the tournament with. Then again they would still probably have been pretty poor
__________________
She was like a candle in the wind...Unreliable
sharky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th September 2007, 18:23   #345
CoE
County Pro
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Shrewsbury
Team(s): England!
Posts: 696
Do you really think they should have taken Cook and Monty though? I think their problems were less with the players than with the structure of the team. Trusting inexperienced players with roles in the top three (not just one of the roles - all of them) was a recipe for disaster. I think warm up games would have helped, but I can't help but think our tactics were completely wrong, regardless of the players.
CoE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th September 2007, 18:32   #346
sharky
Posting God
 
sharky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sunny Sussex
Team(s): Sussex, England
Posts: 10,885
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoE View Post
Do you really think they should have taken Cook and Monty though? I think their problems were less with the players than with the structure of the team. Trusting inexperienced players with roles in the top three (not just one of the roles - all of them) was a recipe for disaster. I think warm up games would have helped, but I can't help but think our tactics were completely wrong, regardless of the players.
Monty, yes but Cook, no. I agree with you with the overall tactics once they arrived in SA being very poor. In the end KP was given the number 3 spot and probably would have started there if they had played a couple of warm-ups, and Bell would probably have ended up opening with Prior if he was there. I would have fancied us faring a lot better like that as I think that the tournament proved that twenty20 really is a condensed 50 over game than 20 overs of slogging. But it was a bit suck it and see for all the teams and England got sloppy seconds
__________________
She was like a candle in the wind...Unreliable
sharky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th September 2007, 18:43   #347
Rosbif
International Material
 
Rosbif's Avatar
I miss Duncan
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Pomgolia
Posts: 1,488
My view on this has definitely changed. From now on I want a core of England players to play all formats of the game and I don't want a sort of 'horses for courses' or 'Hes shown good form' attitude.

I think we've got ourselves into a pickle by being caught between a 'club' ethos where we run England like a club and where we pick players on form 'to do a job'.

So based on that, I definitely think Panesar and Cook should have gone, because they are England players and very likely to be in the setup for a while to come ..

I think at the end of the day England as a team needs to be run like a club and we should bring players into the setup with a view that they will be in the team for a decent period of time and not just a tour or two. Counties don't bring players in just to play a one off competition like the FP Trophy so why should England?

Now we can say that Cook and Panesar haven't shown much promise in T20 or ODI's but I think you would say that is down to their approach to the game as opposed to a lack of fundamental talent. If you compare Panesar to Schofield or Cook to Maddy you would say that the established internationals look sounder as cricketers in technical terms than the other pair.

I would also like a harder line being taken on players who opt out of formats and who perform poorly in one and not in the other. I think some players, just because they're in the Test team, think they can get away with not applying themselves in other formats. Vaughan is a great case of this IMO .. I think the fact he wasn't going to be dropped from the Test team meant he was under no pressure to become a decent ODI player

Last edited by Rosbif : 24th September 2007 at 18:46.
Rosbif is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th September 2007, 18:58   #348
Kim
Posting God
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 18,088
Thats all very well but havent India just won with a team far different from their 50 over outfit?
Kim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th September 2007, 19:08   #349
1000yardstare
Posting Goddess
 
1000yardstare's Avatar
JA 851 Cummins 149 Wagner 147 TCurran 21 SCurran 15
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: London
Posts: 21,001
Opening with Maddy/Wright/Prior didn't work for the first two matches against Zimbabwe and Australia. Then we tried Wright/Prior/KP in the 3rd match which also didn't work. What was better was Maddy/Solanki/KP in our 4th and 5th matches. So it took most of the tournament just to find the right opening combination.

I hope we will have better luck finding the top three batting positions in Sri Lanka. We will have Cook, Mustard, Wright, Swann, Bell and Pietersen.
1000yardstare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th September 2007, 19:18   #350
Rosbif
International Material
 
Rosbif's Avatar
I miss Duncan
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Pomgolia
Posts: 1,488
'Far different'? Not really Kim .. Only 3 names in the Indian squad are ones you'd probably not recognise .. Joginder Sharma, Yusuf Pathan and Rohit Sharma ..

Joginder Sharma, 23, 4 ODI's to his name .. Yusuf Pathan, 24, no previous India experience .. Rohit Sharma, 20, 2 ODI's

So its not like they are horses for courses and one off selections .. They're all young players and are probably in the squad because they have a future with the Indian team .. They probably only got a crack because Dravid, Tendulkar etc couldn't be bothered to turn up ..

Even if England were successful what chances were there or are there of Kirtley, Maddy, Snape, Schofield, Solanki playing for England again? Maybe Solanki has a chance but I doubt anyone else .. There is very little cross format versatility in any of the left field selections we made .. They have no future with England
Rosbif is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th September 2007, 19:30   #351
CoE
County Pro
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Shrewsbury
Team(s): England!
Posts: 696
Do you really think Cook and Panesar would have outperformed Maddy and Schofield though? I thought they both did fairly well, and the latter was extremely unlucky at crucial moments. The goal should have been to win the tournament rather than to give Cook and Panesar a go.

At the top of the order, I think Prior was the real problem. He just couldn't score faster than a run a ball no matter how hard he tried. I think he's just not good enough to open.
CoE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th September 2007, 19:40   #352
Rosbif
International Material
 
Rosbif's Avatar
I miss Duncan
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Pomgolia
Posts: 1,488
Do I think Cook and Panesar would have done better then Maddy and Schofield .. In all honesty I doubt it ..

Heres the crux for me though. If we're going to go down that road of immediate form and try to win things on an event by event basis, regardless of whether that team will be together for the next tour or event, you have to ask why the hell hasn't Ramprakash been playing for England?
Rosbif is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th September 2007, 19:42   #353
Kim
Posting God
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 18,088
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rosbif View Post
'Far different'? Not really Kim .. Only 3 names in the Indian squad are ones you'd probably not recognise .. Joginder Sharma, Yusuf Pathan and Rohit Sharma ..

Joginder Sharma, 23, 4 ODI's to his name .. Yusuf Pathan, 24, no previous India experience .. Rohit Sharma, 20, 2 ODI's

So its not like they are horses for courses and one off selections .. They're all young players and are probably in the squad because they have a future with the Indian team .. They probably only got a crack because Dravid, Tendulkar etc couldn't be bothered to turn up ..

Even if England were successful what chances were there or are there of Kirtley, Maddy, Snape, Schofield, Solanki playing for England again? Maybe Solanki has a chance but I doubt anyone else .. There is very little cross format versatility in any of the left field selections we made .. They have no future with England
Powar, Zaheer Khan, Tendulkar, Dravid were missing from India's regular 50 over side so Im not convinced by the argument that we should play our 50 over team in T20...

Problem with our "specialists" is theyd all been tried in international cricket based on county form in the past and failed. No real reason to suppose that county t20 form would translate to the international stage any better.

Anyway reckon its all a moot point (s). This excellent competition will be the beginning of the end for 50 over cricket, esp with two t20 prizes of $5 million and 1 million available next year.

Nice to see that we've found another form of one day cricket that we have more experience of than anyone but still cant win.
Kim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th September 2007, 19:49   #354
CoE
County Pro
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Shrewsbury
Team(s): England!
Posts: 696
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rosbif View Post
Do I think Cook and Panesar would have done better then Maddy and Schofield .. In all honesty I doubt it ..

Heres the crux for me though. If we're going to go down that road of immediate form and try to win things on an event by event basis, regardless of whether that team will be together for the next tour or event, you have to ask why the hell hasn't Ramprakash been playing for England?
The difference here is that it was a T20 tournament with little T20 coming after it. I don't think anything other than winning the event should have been on the mind - this isn't just on ODI series which can be expended - it was a world cup. I don't see Cook or Monty as players with a T20 future to be honest. I don't think we should go down the road of playing the test cricketers in the other formats, at the expense of results. We need a squad in each format that can win games in the near future.
CoE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th September 2007, 20:01   #355
Huda
International Material
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Team(s): Bangladesh
Posts: 1,897
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kim View Post
Powar, Zaheer Khan, Tendulkar, Dravid were missing from India's regular 50 over side so Im not convinced by the argument that we should play our 50 over team in T20...

Problem with our "specialists" is theyd all been tried in international cricket based on county form in the past and failed. No real reason to suppose that county t20 form would translate to the international stage any better.

Anyway reckon its all a moot point (s). This excellent competition will be the beginning of the end for 50 over cricket, esp with two t20 prizes of $5 million and 1 million available next year.

Nice to see that we've found another form of one day cricket that we have more experience of than anyone but still cant win.
Don't think Powar, Dravid, Tendulkar, Khan have been missing from the OD format of the game, they've actually been regulars.
Huda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th September 2007, 23:47   #356
1000yardstare
Posting Goddess
 
1000yardstare's Avatar
JA 851 Cummins 149 Wagner 147 TCurran 21 SCurran 15
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: London
Posts: 21,001


England's number 3 arrives in Colombo.
1000yardstare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th September 2007, 00:56   #357
Michelle Fivefer
Posting Goddess
 
Michelle Fivefer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: North West England
Team(s): England, Lancashire
Posts: 42,506
Thanks for bringing back the subject of this thread, FBU.

I notice that Getty Images are obscuring the pics more and more with their logo thingies. I'm sure they just used to have "getty images" without the other stuff.
Michelle Fivefer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th September 2007, 01:02   #358
zxb
Posting God
 
zxb's Avatar
Just biding my time...
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: UK
Team(s): England and the Bangas
Age: 35
Posts: 12,297
Quote:
Originally Posted by FastBowlersUnion View Post
England's number 3 arrives in Colombo.
He looks as if he's about to be beaten up by a mugger.
__________________
"Only the dead have seen the end of war" - Plato

"What counts is not necessarily the size of the dog in the fight - it's the size of the fight in the dog." - Eisenhower

"The Pie will soon be mine" - Weebl
zxb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th September 2007, 01:08   #359
Michelle Fivefer
Posting Goddess
 
Michelle Fivefer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: North West England
Team(s): England, Lancashire
Posts: 42,506
It looks as if the squad have got nice new suits rather than the blazers they usually wear.
Michelle Fivefer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th September 2007, 01:12   #360
1000yardstare
Posting Goddess
 
1000yardstare's Avatar
JA 851 Cummins 149 Wagner 147 TCurran 21 SCurran 15
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: London
Posts: 21,001
Well I was surprised that Bell was able to change his way of playing in ODIs as I had him pigeon-holed as a Test player. Hopefully he can develop his game even further and be a definite for the 20/20 squad so we don't have to have all these foreign specialists coming into the side. I would like the ODI squad to be the 20/20 squad. If Mustard doesn't make it in Sri Lanka then Solanki as the keeper might be a good idea. Bell's fielding is also a big plus.
1000yardstare is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 20:19.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Cricket247.org