the middle allround order

[dezz]

why have England still not yet learnt you need class bowlers who can get class batsman out and class batsman who can get runs against class bowlers? can clarke, blackwell, collingwood, mcgrath do that? NO! we don't need any more ronnie irani's, mark ealhams, dermot reeves! you can't win with a team of allrounders, it's just boring to watch and that's what it's all about isn't it! entertainment? *wishing for the day when we have more than three recognised batsman in our team*

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

See blackwell as a spinner who thumps it if he gets a bat.

Weird view for a zummerzet fan. Do you have another motive ?

[dezz]

i just want one more recognised batsman. blackwell come in at 7 if johnson (great bowler) is injured

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

Johnson SHOULD be a great bowler but he's only played against Zim and Bang. Not exactly world beaters. I thnik he can do the business, blackwell, as a "stopper" has proven this at ODI level.

[Rachael]

I'm all in favour of specialist batsmen... and would like to see 5 of them, a keeper and 5 specialist bowlers.. but please don't class Collingwood as a bits-n-pieces player: he's the best ODI specialist batsman we've got right now.

We're missing a Nick Knight character who can judge a good run rate at the top of the order: Tresco can score runs.. but doesn't have that judgement. We're also overloaded on big hitters: Fairbrother was the best England ODI batsman I ever saw, closely followed by Thorpe, and they stood out not for making risky boundaries but for keeping the scoreboard ticking without taking ANY risks.

Until we find those players I'd like ot see Tresco, Strauss / ??????, Butcher / Pietersen, Thorpe / Vaughan, Collingwood, Flintoff, Read, Gough, Kirtley, Anderson, HArmison

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

I cant think (apart from thorpe) of a young "nudger and nurdler". Solanki tried to be a bit wristy but just gave his wicket away too much. can anyone think of a Fairbrother replacement ?

[dezz]

you need 5 batsman, i allrounder, wicketkeeper and 4 bowlers (not a batsman that can bowl a bit of spin). We proved last summer that bowling a side out(south africa) for 100 with gough and anderson is much more effective and innovative than having kirtley bowl 10 overs for 40 runs, and no wickets thereby letting the opposition get 270. we must innovate like australia if we want to be the best!!!
my team...

1 trescothick
2 vaughn
3 strauss
4 peng/carberry
5 flintoff
6 collingwood (the finisher and guard against collapse)
7 g. jones
8 johnson
9 gough
10 anderson
11 harmison

now that's a team! unstoppable and youngish! dezz for england selector!

[Rachael]

The Fairbrother-replacement issue seems to just run and run.. and for the time being I think we have to accept that Collingwood is the closest we can get. That said.. I've seen little of Strauss.. but he's supposed to be an "accumulater" not a "slogger".

What irritates me is that, Knight and Thorpe excepted, Fairbrother towers over recent English ODI batsmen.. and Bevan towers over world ODI batsmen... yet all the hype focusses on people like Flintoff, Clarke and Blackwell and the enormous hits that find the boundary.

ODI cricket seems to be evolving.

At first we just bumbled along.

Then the whole world woke up to the fact that one sme pitches... quality bowling gets despatched as ruthlessly as average bowling... wickets are given away not taken.... and any team that bats down to 9 or 10 is likely to be freer to keep the scoreboard moving than a team that only bats to 6.

More recently the world has moved on once again... focussing on keeping wickets in hand when batting (enabling a late push) and taking wickets with genuine strike bowlers (to stop the other team making a late push).

It seems to me that England selection is struggling to keep up.

It seems to me we need a top 5 who can all keep the scorecard moving without taking risks: guys who find gaps with gentle dabs and cute touches into inevitable gaps.. running quickly between the wickets.. and rarely risking a slog... and building a platform from which just one or two sloggers (say Flintoff and Read) can cut loose.

On that basis... Clarke and Blackwell just seem out of place: it's great if the top order do the job for 40 of the 50 overs.. because as we approach the death we have 4 sloggers to capitalise... but if we lose 3 of our top 4 before we've reached the 30 over mark we find ourselves up a creek without a paddle: either we ask the sloggers to keep wickets in hand (in which case they stop slogging and the scoreboard stops) or tell them we need runs (in which case they take risks and we end up 7-8 wickets down and praying that Gough and Harmison stick around).

Not good.

[cantplaycantalk]

Point from a Durham fan who has seen both Peng and Collingwood. Collingwood is an international class batsman, he has both the skill and the temperament to play both Test and ODI. Nicky Peng is still a kid, he occasionally flashes the bat with some success but he is barely county class at present.

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by Rachael

I'd like ot see Tresco, Strauss / ??????, Butcher / Pietersen, Thorpe / Vaughan, Collingwood, Flintoff, Read, Gough, Kirtley, Anderson, HArmison

I'm always interested by "I'd like to see" sides. Does this take into account Thorpe's ODI retirement?
Butcher presumably doesn't get picked for ODIs because a) he can't catch and b) he has very dodgy knees.
Not useful when you are partially reliant on having superb fielders all round the park.
You can excuse a quick bowler, but you can't excuse a batsman.