Just in case you thought that it was serious...

[Mark Kidger]

I know that for some of you pundits the one day game is the finest form of the art, but just in case you think that it's all serious out there here, with no other aim than to raise Scott's blood pressure (only joking Michael, I would not be so mischievous as to introduce statistics just to upset people who distrust them), are some relevant numbers from the two current series:

In Zimbabwe v Sri Lanka, Tatenta Taibu not only tops that batting and bowling averages for Zimbabwe, but has the greatest number of runs and the highest number of dismissals in the field too. For the upcoming series with Australia the ZCB plans to clone him so that he can opening the batting and bowling and keep wicket at the same time!

On a totally different scale of awfulness, Chris Read is the leading candidate for "Man of the series" in the current W.I. v England series based on his consistent results in the games that have produced a finish! However, I should push the claims of Marcus Trescothick for this honour given his solid all-round performances in this ODI series (just one run less than Read, the same number of dismissals, and the most economical bowling in the England team).

I should add that a win in either of the matches in St. Lucia would ensure that England cannot lose the ODI series (the first time that they have ever avoided defeat in a ODI series in the Carrribean) - come on lads, you're almost there!

I'd better stop now because someone may be in real medical danger if I continue!

[Rachael]

Mark - what do you make of the notion that ODI cricket should be reserved for veterans like Gough, Knight, Hick and Russell.. or even Tuffers, Fraser, Stewart and Steve Waugh: house-hold names, living legends and all folk capable of providing just as good a day's entertainment and kids like Strauss, Clarke, Jones, Harmison and Anderson.. who should all have better things to do with their time.

Freed up to concentrate on the serious stuff, the younger talents could maybe play more proper cricket (5 Test series against all nations) and with no distractions the youngsters would not be picking up bad habits of bowling defensively, slogging with the willow and so on.

RDT's proposed minimum qualification for ODI team: have played at least 25 Test matches, be retired from Test cricket.

[Mark Kidger]

There was a time when counties would not play their younger players on a Sunday to avoid them picking up bad habits. There is no question that two teams of veterans would give it just as good a go and be just as entertaining as the youngsters. To much one day cricket and definitely there is nothing to be gained by young players going into the 20-20 League and massacring their technique.

[sostenurter]

Originally Posted by Rachael

Mark - what do you make of the notion that ODI cricket should be reserved for veterans like Gough, Knight, Hick and Russell.. or even Tuffers, Fraser, Stewart and Steve Waugh: house-hold names, living legends and all folk capable of providing just as good a day's entertainment and kids like Strauss, Clarke, Jones, Harmison and Anderson.. who should all have better things to do with their time.

Freed up to concentrate on the serious stuff, the younger talents could maybe play more proper cricket (5 Test series against all nations) and with no distractions the youngsters would not be picking up bad habits of bowling defensively, slogging with the willow and so on.

RDT's proposed minimum qualification for ODI team: have played at least 25 Test matches, be retired from Test cricket.

I think ODIs are, on the contrary, very handy for introducing players to international cricket. They are a step up from county cricket, they feature some of the best players in the world, but the outcome of them is not SO important so you can afford to risk playing a young side that might lose a couple of matches. If the selectors make a howler in a ODI, it's not the end of the world. They can test players and see if they have the temperament and ability for international cricket.

I see what you say about technique being affected, but say a batsman comes in near the top of the order and is bowled lbw for low scores, say, three times out of four. In this case, the ODI will have discovered a flaw in his game that was most likely already there. The selectors then know he probably isn't cut out just yet for Test cricket, and he ahs the chance to go away and work on it.

ODI matches are not complete slogs - they are 50 overs long and whilst a lower order batsman might be picked for his ability to slog a quickfire 20s or 30s, top order batsman have to have good technique to stay in and make substantial scores.

I don't think it really does massacre your technique - I think being thrown in at the deep end in a Test series (which we all agree are much more challenging than ODIs) with no previous experience of international cricket is likely to massacre your confidence, though!

Trescothick, Flintoff, and Collingwood were all introduced via ODIs. I know some of you don't rate the technique of the first two, but I have never heard Collingwood's technique criticised, and it is certainly true that Freddie's bowling improved leaps and bounds by playing in one-day cricket. I don't know if "bowling defensively" is such a terrible habit for bowlers to get into either - too many young English bowlers come into international cricket bowling pies and ODI cricket teaches players who have been weaned on the county game that long-hops, wides and leg-side balls will be punished - as indeed, they will be in Test matches.

I agree though, young talents who are then established in the Test side don't need the extra stress of too many ODI matches, especially if they are injury prone. Jones, Harmison and Hoggard should be saved for the Test matches.

[Mark Kidger]

You've got me wrong here. If a guy is good enough to play a ODI for England he should have his technique more or less sorted out. What I'm talking about is your 18 and 19 year olds, just starting in the county game, who get blooded in one day cricket and their career is made or broken by how effectively they can swing at the ball with 20 needed off the last 10 balls.

I strongly favour players like Strauss getting a chance to find their feet in ODIs before being thrust in to open on a May greentop against a strong attack. Certainly, the policy of trying players like Clarke, Strauss, Troughton, and Solanki has been a good one. They haven't found a real gem yet, but in part that's been due to the fact that this winter more games have been rained off than completed and most of the ones played were against awful opposition - not a lot that one can do in those circumstances.

[sostenurter]

Originally Posted by Mark Kidger

You've got me wrong here. If a guy is good enough to play a ODI for England he should have his technique more or less sorted out. What I'm talking about is your 18 and 19 year olds, just starting in the county game, who get blooded in one day cricket and their career is made or broken by how effectively they can swing at the ball with 20 needed off the last 10 balls.

I strongly favour players like Strauss getting a chance to find their feet in ODIs before being thrust in to open on a May greentop against a strong attack. Certainly, the policy of trying players like Clarke, Strauss, Troughton, and Solanki has been a good one. They haven't found a real gem yet, but in part that's been due to the fact that this winter more games have been rained off than completed and most of the ones played were against awful opposition - not a lot that one can do in those circumstances.

Fair enough Mark; I was just disagreeing with Rachael's suggestion that only ex-Test players should play ODIs when it seems to me they're the best way to blood young players in international cricket.

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Rachael

Mark - what do you make of the notion that ODI cricket should be reserved for veterans like Gough, Knight, Hick and Russell.. or even Tuffers, Fraser, Stewart and Steve Waugh: house-hold names, living legends and all folk capable of providing just as good a day's entertainment and kids like Strauss, Clarke, Jones, Harmison and Anderson.. who should all have better things to do with their time.

Freed up to concentrate on the serious stuff, the younger talents could maybe play more proper cricket (5 Test series against all nations) and with no distractions the youngsters would not be picking up bad habits of bowling defensively, slogging with the willow and so on.

RDT's proposed minimum qualification for ODI team: have played at least 25 Test matches, be retired from Test cricket.

Using veterans for one day internationals,to free up the test players.
Fine if you are talking just about internationals 11 players would surfice,but there a 3 major one day competitions in England,not counting that silly 20 over stuff,are you saying all England test players are barred from these competitions.

cant see any players wanting to miss a final at lords in one of the major one day competitions.

[Rachael]

Ernest - did I hear somewhere that in domestic cricket in India, participation in the one day game is now limited to the over-25s or something like that: I'm not sure what the exact ruling is.. and suspect the only authority I have for that comment is another contributer on this board.. but I must admit.. it sounds a decent idea.

Guys in the 19-25 age group are clearly very much in their formative years: going through the learning curve we've been witnessing in Flintoff of late as he's struggled to get beyond defensive, ODI bowling (learning to pitch the ball up a bit and risk doing a bit more with it) and aggressive ODI batting (partly technique: blocking the balls into gaps; parly shot selection: leaving balls that don't HAVE to be hit, refusing the riskier strokes, taking a safe 2 ahead of a riskier 4).

I guess it should do little harm in domestic cricket to allow people like Harmison, Jones and Hoggard to bowl... but I really do object to Anderson or Mahmood playing pyjama cricket anywhere, anytime: they have a lot to learn about playing real cricket.. and Gough's defensive bowling techniques for bowling at the death in a ODI are NOT what they will need to help us win the Ashes.

Same with batsmen: you might as well let Collingwood, Strauss and pietersen play all forms of the game... adding improvisational skills to their armoury so they can score in any and all situations... but the youngsters in the academy who played on the A-tour.. and the U-19 players who just performed so well... should be playing 4 day cricket and 4 day cricket alone.

Depends on your priorities really: if you give a damn about the pyjama stuff then all the above might seem a bit retrograde.. but if it's the Ashes that remain objective no 1... then I think something like the above is eventually going to be needed.

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Rachael

Ernest - did I hear somewhere that in domestic cricket in India, participation in the one day game is now limited to the over-25s or something like that: I'm not sure what the exact ruling is.. and suspect the only authority I have for that comment is another contributer on this board.. but I must admit.. it sounds a decent idea.

Guys in the 19-25 age group are clearly very much in their formative years: going through the learning curve we've been witnessing in Flintoff of late as he's struggled to get beyond defensive, ODI bowling (learning to pitch the ball up a bit and risk doing a bit more with it) and aggressive ODI batting (partly technique: blocking the balls into gaps; parly shot selection: leaving balls that don't HAVE to be hit, refusing the riskier strokes, taking a safe 2 ahead of a riskier 4).

I guess it should do little harm in domestic cricket to allow people like Harmison, Jones and Hoggard to bowl... but I really do object to Anderson or Mahmood playing pyjama cricket anywhere, anytime: they have a lot to learn about playing real cricket.. and Gough's defensive bowling techniques for bowling at the death in a ODI are NOT what they will need to help us win the Ashes.

Same with batsmen: you might as well let Collingwood, Strauss and pietersen play all forms of the game... adding improvisational skills to their armoury so they can score in any and all situations... but the youngsters in the academy who played on the A-tour.. and the U-19 players who just performed so well... should be playing 4 day cricket and 4 day cricket alone.

Depends on your priorities really: if you give a damn about the pyjama stuff then all the above might seem a bit retrograde.. but if it's the Ashes that remain objective no 1... then I think something like the above is eventually going to be needed.

Of course regaining the ashes is objective no 1.well to me it is the beating if Australia that is the main objective,the ashes are a bonus.I agree with you over Freddy to a point,I think maybe for the time being he should play in test matches only,he appears to be a more defensive bowler than he is,He would have looked a more penatrating bowler had catches of his bowling been held on to,dropped catches of his bowling have been going on for some time now.

Test match cricket is far superier to the one day stuff,I will agree,but it packs grounds and brings mutch needed funds into the game with sponsership as well.
What about the One day world cup,even if you dont like the one day stuff a strong team is needed for that event,because you are playing the best in the world.how long are the veterans going to last,who will replace them,I am not sure two different squads for two different types of cricket is right,we just dont have enough players in my opinion to have two sqauds.
I can see the problam well enough,cant see an answer.

[Farmer Giles]

Afternoon MK, and anyone else. I haven't got a lot to add to this debate, because I agree with all of you. I am certain, however, that the long game is more important than the ODIs. Even so, there have been disappointing crowds for Tests in England of late, and I believe the turnouts for matches in Pakistan were not spectacular. There are certain series that will pack them in, and others that won't. Interesting to see what happens here in England this summer.