Why are England so bad at setting awinning score in ODI's?

[Kirsty Harris]

If this has already been discussed at length in other threads over the last few days, please excuse me but I have been at my dear old Mum's in devon the past week to celebrate my birthday!

My question isn't just based on the last couple of games, but on what I percieve as a real weakness in England's one day side historically. For as long as I can remember, every time I see England batting first, I've had a feeling of dread! It's almost as though I EXPECT England to lose if they bat first! I have no idea what the stats are on this, but I suspect England lose a hell of a lot more games batting first than second, at least in recent years.

This weekend, in both games, it was clear with were 30-50 runs short of a good total. That's not to say 280 is a BAD score, but it should have been better. England always seem to lose momentum at the halfway mark, or fall away towards the end. I just don't understand WHY this is the case.

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

Arguably to many bits n pieces, but I think england need something different at 6. Collingwood might fare batter and put biffers (no offence intended) like freddie and blackwell up a bit. Or replace them with proper bats. Butcher ???????????

[R W S]

Vaughn’s Record as ODI captain:P15 W9 L6

All nine wins were won batting second and all six loses were when batting first!!

Although there is a something like 60/40 win chance if batting second (from statistical history) this is still quite revealing. A number of ideas have cropped up about how we should go about getting a first innings score, some as revolutionary as:

• playing all batsman
• playing Read at No.3
• playing Clarke at No.3
• playing Butcher (who doesn’t play onedayers for Surrey)
• playing Thorpe (at No.3 obviously) Etc.

The WI and NZ are good ODI teams so we should not be too downhearted (after all we won the main prize 3-0)!

I reckon with improved nurdling skills and a few more games they should be ready for the ICC tourney (plus we should have big Piet by then).

Odds for tomorrows match
WI 10/11
England Evens

Imaginary fivers anyone?

[Kirsty Harris]

RWS

Thanks for the stats - guess they proved my theory, anyway!!!

But I'm not really downhearted - it just worries me that our success seems to depend on batting second at the moment! I do think we have the makings of a decent team, but it still needs tweaking!

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

I know rachael is a fan of the nufger & nurdler, but A; Apart form thorpe , who doesnt play ODIs anymore, find me another n&N in the county game ? There arent any ! B: With runs rates at least 6 or 7 an over, a single a ball isnt going to win much. Big hitters ahoy !

[Kirsty Harris]

RBLC

And of course, Thorpe is also pretty good at picking up the boundries where needed, so he isn't JUST a n&n! I agree with your point though - there was far too much of that going on by England at the weekend!

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

Evening Kirsty. Have a good holiday/birthday ??

[cantplaycantalk]

My gut feeling is that these last two results are down to the different ways the two teams play and the type of pitch.

The West Indies are predominately a side dominated by the quality batsmen, (Lara, Chanderpaul, Sarwan...) England are dominated by the quality of the bowlers (Flintoff, Gough, Anderson, Harmison).
England at present cannot match WI for quality batsmen in the same way that WI cannot match Englands quality bowlers.

The result of that is as follows. On a flat featherbed pitch like the one prepared in St Lucia, West Indies quality batting can dominate the game to the point where England struggle to compete. Conversely on a pitch with a bit in it the England bowlers "should be able" to tie down and knock over the West Indies batsmen in a way that the West Indies bowlers will struggle to do to the England batsmen.

OK now this could be modified if the England one day batsmen had a little more recent practice, and the one day bowlers (apart from gough and freddy) a little more ODI experience, but that is how it "feels".

[R W S]

There used to be a rule of thumb that you should expect a total that is double the score after 30 overs (in a 50 over match).

So 5th ODI after 30 overs Eng were 162/3 = 324
So 6th ODI after 30 overs Eng were 157/2 = 314

I reckon the batting order should be dynamic; at the fall of each wicket we should aim to replace like for like. So if Strauss is out put in Collingwood - Flintoff out - Clarke in etc. keeping the momentum steady rather than the fits and starts we currently have.

[Kirsty Harris]

Evening, RBLC - yes I had a lovely birthday, thanks! I got tickets for the Lords Test v New Zealand from my folks, a lovely Surrey cap from my best mate and a couple of days after we went to see 'Wondrous Oblivion'. The film title also sums up my dazed recollections of my birthday celebrations at the pub...