Winter Worries For England..>

[Trescothick]

Originally Posted by Mongoose

I don't think there's such a huge crisis as some make out after the Pakistan series. I think England over-performed slightly against Australia, and under-performed slightly in Pakistan (considering also that they were inexperienced in those conditions, and that, after the first few days in Multan, Pakistan played day after day of bloody good cricket).

It seems when England are up; then they are the best in the world, when they're low; they're simply average. I think the Ashes and this tour were an example. England were world class; undeniable! and that is the potential we have. But this tour showed the way we can also play and we were distinctly average.
I think the test result was maybe skewed because of the first test, we maybe deserved to win iot based on the first 3 innings, then let it go and that test made a huge impact on the rest of the tour and we lost our way.
No crisis, just have to adjust and attempt to get back on track

[Mr Cricket]

Originally Posted by Ernest

On top of that they have been thrashed in the one dayers, even with players like Flintoff and Trescothick in the side.

You forgot about there big hitter Kevin Peiterson

[Collyisamackem]

I've recently reminded myself of the tremendous success England have had for quite a sustained period now, and have decided to let this one series go down as a poor result which I do not expect to be repeated. It's funny how so many in the public and media are ready to get stuck into England, when before the Pakistan series we were being hailed as the next world number 1 in some quarters. It truly is bandwagon city for some. I was wary of such comments (about us being the "best"), but we are a very good test side, and are improving in the one-day arena after some really awful years. It wasn't so bad, after all, that we very nearly won every test we played in 2004 (a little proper umpiring at Durban would have helped that). I'm also goping to stick my neck out and say we have a very good chance of beating India, the best chance we have had in a long, long time.

On another note, I purchased a copy of Freddie's book the other day and am reading it with real interest.

[Kirsty Harris]

Originally Posted by Collyisamackem

I've recently reminded myself of the tremendous success England have had for quite a sustained period now, and have decided to let this one series go down as a poor result which I do not expect to be repeated.

Yes, I share your view, no need to panic over one series where the side underperformed. England have peformed to a high standard for a couple of years, and one poor series does not change it. England have been consistantly good for two years, and I for one am prepered to give them a break.

At the start of the year, had we been told England would win in SA and win the Ashes, but lose against Pakistan is there one single England supporter in the country who wouldn't have been delighted at the prospect?

This is a damn good team, and I nothing I saw in Pakistan has shaken my basic view that this England side is one of the best post-war England teams.

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

Originally Posted by Kirsty Harris

This is a damn good team, and I nothing I saw in Pakistan has shaken my basic view that this England side is one of the best post-war England teams.

Its certainly the best pace attacks this country has produced, but the batting is well off the pace in my view, odd considering, on paper, how good it is.

[Collyisamackem]

Well given that Bell is 23 and KP is 25, I suppose the batting lineup just lacks experience. I think Bell will be to us what Kallis is to South Africa, and KP is a unique talent possibly more along the lines of Hayden or Inzamam in that once his eye is in he can do anything - though I would say I think he will play quality bowling better than Hayden at his peak. Tresco is in great long term form and nearly just got a double-hundred, Strauss didn't do so well in the latter part of the year but still has 7 centuries (including 2 against Australia) and averages 46 (I expect that to rise again, he is quality) and Vaughan could do better but is still capable of big scores once he concentrates and gets going.

So our batting can improve yes, but there is already some real substance and enormous potential for improvement in the future. The bowling only needs a replacement coming through for Giles when he can no longer put up with it. We are (sadly) seeing some signs that the King's fitness will hinder him more in the future.

[Leafy Seadragon]

A range of reasonable comments. I still think that many people underestimate the difficulty of touring. Even good teams generally struggle to win away from home. Cantplaycantalk touched on it. Local conditions will undoubtedly favour local teams, normally nurtured on those very conditions.

In terms of England, I don't think it fair to suggest that England overperformed - there was a mix of good and not-so-good in the summer. I think Oz underperformed in the Ashes (hung on the old guard, unprepared for quality swing bowling, whatever...). I think that India will probably just hang on to beat England, or at worst draw the series. India is very hard to beat at home - just ask the Aussies. This doesn't diminish the calibre of the English team. Similarly, I don't expect them to retain the Ashes (although I didn't think that they'sd win them). However, I think they will be warm favourites in 2009.

At the moment England's loss in Pakistan probably reflects the fact that they aren't a 'great' side. They lack a world-class spinner and the pace attack and the batting still seems fragile. The batting struggled too often against SA, Oz and Pakistan to be completely confident in it. I expect this to settle if Bell & Pietersen continue to grow into their roles. I'm uncertain why the bowling doesn't always fire - I guess that I haven't seen enough to pass comment. On the basis of the Ashes I would suggest that the attack bowls fabulously when conditions suit, but may struggle otherwise. Combine that with the lack of a quality spinner and the team threatens to fail to deliver on obvious potential. I'd willingly admit that England look to have a better say 2007 side than Australia as the younger players mature into their roles. But for whatever reason (obvious personal bias?) I think that the Aussies will have a better team at that point in time

[MarkC]

Watching the ashes series again on DVD it reminds me of how good our bowlers can be with the right conditions. I think England will narowly beat Pakistan in the summer. Inzi apart their batsman will struggle against our bowlers.

When we went to Pakistan full of confidence we dominated the first 4 days, then we blew it on the fifth with some pretty average batting.

After that trying to beat a Pakistan side , playing as team, full of confidence, on home soil with the players they have was always going to be an uphill struggle. A lot of the players in the squad hadnt toured there before so maybee they will be better cricketers for their experience.

Hopefully Tres and Strauss can start putting some decent opening stands together in India. Vaughan needs a good series and Bell coped well in Pakistan and I think he could have a really good series. Will Pieterson curb his natural attacking instincts and build an innings, or will he try and smash Kuble and Harbhajan out of the ground after a couple of overs? Hopefully the former.

Im not sure we can bowl them out twice. Is it worth giving Panesar a go? I guess we should be happy with a drawn series and look toward winning the summer series at home . Then go to Australia full of confidence and retain the ashes).

[Lemming]

We [England] were blatently outplayed recently in Pakistan. Mainly because I think they batted a million times better than we did. The pitches were batsman friendly and required tight bowling. Pakistan bowled well, forcing us into many errors, but on top of this we contributed to our own downfall many times with very poor shot selection. I feel we bowled well, especially our quick bowlers on wickets which did little.

At the minute, there is no doubt that our batting line-up is prone to collapse, especially with numbers four and five [Bell and Pietersen] relatively young and inexperienced.

The Pakistan series was a wake-up call for an England side on 'Cloud-9' after the Ashes. But it is far from crisis-point at the minute. If we stand back and have a little look at the future of the side, with only Vaughan, Trescothick (who left his 20's only four days ago) and Gilo over the age of 30, we can see that the line-up has a good 5-6 years of good test match cricket ahead of it.

Opening pair - Trescothick (well on the way to English batting records) and Strauss (more than capable of 6,000+ runs and 15+ 100s) have already developed a top-class partnership. Strauss's technique is maybe not quite a traditional test opening standard (defensively) but his record so far is excellent with 7 hundreds in 20 months of test cricket. Trescothick has scored 1,000 runs in three calendar years running now.

Number 3 - Vaughan has a good record not only as a player and as a captain. Relies maybe too heavily on form as he suffers when not in touch, but a good leader and classy player.

Number 4 - Ian Bell may still have the jury out. He answered his critics with a confident century in Pakistan after looking out of his depth during the Ashes. The technique is there, a chance to move up the order maybe? A talented batsman with the his own future in his hands.

Number 5 - Pietersen may aggravate somewhat with his poor early dismissals, but he averaged 50+ in the Ashes - being top scorer - and then 40+ in the Pakistan series. He'll score plenty of runs and settle down at number 5. I'm sure it won't be long until he does something really stupid like score 200 in a day.

Number 6 - Flintoff, over the past few years has transformed into one of the best fast bowlers in the world, and has averaged pretty much over 40 since the beginning of 2003. One of the best players to bat with the tail and maybe the best all-round player in the world?!?!

Number 7 - Jones has talent in all areas of his cricket, easily enough to contribute heavily to England's future. With a solid foundation given to him in an innings he is capable of upping the pace with a classy repetoire of strokes. I'm sure we have yet to see the best of him with both bat and gloves.

Spin bowling - The only real, current, negative in the English set-up is how we can replace Giles when he retires. He's 34 now, has started to have a few niggles and won't continue anywhere near as long as the rest of the side. But for the short-term, a real heart-on-his-sleeve guy with the potential to bowl good spells and maybe even - dare I say it - get a test match hundred.

Seam bowling - Our pace attack is the best on the planet, and still pretty young. Our bowling during the Ashes was immense and not too shabby during the recent Pakistan series. We have the players to exploit all conditions partially helpful to faster bowlers, we can swing, seam, reverse swing, bounce and york all with good accuracy and control. If our current quartet of Hoggard, Harmison, Flintoff and Jones stays fit, it may be a number of years before we lose a home series.

So do England have winter worries? I don't think so! As I've tried to explain, our major worry is replacing Giles with a spinner who can be relied upon to at least keep an end tight. Our top seven has massive potential to score tens of thousands of runs together and our fast attack is already second to none with a good five years ahead of them.

Watch this space!!!

[Ernest]

Fair enough post Lemming, but this does not explain Englands poor batting even through their vast improvment, it is the seam bowling and to an extent Giles that have won matches for England.
Vaughan is a major worry how long can he be carried, and also Bell has shown he gets runs on dead pitches like in Pakistan, the jury really is out on him.