England's ODI failure

[Notts Exile]

Originally Posted by flanflinger

As for Vaughan, as you pointed out he has never really added much value to the ODI team, so the fact that he is missing is not (for me) a key factor in our current failure to do well.

I would take a it a step further and suggest that when he has played he has been stopping someone more deserving of gaining a place in the team. He should have been left out of the ODI squads a long time ago. That said, I suspect he will be in the World Cup squad if fit. (For me, his mere selection proves that the management hasn't got a clue.)

[darksideofthemoon]

We have used 30 players so far this year. Of the team out in India only 4 players have played more than 50 games -
Flintoff 104, Collingwood 102, Strauss 63 and Anderson 52.

They are competing against players that have played 200 and 300 games. Jayasuriya has played 356. Not batting the full 50 overs is the biggest crime. Our batsmen's shot selection is poor when runs dry up. They are not sure when to be patient and when to change tempo. Bowlers win Tests, batsmen win ODIs. Our batsmen are largely at fault but we need bowlers that go for under 5 an over and have experience of bowling at attacking batsmen. The fielders also need to hit the stumps more often.

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

I feel it is more a batting problem. The spin dept seems quite solid, and the seam dept can be fixed with the arrival of lewis in my view. But I really cant think where we can improve the batting - the players picked seem the best bet but just cannot perform, thus my view that a change at the top, maybe even for just the ODIs.

[Notts Exile]

Originally Posted by Richie Benauds Love Child

and the seam dept can be fixed with the arrival of lewis in my view.

Lewis has been in India all along! Fletcher has simply refused to select him, preferring his wayward "pace" attack! That's part of the reason I blame Fletcher as much as any of the other reasons.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Richie Benauds Love Child

I feel it is more a batting problem.

Yes... but that is true in Tests as well... the idea that the Test batting line up is a match for that of India or Australia is laughable... so why regard the batting limitations as a ODI phenomenon?

That said... how many sides have struggled in the current pyjama tournament? South Africa were 5/42 in today's match before Boucher and Kemp dug in to rescue them... and Pakistan are desperately struggling to recover from a seemingly impossible 8/47 in reply - screwing up a ODI innings is not something unique to England!

Where's the weakness in the following ODI line up?

1. Tresco
2. Bell
3. Pietersen
4. Strauss*
5. Collingwood
6. Flintoff
7. Read+
8. Giles
9. Blackwell
10. Simon Jones / Lewis
11. Anderson

That's a side I'd back if it were fit and able to play 20-30 ODIs in a row without players going AWOL with injuries.

ps. If you put Lewis in for Simon Jones this XI is an option for the World Cup: everyone else is on course to be fit and available.

[Notts Exile]

Part of the problem, Rachael, lies in the fact that if everyone were fit the Manager would select Michael Vaughan to bat and also Mahmood or Plunlett ahead of Jon Lewis to bowl.

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

Originally Posted by Rachael

Where's the weakness in the following ODI line up?

[/i]

No problem at all Rach, problem is half are injured the other fletch wont pick !

[Hache]

My 2 cents on the problem:

Too many bit's and pieces players
IMO, Fletcher's insistence on building a force of multi-skilled players has hurled England's approach badly in shorter version of the game. let's just admit, there's one Freddie Flintoff, and the likes of Rikki, Dalrymple, Yardy will by and large provide limited support to the main strikers, which is of no use when wickets are required or a RR of 7+ is needed in 10 overs or so.

If teams like South Africa, Pakistan or even West Indies are doing an above-average job with multi-skilled players, it doesn't lessen the importance of specialists by any means. These teams still needs their spearheads to dig holes earlier on for support bowlers to try further latter.

As per my limited understanding of the game, England shall be better off by instilling specialists in their ODI setup. They are doing just fine with them in longer version of the game. Then why not try this successful stratagem in other troubled version of their game?

An ODI attack comprising of Harmison, Anderson, Mehmood & Plunkett probably along with Freddie is pretty formidable one! Out of them Freddie is a genuine batter, Mehmood and Plunkett can hold it efficiently (showed it against Pakistan in different periods). Moreover, on spinning tracks addition of Monty in place of any of the 4 seamers wouldn't harm either. England can mould him into their own ODI version of Musthaq Ahmed or Saqlain Musthaq by ATTACKING with him. Protecting his killer instinct by restricting him to longer version only is fine in case your ODI team is doing wonders. However, the ploy of having bits and pieces is tried and tested so many times in England's ODI team that I may well lose the count.

Simultaneously, a batting lineup of Trescothick, Strauss, KP, BELL, Collingwood, Freddie and Read is very reasonable if play's up to their potential. There's no use batting down till no.9 if your support bowlers are on within the Power Plays...

There could be once in a blue moon TITLE VICTORY in SHARJAH(1997), but certainly not a move to persist with in a longer run, specially when it's not paying after numerous tests...

[darksideofthemoon]

Where's the weakness in the following ODI line up?

1. Tresco
2. Bell
3. Pietersen
4. Strauss*
5. Collingwood
6. Flintoff
7. Read+
8. Giles
9. Blackwell
10. Simon Jones / Lewis
11. Anderson
-----------------------------

Giles and Blackwell are not mobile in the field and bat too far down the order. Dalrymple is the better option with the bat and ball and should be at 6 and Flintoff at 7. Blackwell admits he hasn't learnt how to bat in odi's yet.
Simon Jones has no one day experience (county or international) and 8 games 7 wickets at 39.28 isn't good. After 8 games a bowler should have 12 wickets. In his last ODI series against Australia he didn't take a wicket. I would have Tremlett.

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

Yet as a bowler was second in the overall economy rates in India behind a certain H. Singh by.2 of a run. He cant bat in ODIs but will at some point hammer a side. He did score 83 in his first ODI against SL