Should England dispense with "bits and pieces" players

[pie_chucker]

Originally Posted by Ernest

Worry not - I have changed it to this - "I don't care: I support another major team" .

Cheers, Ern. Had a bad night last night.

Rachael, what are Dalrymples stats removing the games against Sri Lanka?
Beacuse, yes he performed well in those games but those performances were "Chris Lewis" esque in that he performed well in a lost cause, but i cant remember him contributing anything since.

[Rachael]

Dalrymple batted well (better than all his colleagues) against the Aussies in this losing cause, coming in at 93/6, supporting Flintoff and then scrabbling together a total with the tail. He then hit 30 off 18 balls and an unbeaten 29 off 26 balls to ensure England beat Aus and NZ to qualify for the CB series finals.

Aside from Sri Lanka the only teams Dalrymple has bowled at for any statistically significant number of overs are the following:

(6 ball overs)       Mat    O       R   W   BB1    BB2     Ave  Econ    SR 4w 5w
v Australia            7   26     120   3  1/25   1/38   40.00  4.61  52.0  0  0
v Pakistan             5   26      95   4  2/13   1/38   23.75  3.65  39.0  0  0

Two eminently satisfactory sets of stats.

Answer me this, though: if Flintoff were injured... how would you balance the side without playing Dalrymple? I can imagine a team of specialists that had Nixon at 6, Plunket at 7 and Mahmood at 8 ahead of Lewis, Panesar and Anderson - quite a tail. Somehow, Collingwood and Dalrymple as 5th bowler and ditching a specialist seamer strikes me as the way ANY coach would go!

[Occasional Fan]

Originally Posted by pie_chucker

Cheers, Ern. Had a bad night last night.

Cheers, Ern. I obviously had a bad morning this morning!

[feverpitch]

Why not play Ravi Bopara, potentially a much better batsman, instead of Dalrymple?

[pie_chucker]

Bopara is also a much better bowler and as good a fielder, his only negative point is that he didnt go to Radley college .

[Harmy's Army]

Comparing Dalrymple and Bopara - with Paul Collingwood as the benchmark ODI bits 'n pieces player (hope that's not
being unfair on him).
Their fielding is on a par - very good (Collingwood's is outstanding).
Their bowling economy rates over time are likely to be comparable with Collingwood's (average).
Ravi is a more talented batsman (lest we forget he is still only 21).

So it's down to batting - Bopara is the likelier of the two to score more with the bat than he concedes with the ball. Wouldn't mind seeing him get a chance to stake a claim today against Canada at the expense of one of the four clubbers.

[Harmy's Army]

Originally Posted by Harmy's Army

Wouldn't mind seeing him get a chance to stake a claim today against Canada at the expense of one of the four clubbers.

Hot off the press - Bopara in for a suspended Flintoff against Canada.

[pie_chucker]

Another great batting performance by Dalprymple!
2 and going at 7 an over against the mighty Canada.

Hopefully when Freddie gets recalled he'll make way for Bopara

[flanflinger]

For me a "Bit's and pieces" player is a player that does not deserve his place in the team on one skill alone, but the sum of three. But they are noi genuine all-rounders.

So for example, Fred would get into the team for his bowling or his batting alone, while Collingwood, Bell, Pietersen and Bopara are batters, who can turn them arm over, and Plunkett and Mahmood, as well as front-line bowlers, can bat lower down the order.

So if that player were unable to do one of the two key skills (bat or bowl) they would no longer deserve their place.

Dalrymple is an interesting case, as he is a front-line batter for Middlesex and has somehow been asked to do a job with the ball. The problem is, if you took him purely as a Batter, there are better players out there, but they probably can't turn there arm over. He has therefore been badged a bits and pieced player. Where as I would consider him a batter, who can bowl. This is his problem. He is a decent batsman in County Cricket, but he has leap-frogged better batters, because he can bowl a bit.

He is different from your classic bits and pieces player - Ealham, Irani and Fleming - as he probably could get in the team as a batter alone, but I think there are better players, and that's why he is a weak point.

[darksideofthemoon]

9 players who can bat and 5 bowlers that you can get 10 overs with Collingwood as a reserve if needed.

Vaughan
Strauss
Bell
Pietersen
Collingwood
Flintoff
Nixon
Plunkett
Lewis
Anderson
Panesar

Anderson 6 + 2 + 2
Plunkett 6 + 4
Lewis 10
Flintoff 6 + 2 + 2
Panesar 10