Would you play Cook for ODI's?

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by flanflinger

I would pick Cook, and I would even consider him as skipper,It is a bit of a gamble, but long term it may pay off?

I would leave Cook alone and keep him a million miles from one day cricket where he will pick up bad habits, poor shot selection - and ultimately loss of form.

His strength has been in the test side - he is a world class player, let the specialist England one day players be selected.

[pie_chucker]

But everyone said dont play Panesar in ODI's.... they said it will affect his game.....

Since he played in Australia I've noticed a sharp decline in his game

Playing in ODI's will do Cook no harm, it may even help expand his game a bit.

[flanflinger]

Originally Posted by Ernest

I would leave Cook alone and keep him a million miles from one day cricket

But Ern we know that you would not have any of the Test team playing ODI's because you don't consider them important.

The fact is this thinking is the reason why we have struggled in the World Cup. The ECB have two aims, one to be the No 1 Test team, No 2 to win an major one-day tournament (i.e. World Cup or ICC trophy) how can they be expected to achieve No 2 if they play a sub standard team.

Modern players need to learn to adapt, to play different innings in the different formats. What you are going to argue next, is that to be the No 1 Test team then we need to forget about our best players playing ODI's.

But how come Australia can do both, consistently. ODI's have not damaged the way any of their players play Tests, if anything they have become more aggressive batters, supreme fielders and far more intelligent bowlers in tests, due to ODI's!! They are also very clear that the ODI team and the Test team should be as close as possible in make up.

[pie_chucker]

Originally Posted by flanflinger

.
Modern players need to learn to adapt...

More to the point Modern players should be able to adapt. I cant believe that they are that unintelligent and cant tell the difference between test cricket and ODI cricket.

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by flanflinger

But Ern we know that you would not have any of the Test team playing ODI's because you don't consider them important.

It's not that they are not important, it's more that ODI's are different - and would be better served with specialist one day players, rather than burning out our test stars.

Originally Posted by flanflinger

how can they be expected to achieve No 2 if they play a sub standard team.

I think this is the proof of my pudding FF - with the present set up, England are the worst one day side on the cricketing planet, and they have been for many years.

Players the like of Fairbrother should be found, his face never fit at test level - but he was a brilliant one day player.

[EllN]

Originally Posted by Ernest

Players the like of Fairbrother should be found, his face never fit at test level - but he was a brilliant one day player.

Every player to thier own look at kevin peitersen he is able to play both forms of the game and adust accordingly similar to andrew flintoff (the bowler), paul collingwood, marcus trescosthic, and monty panasar (though he needs a little longer to prove himself and become a much more threatening bowler) you build your team round them, and then briing in players which compliment your best players like an ian bell, who will nudge round the singles to get them on strike, a line and lenght you miss I hit bowler and another bowler that is lethal with the new ball then team england will become an ausome one day side

[darksideofthemoon]

Only trouble with that you miss I hit theory is against world class batsmen they hit more than they miss. Take Bond and Bracken. Both have variety and speed so the batsmen don't know what to expect.

[Notts Exile]

There will always be the odd One Day specialist like Fairbrother or Michael Bevan. The rest of the Test side should be good enough to adapt their games. Look at the best sides in the world, their ODI teams are made up of the best Test players with the addition of a specialist here and there. Why should we be any different?

[Milo]

Originally Posted by Notts Exile

There will always be the odd One Day specialist like Fairbrother or Michael Bevan. The rest of the Test side should be good enough to adapt their games. Look at the best sides in the world, their ODI teams are made up of the best Test players with the addition of a specialist here and there. Why should we be any different?

We shouldn't be any different NE. All the bowlers (not retired) and most of the batsmen should be playing. But just as Langer didn't play for Australia, I think Cook might be better served (along with England) with him sticking to tests.

Bell and Cook in the top 6 would not fill me with excitement (or optimism).

[Notts Exile]

Originally Posted by Milo

Bell and Cook in the top 6 would not fill me with excitement (or optimism).

I completely agree. One of them but not both. The likes of Pettini, Benning, Patel should be vying with Jon Trott and co for the top and middle order roles. These are our ODI future. They may well be our Test future, too.