England 30 for the Twenty20 World Cup

[adamberry]

I'd have said Collingwood would have 4 overs and Snape and Bopara sharing the last four, mixing up the pace. What I meant by Snape wasted at 9 is that I'd have him batting higher up - not sure how high in your team, but certainly above Nixon and possibly above Flintoff as well.

I must admit I've got my doubts about Panesar as well - at times in one-dayers he seems a bit one-dimensional, international Twenty20 matches could show up some serious problems. And he has precious little Twenty20 experience as well - only 7 matches, and an economy of 8.39.

[Rachael]

Surely the key thing is to get Flintoff and Collingwood well down the order.. perhaps at 7 & 8.. where they can be called upon to rescue a dire situation OR to slog a few.

People like Shah, Snape, Nixon and Pietersen need to be in earlier with a license to really go for it in the knowledge that the lower order is capable of digging the side out of genuine holes.

In terms of bowling.... I'd open with Flintoff and Panesar... with Bopara, Collingwood, Snape and the occasional bowlers doing the rest - at least that way the opposition would come under huge initial pressure!

[adamberry]

Originally Posted by Rachael

I'd open with Flintoff and Panesar... [...] - at least that way the opposition would come under huge initial pressure!

Either that, or they won't need to worry, after being 50-60 for none after 4 overs chasing about 150! Panesar, in a powerplay, in a slogging match (which is what Twenty20 essentially is), surely would equal carnage.

Unless I'm mistaken and there are no powerplays in Twenty20?

[TopperHarley]

Cant see Kirtley's bowling action being to the liking of most international umpires, i'm afraid.

Wouldnt take Monty and would have had Ramps in the squad. Often it is the classical stroke that finds the boundary rather than the heave and hope, and ramps 20/20 record is excellent.

[Occasional Fan]

Originally Posted by first change

What does everyone think?

Short answer: I would not pick a single player who might be required for the three Sri Lanka tests and the three New Zealand tests which England are committed to play in the winter (and five ODIs against each). Give them all a couple of weeks off and forget about all this Twenty20 nonsense. I have no problem with domestic Twenty20s as a way of pulling new followers in to the game; I can even tolerate (though with severe reservations) a Twenty20 international in each tour.

Twenty20 world cup? Forget it! Or, if we have to have one, have it instead of the ICC Champions Trophy. Something has to go, and this Twenty20 jamboree would be the first as far as I am concerned.

[darksideofthemoon]

My team -

1. Trescothick
2. Wright - (bowler)
3.Loye
4. Pietersen
5. Collingwood - (bowler)
6. Shah
7. Flintoff - (bowler)
8. Nixon
9. Schofield - (bowler)
10. Lewis - (bowler)
11.Anderson - (bowler)

[greg]

Originally Posted by Occasional Fan

Short answer: I would not pick a single player who might be required for the three Sri Lanka tests and the three New Zealand tests which England are committed to play in the winter (and five ODIs against each).

While i agree with you on that score it might be of use to Flintoff to get some overs under his belt before the serious stuff later on,the side i picked had as few test players as possible but we all know Collingwood will be captain and KP and Prior will be involved.Other than that i think we probably have better Twenty20 players in county cricket than in the current national side.

[pie_chucker]

Originally Posted by TopperHarley

Cant see Kirtley's bowling action being to the liking of most international umpires, i'm afraid.

Whilst i agree Kirtleys action is far from pure, there any many bowlers playing with far worse actions that are deemed legal.

[Occasional Fan]

Originally Posted by greg

... It might be of use to Flintoff to get some overs under his belt ...

I think Lancashire still has a programme of matches ahead, doesn't it? We should not be putting front line players into this schoolyard competition, in my view. It's just risking injury for no discernible benefit. Someone pointed out somewhere on the site that this is a world cup and therefore it needs to be taken seriously. With respect to whoever it was, I think that's poppycock. If world cups are really that important, send the England test team out to win the tiddlywinks or Monopoly or something. I really see no need for this Twenty20 world cup nonsense and I would be far happier if England just boycotted it.

[first change]

I think, on reflection, Snape would replace Panesar in my squad. Snape change of pace is staggering, he knows Twenty20 inside out, getting hit for sixes doesn't bother him. Might not be good for Monty's development. Plus Snape's still a very fine fielder and more than useful with the bat - perfect foil to the big hitters in terms of finding gaps etc, but also surprisingly capable (giving his stature) of using the long handle when required.