Eng ODI team

[Mike_Hock]

From watching the ODI series in the West Indies, it seems to me that England have the quality to be one of the top ODI sides around. One of their problems seems to be the batting order. They have continued to play Flintoff at four. This seems strange to me as I feel the no.4 batsman should be someone who keeps the scoreboard ticking over, i.e Paul Collingwood/Andy Strauss. Flintoff should either play at no.3 (pinch hitter), or at number 6 (late innings runs). If the England team did this on the Weekend, I feel they would have posted bigger totals. I would like to see the following team line up in the Natwest series in the summer:-

M Trescothick
M Vaughan
A Flintoff
A Strauss
P Collingwood
R Clarke?
I Blackwell
C Read
D Gough
S Harmison
J Anderson

I think England should give Blackwell a decent run as he is a useful cricketer. He needs to work on his bowling and batting, but he can deffinatley do a job for England in the future. He and Read could end up being the 'finishers of the innings'.
I think the jury is still out on Clarke, but Fletch and Vaughan believe that he has talent, so he should be given a run in the summer. If he doesn't perform, chuck Pietersen in for the ICC trophy. Either way, I think someone will more then likely have to make room for Pietersen when he becomes eligable.

[Rachael]

There's always something to be said for looking on the bright side.. and I agree that in Tresco, Flintoff, Collingwood, Read, Gough and Anderson we've the core of a decent team... and in Harmison and Clarke we've guys who look capable of joining that core group.

If all 8 players go from strength to strength... with Clarke, Flintoff, Gough, Anderson and Harmison routinely delivering 10 overs a piece... Tresco opening... and Collingwood / Read accelerating us through the last few overs... we've reasons to be confident.

Two problems:

{i} on tracks where we want slow bowling options we're no-where near having answers to (say) India, Sri Lanka or Australia: as in the Test arena we are basically looking at "least worse options". On tracks really demanding 3 frontline spinners... I really don't see us competing for at least another 4-5 years.

{ii} our proven specialist batting boils down to just Tresco and Collingwood... and that leaves us 3 short. Vaughan might come good.. but there's nothing in his entire ODI record to suggest that's likely. Similarly, Strauss looks more like a Test batsman than a ODI batsman. We don't even HAVE a 5th specialist bat who plays: the only contender in the squad is McGrath... and he's not exactly inspiring.

Sure, the batting order is an issue.. but before that we seem in need of some personel!

With all that said... I agree on the case for a nudger / nurdler at 4... and would prefer to see Flintoff coming in lower down the order.

Possible team: Tresco, Butcher / Vaughan, Pietersen, Thorpe / Strauss, Collingwood, Flintoff, Read, Giles, Gough, Anderson, Harmison.

[Miles Cooper]

Firstly it's absurd that Butcher has never played an ODI - now more than ever.

Secondly, someone at the ECB should go round to Thorpe's house and ask him politely to 'unretires' from ther one day game - he has enjoyed such a renaissance in his career of late that I don't think it would be too diificult to persuade him to come out of retirement, especially as he has a complicated and potentially expensive personal life - I don't mean to be cynical here but having been in a similar situation myself I know the score.

I'm all for giving youth it's head (in fact I was berated here on that very subject just recently) but the ECB have to pick the very best team at their disposal for every match. I'm not English but even I can see this...

[Rachael]

LOL - "unretires" is a bit of a mouthfull... but you're spot on: he has to go down with Neil Fairbrother and Nick Knight as one of the all-time great English ODI players... and there's no obvious reason why he shouldn't carry on doing just that.

If the ECB were going to adopt strong-arm tactics though.. I'd like to see them start with Knight: he's sadly missed.. and is clearly still the best one day player we have eligible to us!

This unretiring could easily get out of hand... but there is one other guy who might be persuaded back if his Test career was ended: the one who can do 10 overs straight off with the new ball better than any other ODI bowler we've tried in some 20 years.

Team including the "unretired": Tresco, Knight, Butcher, Thorpe, Collingwood, Flintoff, Read, Caddick, Gough, Anderson, Harmison.

Now that IS world class.. top to bottom... or at least... it is until you have to play on the subcontinent and India are fielding Singh, Kumble, Kaneria and several occasional bowlers who are still better spinners than Blackwell and Batty.

[Scott-Wozniak]

Originally Posted by Rachael

Possible team: Tresco, Butcher / Vaughan, Pietersen, Thorpe / Strauss, Collingwood, Flintoff, Read, Giles, Gough, Anderson, Harmison.

Rachael

Butcher does not want to play ODI's he's said that in the past - I simply cannot see him ever playing an ODI for England. Thorpe has retired from ODI's and neither of these two will be playing in the 2007 World Cup, I just cannot see the point in even considering the pair of them.

I think one of the possible answers to the spin problem could come in Pieterson, but the jury's still out on him.

I've seen a lot of people moaning about Rikki Clarke. He has got talent, a lot of talent and just like Flintoff he needs the the time to realise some of this talent. He needs experience, he needs time out at the crease - lets not write him off too early. He's a batsman first and foremost who bowls a bit and I think both need developing. I think Clarke will develop into an extremely useful player for England.

Scott

[sostenurter]

Originally Posted by Scott-Wozniak

Rachael

Butcher does not want to play ODI's he's said that in the past - I simply cannot see him ever playing an ODI for England. Thorpe has retired from ODI's and neither of these two will be playing in the 2007 World Cup, I just cannot see the point in even considering the pair of them.

I think one of the possible answers to the spin problem could come in Pieterson, but the jury's still out on him.

I've seen a lot of people moaning about Rikki Clarke. He has got talent, a lot of talent and just like Flintoff he needs the the time to realise some of this talent. He needs experience, he needs time out at the crease - lets not write him off too early. He's a batsman first and foremost who bowls a bit and I think both need developing. I think Clarke will develop into an extremely useful player for England.

Scott

I don't think Thorpe will ever come back to the ODI set-up, and I don't know if we should want him - given that his mental state is fragile and he does have personal problems, I wouldn't want to overload him and I'd rather he saved his best for Tests.

Butcher is a different matter though - I haven't heard him say he doesn't want to play ODIs - I have heard him say that he's fed up being a "pub quiz" question (only player to play lots of Tests and no ODIs, etc). Given that he bowls quite handy medium pace as well, I think he should be given a go. The only argument agains tthis is that his fielding is atrocious.

I don't think the spin problem is the end of the world - sub-continent pitches do respond to pace, and remember England drew 3-3 with India in India in their last ODI series where Flintoff was the bowler who did most of the damage. Remember also that Darren Gough was Man of the Series in the Test series against SL a few years back - high quality seamers will still be a handful.
Vaughan should bowl more often though - he has a ODI 4-for against the Sri Lankans, who are hardly inexperienced when it comes to playing spin.

I agree about Rikki Clarke - he is coming in for a bit of stick at the moment, but I think he has the potential to be a very good player. I know people are accusing him of only being in the side cos he's from Surrey, etc. but you have to remember that getting into the Surrey batting line-up is nearly as difficult as getting into England's. For a while last season he was keeping Graham Thorpe out of the Surrey side - he can't be that bad. His bowling isn't too shabby either - he bowled Lara today and generally had a good spell. I would keep him in the side and hope he develops a la Flintoff.

[high_on_linseed]

I dont think Harmison is a one day bowler, and I dont see the point in bowling him in one-dayers. Plus, as Ive said before why risk our prized test asset picking up injuries in the One-Day arena, when hes not very good at it anyway. If he could bowl a consistent length and line for a whole day like Pollock and McGrath, Id say, "ok, go for it", but he cant and I dont see the point.

Secondly, Batty and Giles - what the hell are they even doing there, especially Batty. You gotta give Blackwell his run, he is as econmical as both, and though he will get out for low scores, pretty often, now and again hes gonna explode with the bat and win a match on his own. Dont see the point in playing Flintoff AND Clarke either. For the money, my first eleven would be:

Tres, Vaughan, Strauss (maybe), Collingwood, Flintoff, Read, Blackwell, C Tremlett, Johnson, Jon Lewis, Anderson.

Youll note hardly any of the bowlers used in the current Caribbean squad would be in my eleven. I am reluctanct to include Anderson, but hope that through bowling in ODIs he will learn to mix in variations with length and line, and REALLY develop into the prospect everyone thinks he should be. Richard Johnson and Jon Lewis have been the best English one-day bowlers for ages now. Gough is past it. Tremlett is a young test prospect who is pretty accurate. We can see how he copes with pressure by playing him in ODIs.

For back up, I would be looking at Will Jefferson (maybe), Scott Newman (maybe), Ian Bell, Mark Wagh, Rikki Clarke, Ryan Sidebottom. Again because these guys are the future, with a few to bringing them into future test squads, apart from perhaps Sidebottom who is an out-and-out one day campaigner.

[Mike_Hock]

I disagree, and I think Harmison should play as we don't have any better options, and he is by far our best bowler at the moment. That must make him one of the first names on the sheet.
I believe Vaughan should play as he IS a quality batsman and he will come good at some point. Also he is doing a decent job at captaining the side.
Rachael makes a good point about us not having a quality spinner in the ODI team and I tend to agree, BUT I feel that spinners get targeted in ODI's (exception of Warne & Murali), and therefore if we don't have a real quality spinner, why play one? Blackwell and Vaughan can bowl a few overs of spin if required.
Does anyone else feel that Strauss is starting to fit very nicely into the team? I agree it would be great to have Thorpe back, but that doesn't seem likely. Strauss seems to be doing very well working the ball around at a strike rate of around 70-80, could be the answer to a few problems if we dropped him down to 4 and Flintoff promoted to 3. I beleive the no.3 batsman should be able to take advantage of the fielding restrictions in the first 15. Flintoff is not a no.4.

Rikki Clarke looked out of place when given the chance to build an innings yesterday. He seemed to favour the on-side considerably and from past innings he seems to like the sweep shot a lot. The jury is still out. Did ok with the ball though, and has a decent slower ball. I think we should persevere through the summer with him.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by sostenurter

Butcher is a different matter though - I haven't heard him say he doesn't want to play ODIs - I have heard him say that he's fed up being a "pub quiz" question (only player to play lots of Tests and no ODIs, etc). Given that he bowls quite handy medium pace as well, I think he should be given a go. The only argument agains tthis is that his fielding is atrocious.

OK.. the easy one first: Butcher is not the most reliable starter in the world - he is more likely to have a run of innings that run 6, 0, 119, 8, 72, 41 than he is to get a run that reads 41, 39, 40, 44, 52, 30 (same average)... and that makes him pretty well the complete opposite of the guys Fletcher likes to see in the ODI squad (like Tresco and Collingwood).

If we played a decent top 5 (say Knight, Tresco, Butcher, Thorpe, Collingwood) I don't think that would matter... but with Vaughan not pulling his weight, Strauss feeling his way, and Collingwood the only other frontline batsmen... we'd be shooting ourselves in the foot.

Re: his fielding, though - there was a time when Butcher was considered one of the best fielders England had ever had.. and he still pulls off a lot of absolute blinders. The periodic lapses in concentration are a recent thing.. and I can only guess they have been brought about by three years of Test cricket in which the likelyhood of us delivering a wicket-taking delivery has dropped to the infinitessimal.

I'm told that the trick with fielding is to expect the ball every delivery... and in a ODI (unlike, say, in the midst of Lara's quadruple century, or in the midst of the mammoth Sri Lanka innings in Columbo) you can't really help doing that... so I certainly wouldn't see that as an issue.

[Rachael]

OK: spinners in ODI games.

Gayle showed the way in this current series: he seems to have been the best bowler by an absolute mile (econ figures, wickets).. and that's without actually being rated as being more than an occasional bowler.

This isn't an unusual situation: taking the pace off the ball often seems to be enough to stem the run-rate, even if the deliveries aren't that good... hence guys like Trescothick can do damage limitation exercises.

I'm not sure how often Australia have managed more than 20 overs of spin in a match.. but I think they at least toyed with 3 spinners for some of the ODI in Sri Lanka. AS I recall, their opponents DID play three spinners. On those tracks I think we should as well: Giles, Batty and A.N.Other (please not Blackwell).

I'm not in favour of playing a spinner for the sake of it.. but on the right track I don't see we have any alternative to playing at least 2 of them: where Harmison, Gough, Flintoff, Anderson and Clarke are going to get murdered... you take guys who are merely going to get bashed about a bit.