Well Mike if England did get this far at to having a team of specialists one day players - then why - o why then start putting Test players back into the one day side?.
I have been saying this on this forum long before the 2005 Ashes series, and things seem to have got worse.

In Fletchers case he is in a possition to do somthing about this situation, while Ponting is only a captain - not a coach he could bring his playesr to the point of rebelion, bith are only IMO paying lip service to a serious situation.

If your first sentance quote above ever came to pass, then by just looking deeper into your post about what Flintoff will have to play between now and the World Cup, then the solution to me is so obvious.

Forsake Englands best chance of winning this World Cup (probably don't have a chance in any case) and press on with these new player, with sights set on the Next World Cup.

One step further, I could suggest a new coach for the England one day set up - Darron Gough.

If my post makes any sence, then that means it has little chance of ever coming to fruition, because I fear short term success and money, will always be the aim of the ECB.

__________________
Ern

I would counter this whole idea on a couple of points, in the last few years the entire England squad has gone through a rebuilding process, which has resulted in a much stronger test team. The ODI side is a little behind that but has been hampered by injury problems. The burnout issue is being addressed by central contracts which take the key players out of county action.

The England team which has played in Pakistan and India in the ODI's has I think been largely aimed at the world cup with rather less attntion to winning the immediate competitions. Note that England have played only 1 spinner in the ODI's and have instead used the opportunity to blood and test some of the younger seamers Mahmood and Plunkett who may potentially feature in the West Indies this coming winter. We could easily have played Batty and Blackwell and potentially have improved our immediate chances, but we would have learned less about Mahmood, Anderson and Plunketts ability to perform under pressure by doing so.

So in short no we have not treated these ODI very seriously, but the question I would raise is have we just used them as training and warm up matches for a number of the peripheral players ahead of the world cup?

Well then CPCT this raises a couple of issues, why bother playing the Test players if England are not taking the one day series seriously, some young batsmen could also have been tried alongside Mahmood and Plunkett if this was the case.
And more to the point, the critics who say that England are doing just that are being proved to be right, if that is the case.

However I still think it's more simple than that, England were outclassed, and would liked to of been on a winning run on the build up to the World Cup.

__________________
Ern

England have a history of resting key ODI players when on tour and then play their full-strength side at home. For example, Flintoff didn't play in the ODI series in South Africa in Jan-Feb 2005, Harmison played just two matches. Only 7 players played all 7 matches. Only 5 players on this tour in India have played in all ODIs. I think we'll see our main side together again at some stage this summer - probably against Pakistan. It will be interesting to see who they select for the Champions Trophy in India later this year.

Harmison was starting to show signs of elusive home sickness problem so he left home to be with his family.

Flintoff was getting a bone spur taken out of his ankle, hardly resting players, more making sure they don't ruin their careers. Flintoff was making sure he had a chance to play in the Ashes. It was forced through injury, not because he was tired or anything.

__________________
Watch this for a perfect about.
James May

Point is England are always doing that on away tours which is why they have such a poor away record. I'd prefer they selected a specialist ODI side for the sake of consistency and for the fans who are losing interest in experimental sides. I'm also sure that India aren't happy beating a second-string side. I'm sure they would prefer tougher competition.

__________________
Administrator

Englands players getting homesickness on these away tours does seem a little ridiculous when they expect teams to come to their country to play.. ODIS then Tests then 3 days series all in a row... like Pakistan will soon when they go to england. Maybe the english lads are a bit too coddled... and why in gods name dont they enjoy ODIs is beyond me... they can certainly play well when their hearts are in it... but they seem to be quite fickle when it comes to spirit..and for those people on here who keep insisting that Test matches are the only way to go... how will one manage a team who plays only test matches financially??? I dont think flintoff would like a cut in his salary.. because if the England team plays less ODIS then they will be marginalized.. the sub continent team's will not be interested in Test tours only i can tell you that... and that is where the money is.. the sub continent..
and without money... well you know what drives any sport these days

The England management's job is primarily to keep the England fans happy. Given the choice would we rather retain the ashes down under or win the world cup? Both would be fantastic (literally!!) but as a straight choice its no contest. Ashes for me every time and I would hazzard a guess 95% of all England fans would agree

Not even a minor concern: the team exists as the pinacle of a domestic game.... it exists for the benefit of those hundreds of England-qualified players who ply their trade in the county championship.... it exists as a vehicle for the best of them to Test themselves against the best of the rest.

If others happen to find these efforts interesting... or style themselves as "fans"... that's a personal matter for those individuals: it has no bearing whatsoever on what the England management exists to facilitate.

The reason the England management should be more focussed on Test cricket is simply this: those England-qualified players who participate in domestic cricket are overwhelmingly focussed on that format - to the point, in many cases, of treating their own pyjama cricket as little more than light relief between the "real" business.

Nothing wrong with that: seems to show sensible judgement about which is the more interesting game.

Sorry Rachael, but it would be very naive of the England management to completely disregard whether fans are happy. I can see why you make your point i.e. the management should make their decisions based on their cricketing judgement, not popular support. But if fans are unhappy, they end up leaving the game. And without the fans, there will be no money to support the structures that are in place. Hence, no fans equals no England management team, because they will have all gone back to being amateur volunteers.

__________________
Just what is going off out there?