The 5-live crew of Arlo White, Simon Mann and Johnny Saunders have never really convinced me that they have great appreciation of the subtleties of great batting, bowling, fielding or glovework: their summarisers are damn good... but the lead acts seem to be involved principally for their (over-valued) capacity to waffle.

Their effort to master an all time England XI and RoW XI suggests as much: the only places that should have been guaranteed in the top order would presumably be Knight (the guy to judge the pitch), Hick (the innings-builder), Gower (the class for the crucial no 4 role) and Fairbrother (the finisher) - all were ommitted.

I've nothing against such highly effective ODI players as Graham Gooch, Marcus Trescothick, Robin Smith, Kevin Pietersen and Allan Lamb... and would include one or two... but collectively they were surely 'fans' picks (good to watch) rather than 'coach' picks (definite picks): I'd actually consider having Thorpe in ahead of any of them!

Now... Knott should surely get the nod over Stewart in ODI cricket on the basis that the glovework is crtical in the short form of the game (where there's often no slip in place and extras are so critical). Moreover.. if Stewat IS to get the nod... then surely it should be as Knight's opening partner (allowing Thorpe, Pietersen or Lamb into the middle order).

That leave 5 spots... and it's no surprise that the "boys own" brigade of bowlers join "boys own" batsmen: sure, there's a strong case for Flintoff, Botham, Gough, Willis and Underwood... but there's also a strong case for notable ODI bowlers like Hendrick, Fraser and Marks.

There's much that was terribly trashy about the World XI discussions as well.... with Lara of all people being a marginal candidate (I'm not sure he even made the cut)... Warne being preferred to Murali (quite openly because he's more of a boy's own hero than because he has a stronger ODI record)... and hesitation about Joel Garner and McGrath!

To be honest, Rachael, the 5 live picks were a load of rubbish! As you say there is no way i would have left out Knight, Fairbrother, Hick and possibly Thorpe. What about someone like Mark Ealham a great ODI bowler - with a decent record. And I could easily have also put in Fraser for Willis. They havent put any thought into the structure of the team.

I propose, we discuss and nominate our own teams. Hopefully it will spark a nice debate .

My ENG XI

Knight
Stewart +
Hick
Gower
Fairbrother
Pieterson
Flintoff
Botham
Ealham
Gough
Underwood

Although I cant help feeling i should squeeze Tres, Gooch, Smith, Thorpe, Fraser and Defreitas in there and i dont know who would captain . I suppose of the batters Gower would be the first to make way but i would never back against him scoring runs quickly against any attack and in his youth he was a fantastic fielder.

I never thought picking XI would be quite as difficult maybe an alltime XIII .

And no, i havent thought of a world XI yet i'm still wondering if my ENG XI is right.

__________________
Mark.

Well.. I'd might stick Gooch at the top of the order, and then pick Knott / Taylor as a specialist 'keeper. I'd rather NOT choose Gooch... but I'm not sure who I'd push up the order to open in order to accomodate Thorpe / Randall at 6: I'm not sure you can experiment with Beefy as a pinch hitter in an XI like this.

Lower down the order.. Willis strikes me as the only certainty. Lots of seamers would be in contention... including Fraser, DeFreitas and Ealham.... but I'd want two first rate slip catchers to join Hick in the cordon as well as some additional batting.... so Botham and Flintoff might get in first (though in a side based around finding gaps and on sharp running between the wickets from Knight, Gower and Fairbrother... Flintoff in particular would be incongruous)... and after that I think Hendrick would get the nod, not least for his superb close-fielding... leaving one spot for Underwood.

Gooch
Knight (short leg)
Hick (gully, slip when Botham / Flintoff bowling)
Gower
Fairbrother (point)
Botham (1st slip)
Flintoff (2nd slip)
Knott / Taylor ('keeper)
Hendrick (short extra cover)
Willis
Underwood

My occasional bowling options would be Gooch and Hick.. but they shouldn't really be needed much.

ps. the fielding looks awesome... but for 12th man and beyond I'd have Randall and Collingwood to patrol the covers and Chris Lewis to patrol the leg side

The team looks awesome never mind the fielding, I don't think that side you picked would have got beat 5-0 in Australia.

Hendrick was the best example of medium pace at it's best - he gave nothing away, but I remember he could be a cumbersome fielder.

Sorry for being OFF Topic-but I could not resist that team

__________________
Ern

There's nothing in Hendrick's profile about his fielding.. but check this out:See CRICKETER OF THE YEAR - 1978.

Willis? With a strike rate of 44.93. If you look at world class bowlers it should be about 29.00 or 30.00. Tests maybe but not ODI's.

Yes I agree having seen him play many times - I meant he was a lumbering outfielder when placed there.

He did not have the best of strike rates, but with his econ rate he put lots of pressure on batsmen, and other bowlers got the rewards.

England have got nothing like him - Mr Dependable.

__________________
Ern

I don't understand - a strike rate of 44.93 is first class these days, compare to Hoggard with a SR of 55.37.

For a bowler of his type, i don't think a less SR was possible.

__________________
Ern

Willis took 80 ODI wickets at 24.6 in 64 matches and his 3595 deliveries went for just 1968 runs: that's sensational. The strike rate is better than Malcolm Marshall's and Courtney Walsh's... and he went at just 3.28 / over - that's one of THE great ODI economy rates in the history of the game (actually 4th on the list, but marginally ahead of Hadlee, significantly ahead of Ambrose and Lillee and a full run an over better than even very tidy ODI bowlers like Gough and Flintoff).

I appreciate that Anderson, Gough and Harmison (amongst others) have a better career strike rate.. but if Ambrose (surely a candidate for an all-time World XI) is considered a great ODI bowler with a strike rate of 41.5... I think I can safely say that if I were to drop a bowler it would NOT be Willis for his 44.9!

ps. Strike rates are massively influenced by WHEN one conventionally bowls ina ODI: Caddick did awesomely well to muster 42.5 because he'd generally bowl at least 8 overs (and often all 10) straight off with the new ball at the world's best ODI batsmen. Gough's 35.9 was aided by always bowling at the death... when tail enders would routinely gift him wickets by giving themselves room to slog!

Ernest I am talking about ODI strike rates.