ODI series

[glyn]

The lack of as thread on this series is probably a reflection of how (a) anti-climactic 7 ODIs after the Ashes is (b) how irrelevant 50 over cricket has become and (c) how terribly England have batted.

Our continuously poor ODI performances is a scandal. The worrying thing is that with around 10 more ODIs to come straight after this one including the Champions Trophy I can't see even a 6-1 or 7-0 defeat lead to wholesale changes in the team and attitude.

 

[Redditch Fox]

England are having breakfast, lunch and dinner on the back of a test series victory over a mediocre Aussies side which had lost half a team of top players.

The ECB have pocketed the takings for the ODI series and will be happy enough but I worry about the future.

Generally, test cricket is in decline and the 50 over game isn't an attractive format (40 over cricket is massively more popular amongst counties memberships as proven by attendances compared with the 50 over game). The popularity of T20 isn't going to last very long in my opinion. Take away the iconic England v Australia factor and I fear for the international game. England v Bangladesh test match in early season at Old Trafford!! I wonder what ticket prices they think appropriate for that total non-event?

 

[fox58]

there has been talk of changing the formatt and having 4 innings of 25 overs.




http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/content/current/story/424523.html

 

[Redditch Fox]

there has been talk of changing the formatt and having 4 innings of 25 overs.

http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/content/current/story/424523.html

This has the merit of making winning the toss less important but there is a basic problem with 50 overs a side with or without the potential change in format in that for county matches in that spectators appear to think that the game is too long and studies of attendances between the 50 overs and 40 overs competitions seem to substantiate that. The 40 overs a side format is particularly popular for Sunday afternoon county games.

I realise that the players and PCA would generally prefer the 50 over format because it looks like better preparation and potential to make the break through to selection for ODIs. However, it doesn't appear to have done much good so far in respect of preparing players for the England ODI teams.

I think one of the problems that we have is that the standard of county cricket is now generally poor partly because the top English players rarely play for their counties and so when new players are introduced to ODIs against quality teams - eg against a bowler like Brett Lee then they find it difficult to cope with the step up. For instance, with the exception of Steve Harmison where are the real pacey bowlers in the county game?

 

[Brauny Blue]

We are shite at ODI's.

Have been for years, and still never improve.:icon_conf

 

[glyn]

We are shite at ODI's.

Have been for years, and still never improve.:icon_conf

17 years, since we got ourselves to the 1992 WC final thanks to some fantastic rain-affected shenanigans in the semi-final :icon_bigg

 

[Fox From The Hudd]

I find it difficult to understand he selectors logic -

Eoin Morgan is a better than Jonathan Trott?

Rashid is our best player in the first match and is then dropped for the next two?

I don't see 50 over cricket is that specialist - you still have time to build an innings if you have enough about you - we should give Cook another go - we have no quality once Strauss has gone...

 

[Brauny Blue]

17 years, since we got ourselves to the 1992 WC final thanks to some fantastic rain-affected shenanigans in the semi-final :icon_bigg

Was that the SA game where they needed something like a very attainable 22 off 2 overs. Then because of the rain they wiped off most of the remaining deliveries that they had available.
If so, i cant believe that it was 17yrs ago:icon_eek:

 

[Redditch Fox]

I find it difficult to understand he selectors logic -

Eoin Morgan is a better than Jonathan Trott?

Rashid is our best player in the first match and is then dropped for the next two?

I don't see 50 over cricket is that specialist - you still have time to build an innings if you have enough about you - we should give Cook another go - we have no quality once Strauss has gone...

I agree. The way they try to bat in test cricket these days with run rates often up to 4 an over, there doesn't seem that much difference to the batting in 50 over cricket.

The selectors do seem to have got mixed up. It's difficult to see how Trott (another South African) can be selected for Test and T/20 formats and not be in the ODI squad and at the same time out of form players keep getting picked.

With Pieterson injured, the series has confirmed our lack of batting talent. It's a good job that the captaincy seems to have boosted Strauss's form.

 

[glyn]

Was that the SA game where they needed something like a very attainable 22 off 2 overs. Then because of the rain they wiped off most of the remaining deliveries that they had available.
If so, i cant believe that it was 17yrs ago:icon_eek:

It was. One of the first games I ever saw on Sky!

 

[Brauny Blue]

On the way to 5-0.

Cant even defend 299:icon_roll

Aussies making it look easy.

 

[glyn]

They are coasting.

 

[Brauny Blue]

The Aussie batting line-up is far too good for our mediocre bowling

 

[Brauny Blue]

Aussies 4wkts down.

Just trying to keep the fans in the ground, before they stroll to the winning line.

 

[Brauny Blue]

Ponting just out.

Aussies need 39 off 36 with 4wkts left.

 

[Brauny Blue]

Aussies win to take 5-0 lead.

Easily chased down the total, with the Aussies always keeping in touch with the run rate. If it was the other way around, we would have lost wkts at regular intervals, fell behind the run rate and fecked it up.

England are shite at this ODI stuff.

 

[fosseboy83]

wank

 

[Brauny Blue]

wank

Good idea :icon_bigg

 

[fosseboy83]

Good idea :icon_bigg

:icon_lol: get rid of some the tension

 

[manxfox]

I'm going down the bridge tomorrow - I expect it to be a cold and dissappointing experience