This English team is a real deal

Yest they have lost the first two ODIs. But the team has substance. For a start KP is impressive with his leadership, this particularly after having seen Ponting in action and the way he carried on.

They may not win either the test of ODI series in India but will get better with each match and get closer and closer. Given that this is a very good Indian team at home and riding very high on confidence that is not a bad feat.

Their spinning stock is weak particularly in the ODI arena. Guys like Patel will struggle to get into a second state elven on the evidence we have seen so far. Wonder if Monty would have been the better option despite his fielding and batting weaknesses.

They are in general an athletic team and have a very good pace attack. On friendly surfaces they will be quite a handful. Good batting strength as well although not sure of Bell and Collingwood on this tour.

If the current Aussie and English teams were to face off in India the English would come up trumps by the looks of it.

Did you watch the first ODI Josh?

Josh Carney wrote:Their spinning stock is weak particularly in the ODI arena. Guys like Patel will struggle to get into a second state elven on the evidence we have seen so far. Wonder if Monty would have been the better option despite his fielding and batting weaknesses.

He doesn't really have the variation in his bowling to be a good one-day spinner at the moment. In his JAMODI appearances to date he hasn't done that badly but not really provided much of a wicket-taking threat, and that combined with his lack of ability with the bat and in the field has meant they have favoured spinning all-rounders. Still think Swann has been unlucky, as he's primarily a bowler who can bat as opposed to Patel who is a batsman who bowls, and we shouldn't be desperate for the extra batting having a specialist batsman wasted down at number 8!

On the right pitches the pace attack does look potentially better than it has for a long time. With Flintoff finding some batting form again the middle order has a lot to offer as well but the ongoing problem is the opening pair. Nothing we've tried there has really worked. And with Bell, Bopara and Shah in there you're guaranteed a run-out or two.

So this England ODI side is competitive on its day but I can't see them winning series or tournaments against the big teams on a regular basis, particularly away from home.

Josh Carney wrote:Yest they have lost the first two ODIs. But the team has substance. For a start KP is impressive with his leadership, this particularly after having seen Ponting in action and the way he carried on.

They may not win either the test of ODI series in India but will get better with each match and get closer and closer. Given that this is a very good Indian team at home and riding very high on confidence that is not a bad feat.

Their spinning stock is weak particularly in the ODI arena. Guys like Patel will struggle to get into a second state elven on the evidence we have seen so far. Wonder if Monty would have been the better option despite his fielding and batting weaknesses.

They are in general an athletic team and have a very good pace attack. On friendly surfaces they will be quite a handful. Good batting strength as well although not sure of Bell and Collingwood on this tour.

If the current Aussie and English teams were to face off in India the English would come up trumps by the looks of it.

Agreed.

Missed the 1st two ODIs but what i saw of them in ENG they were fantastic in ODIs and not too far away from being really good in tests.

England are the same old wank-stain of before. Cronyism, rubbish coaches, bits and pieces players, cricketers who are inexplicably marginalised and/or ostracized for reasons not based on talent. Numpty selectors, numpty coach, better captain but driven too much by his 'mates' to realise that he alone is great enough to be 'up there'.

Average Test side, average ODI side. Will often compete with decent sides but more often than not lose and prone far too often to embarrass themselves inexplicably against less-than-decent sides.

Augustus wrote:"England are the same old wank-stain of before. Cronyism, rubbish coaches, bits and pieces players, cricketers who are inexplicably marginalised and/or ostracized for reasons not based on talent. Numpty selectors, numpty coach, better captain but driven too much by his 'mates' to realise that he alone is great enough to be 'up there'.

Average Test side, average ODI side. Will often compete with decent sides but more often than not lose and prone far too often to embarrass themselves inexplicably against less-than-decent sides." - Was England Coach Peter Moores' frank assessment of England's performance in the first 2 games. "I know i'm a wanky breathed 'yes man' who enjoys the sight of Sussex players frolicking around fields, so therefore I have decided to take my 500,000 quid, resign as England coach, and retire to my cottage near the county ground at Hove, where I can pleasure myself all day long watching Luke wright hoick his boundaries to mid wicket."

Fixed.

JKLever wrote:Did you watch the first ODI Josh?

I did they were very rusty. But that is understandable.

They've been mainly rusty for 15 years.

Right now they are the best they have been in 15 years. Give them some credit instead of taking the pessimistic route all the time.

Based on what? a 4-0 victory against an unmotivated South African side who's hearts and minds were on the plane home already?

At least KP hasn't pulled out the 'we're a young side' excuse yet. That wouldn't wash considering that India are even younger.

Amazing how benevolent people can be about the opposition's quality - particularly when your side is beating them.

Just think, if england are the real deal than how farkin good must India be?

Not that good, they only just beat Oz and we are "absolutley shite" according to general consensus . . .

The fact is, the same problems that have plagued England in ODI cricket since before I can remember still remain- A lack of aggression at the top of the order, an inability to stop the boundaries with the ball during the powerplays, and the lack of a killer instinct when the opposition is on the ropes, which allows them to recover from dicey positions.

Nothing's changed, really.

tac wrote:Not that good, they only just beat Oz and we are "absolutley shite" according to general consensus . . .

it's about time you started seeing sense horrie

G.Wood wrote:

tac wrote:Not that good, they only just beat Oz and we are "absolutley shite" according to general consensus . . .

it's about time you started seeing sense horrie

Nice . . . coming from you Para . . .

skully wrote:Amazing how benevolent people can be about the opposition's quality - particularly when your side is beating them.

We haven't beaten them yet. Just started well. Long way to go.

edit.

Typical subi talking up the opposition while beating them.

Stay tuned for India are the no 1 ODI side when they win series.

Yeah probably 6-1.

[quote="taipan"]Typical subi talking up the opposition while beating them.Quote Taips


Thanks for the hint.I had it balls up

I agree with Josh. If they can get the opening partnership fixed, they can be a formidable ODI side. The reason the English supporters are so pessimistic is because their ODI side has been tosh for a decade and more. They lack confidence that their side can be a very good ODI side. But from a neutral point of view, there are 8-9 really good players in that team, with 1 world-class all-rounder, and 2-3 capable ODI all-rounders. All they need to do is to plug-in the 1 or 2 weaker areas and play with confidence.

I think cronyism exists in English cricket because most of the English fans are of the 'sun and wine' type who are basically into watching cricket because it's a lifestyle option on lazy afternoons .. they do not care to put pressure on the English board to get its game together.

all bits and pieces players are a result of this oversight .. aggressive ODI types like Nixon and Mal Loye get ignored for eons and stay on the sidelines until too late.