England v New Zealand, 5xODI + 1xT20, 9-23 Jun, 2015

Morgan for Prime Minister.

Does anyone here remember Ian Bell opening for England in ODI's? No, neither do I.

Morgan for a pint of Guinness.

Dello wrote:Morgan for Prime Minister.

Unfortunately you have to be British (presumably) for that job...

Not sure we should be picking the Test side based on this, anyway, although form and momentum is always worth considering. Fast-tracking players into the longer game based on one-day form has a mixed record historically, for every Trescothick there's been a couple of Hollioakes... Morgan needs some consistent FC runs before he gets another shot at it. Hales is perhaps nearer the front of the cab rank if a batting place does become available. And Cook probably won't want Morgan as he would be someone who could potentially undermine his captaincy position...

beamer wrote:

Dello wrote:Morgan for Prime Minister.

Unfortunately you have to be British (presumably) for that job...

Not sure we should be picking the Test side based on this, anyway, although form and momentum is always worth considering. Fast-tracking players into the longer game based on one-day form has a mixed record historically, for every Trescothick there's been a couple of Hollioakes... Morgan needs some consistent FC runs before he gets another shot at it. Hales is perhaps nearer the front of the cab rank if a batting place does become available. .And Cook probably won't want Morgan as he would be someone who could potentially undermine his captaincy position..

Cook's doing quite well enough in that regard without any help

Basil wrote:Does anyone here remember Ian Bell opening for England in ODI's? No, neither do I.

Hmm. You need a solid base at the top. You need to keep wickets in hand for the death overs.

Yeah, you need three or four accumulators, who can potentially bat through the innings at a strike rate of 70 (or alternatively, chip one to cover for a 50-ball 30). Just have one explosive matchwinner in the top five, to ensure he has the maximum amount of pressure on him every time he walks out to bat. Build a solid base with wickets in hand, to make sure your lower order hitters have to find their range from the very first ball. Get to somewhere near 270, if it all works out, because that wins the majority of games, doesn't it?

I don't know what they've done with the English One-Day Cricket Coaching Manual. Maybe Peter Moores threw it on the bonfire when he left the building. Although it only appears to have been Volume 1: Batting that has been shredded. Thankfully the Bowling and Fielding volumes are still being carried out pretty much to perfection.

England in a canter, ay? Well done them. 350 is the new 250.

I'm surprised no team has yet managed 450, looking at the ODI record books. It's coming, though. Nearly 20% of the scores of 350 and above in ODI history have been achieved this year!

All praise to the openers. Their start gave Root and Morgan absolute freedom to play as they like without any scoreboard pressure.

****** me dead. this is parallel universe stuff. or maybe im just dreaming...no a dream would be more pleasant and have more booze and sex in it

Morgan's turnaround in this series from the washed-up wreck in the WC has been remarkable.

It may just be "form", of course, a fickle beast. But it's hard to think he has not benefited more than anyone from being released from his usual anxious role @ 5 or 6, where he would be asked both desperately to hang on to his wicket at all costs (generally after 3 or 4 drawn-out and/or tame dismissals), and desperately to rescue the day with a clatter of lusty blows. An immobilising position.

I presume Middlesex man Strauss's evident faith in the captain, has done little harm either. And Farbrace/Bayliss's backing for an adventurous approach, too.

Basil wrote:All praise to the openers. Their start gave Root and Morgan absolute freedom to play as they like without any scoreboard pressure.

Hit the nail on the head. With Cook/Bell/Trott then scoreboard pressure was always on the people coming in next and they had no choice but to slog it out.

I'm actually a bit angry as to how long we persisted with that method.

Thank fark we have joined the 21st century.

skully wrote:England in a canter, ay? Well done them. 350 is the new 250.

Yeah, bit tiresome really. Apart from the novelty of England attacking from the start, this series is just highlighting again how desperately lopsided ODIs are. I don't know how long 100 over 20-20s will help ODIs maintain any identity they have.

Well played England. That was a superbly managed chase.

I think there's still a bit of a difference and I'm all for it. I don't think 350 is the norm just yet, there's only been 4 times in history a 350+ score has been chased. This has been an incredible series but I don't think we can yet say that this is definitely going to be the norm.

What's the highest aggregate runs for a 5 match ODI series?

I mean unless the next match has a 100 all out 1st innings I feel like it's almost a rhetorical question...

Can't take anything away from the chase. That was brilliant. The number of 350+ innings that occur these days, and often the chasing team succumbs meekly.

The past world cup too saw huge totals and the team batting first often cruise to victory. But 350s are becoming far too common imo. Maybe it's just a personal case of too much cricket....

PeterCS wrote:Morgan's turnaround in this series from the washed-up wreck in the WC has been remarkable.

It may just be "form", of course, a fickle beast. But it's hard to think he has not benefited more than anyone from being released from his usual anxious role @ 5 or 6, where he would be asked both desperately to hang on to his wicket at all costs (generally after 3 or 4 drawn-out and/or tame dismissals), and desperately to rescue the day with a clatter of lusty blows. An immobilising position.

I presume Middlesex man Strauss's evident faith in the captain, has done little harm either. And Farbrace/Bayliss's backing for an adventurous approach, too.

I honestly think it goes to show what an absolutely infectious disease Alastair Cook was. He was absolutely killing every facet of English cricket that he was involved in. Then he had the temerity to come out and say that England would've fared better in the WC with him at the helm. An absolute f*cking disgrace. Abhorrent. Loathsome creature.

tricycle wrote:Can't take anything away from the chase. That was brilliant. The number of 350+ innings that occur these days, and often the chasing team succumbs meekly.

The past world cup too saw huge totals and the team batting first often cruise to victory. But 350s are becoming far too common imo. Maybe it's just a personal case of too much cricket....

I'm with you, but I'm wondering more whether it's a dearth of ODI bowling talent? The likes of Trent Boult and Mitchell Starc, good ODI bowlers, show us that it's possible to keep runs tight / take wickets regularly.

Brass Monkey wrote:

PeterCS wrote:Morgan's turnaround in this series from the washed-up wreck in the WC has been remarkable.

It may just be "form", of course, a fickle beast. But it's hard to think he has not benefited more than anyone from being released from his usual anxious role @ 5 or 6, where he would be asked both desperately to hang on to his wicket at all costs (generally after 3 or 4 drawn-out and/or tame dismissals), and desperately to rescue the day with a clatter of lusty blows. An immobilising position.

I presume Middlesex man Strauss's evident faith in the captain, has done little harm either. And Farbrace/Bayliss's backing for an adventurous approach, too.

I honestly think it goes to show what an absolutely infectious disease Alastair Cook was. He was absolutely killing every facet of English cricket that he was involved in. Then he had the temerity to come out and say that England would've fared better in the WC with him at the helm. An absolute f*cking disgrace. Abhorrent. Loathsome creature.

I think the toxicity of English cricket goes deeper than just Cook. There are a number of other English stalwarts not playing in this series.

taipan wrote:

Brass Monkey wrote:

PeterCS wrote:Morgan's turnaround in this series from the washed-up wreck in the WC has been remarkable.

It may just be "form", of course, a fickle beast. But it's hard to think he has not benefited more than anyone from being released from his usual anxious role @ 5 or 6, where he would be asked both desperately to hang on to his wicket at all costs (generally after 3 or 4 drawn-out and/or tame dismissals), and desperately to rescue the day with a clatter of lusty blows. An immobilising position.

I presume Middlesex man Strauss's evident faith in the captain, has done little harm either. And Farbrace/Bayliss's backing for an adventurous approach, too.

I honestly think it goes to show what an absolutely infectious disease Alastair Cook was. He was absolutely killing every facet of English cricket that he was involved in. Then he had the temerity to come out and say that England would've fared better in the WC with him at the helm. An absolute f*cking disgrace. Abhorrent. Loathsome creature.

I think the toxicity of English cricket goes deeper than just Cook. There are a number of other English stalwarts not playing in this series.

Not saying that he's the sole problem, but at the end of the day it boils down to the captain: his utilisation of the given resources, his input in the choice of said resources, his environment

Oh agreed. But Cook was not ever going to take on Jimmy, Broad, Prior and the rest.

Saw the highlights this morning ... after catching a few minutes infrequently at Ascot yesterday.

What a chase ... what a game!
Who'da thought 350 could be chased down ...?!

Played Williamson, Hales, Morgs and Rootie.
Fair weather, no swing, flat track, small boundaries, big bats ... who the hell would want to be a bowler!!

Sets it up nicely for Durham.

Yes, a veritable run fest this series has been but at least England has shown it can be positive and you're allowed to aim for something over 240.

Also shows that there is life beyond KP!

Maybe they always had some attacking, innovative players but they were kept well hidden.

taipan wrote:Oh agreed. But Cook was not ever going to take on Jimmy, Broad, Prior and the rest.

Then he's a weak captain. We captaincy breeds weak tactics and a week mentality. Not the sort of captaincy you'd want in a bitter tussle.

Brass Monkey wrote:

PeterCS wrote:Morgan's turnaround in this series from the washed-up wreck in the WC has been remarkable.

It may just be "form", of course, a fickle beast. But it's hard to think he has not benefited more than anyone from being released from his usual anxious role @ 5 or 6, where he would be asked both desperately to hang on to his wicket at all costs (generally after 3 or 4 drawn-out and/or tame dismissals), and desperately to rescue the day with a clatter of lusty blows. An immobilising position.

I presume Middlesex man Strauss's evident faith in the captain, has done little harm either. And Farbrace/Bayliss's backing for an adventurous approach, too.

I honestly think it goes to show what an absolutely infectious disease Alastair Cook was. He was absolutely killing every facet of English cricket that he was involved in. Then he had the temerity to come out and say that England would've fared better in the WC with him at the helm. An absolute f*cking disgrace. Abhorrent. Loathsome creature.

Thankfully recent performances should mean he will be no where near the ODI for the rest of his career. Worst influence on our ODI team in the last decade.