England player ODI stats

Well, some of them. Ravi Bopara averages 28 after 45 games, Matt Prior averages 24 after 45 games, Luke Wright averages 22 with the bat and 43 with the ball after 21 games, and Owais Shah averages 30 after 64 games. You just can't win ODI's with those sort of numbers. Yet all of those guys are going to the Champions Trophy.

In fairness to me, I've been slagging all of these players apart from Owais Shah off ever since they were selected. England's selectors are loyal to a bunch of shit-hound, prototype cricketers. Luke Wright is firmly in the clique now and will never be out of it. Ravi Bopara's worse than Ian Bell for God's sake. Matt Prior doesn't seem to have any idea about how to construct a OD innings. And don't get me started on James Anderson.

When everyone is fully fit i'd have-

Strauss
Davies+
Pietersen
Trott
Collingwood
Flintoff
Broad
Rashid
Swann
Bresnan
Sidebottom

We don't score enough hundreds, and far too many 20's and 30's.

Trotts omission is a total joke really. I guess they didn't pick him for this series because they couldn't include him in the chumpions trophy rubbish. Is that right?

So, since when did the ICCCCCTTT thing become so important that we pick substandard players instead?

JKLever wrote:We don't score enough hundreds, and far too many 20's and 30's.

Trotts omission is a total joke really. I guess they didn't pick him for this series because they couldn't include him in the chumpions trophy rubbish. Is that right?

So, since when did the ICCCCCTTT thing become so important that we pick substandard players instead?

They could have included him, as they were entitled to replace Flintoff from the original squad. But they went for the extra bowler instead in Onions. Who they haven't used yet despite giving Jimmy Bage a "rest"... figure that one out.

I guess there's no way they are going to call up players who aren't going to the Champions Trophy because then they would be having to go back to a group of players who had already been discarded because they had been selected in advance, not exactly good for team spirit... If you can only make changes for injuries, can we not do some rugby-style faking of injuries to get some of these muppets out?

I suppose in any case they're only going to SA to lose three games and come home, maybe we should just give up our slot in favour of a better side like Bangladesh or Ireland!

Funnily enough I rate Wright.

He is one of the few England players who tries to get on with the game.

I think Wright deserves a lot less criticism than most of the others in this series. Yes he's still a bits-and-pieces player whose batting only comes off on occasions and isn't quite a front-line bowler who can be relied upon to bowl 10 overs every time at this stage. But he's showing some intent to score runs, not pissing about at a strike rate of 60 like most of the others.

I'd be tempted to give him a go at 4 or 5 in the remaining games, just something to try and break the complete loss of momentum in the middle overs.

I think Wright has a big heart, but he's just not quite good enough.

Henry wrote:I think Wright has a big heart, but he's just not quite good enough.

Which is better than the rest of the tossers with no balls.

Yeah, I'd rather that than players who aren't quite good enough and don't seem to be giving it 100%, which goes for a lot of players in the current team! He's still young and has the chance to get better with both bat and ball. Not suggesting he's necessarily going to turn into a Test all-rounder but could be a player capable of turning the momentum of a limited-overs game.

beamer wrote:Yeah, I'd rather that than players who aren't quite good enough and don't seem to be giving it 100%, which goes for a lot of players in the current team! He's still young and has the chance to get better with both bat and ball. Not suggesting he's necessarily going to turn into a Test all-rounder but could be a player capable of turning the momentum of a limited-overs game.

Similar to Jesus Flintoff?

Henry wrote:When everyone is fully fit i'd have-

Strauss
Davies+
Pietersen
Trott
Collingwood
Flintoff
Broad
Rashid
Swann
Bresnan
Sidebottom

Strauss
Carberry
Pietersen
Collingwood
Trott
Prior+
Flintoff
Rashid
Broad
Swann
Bresnan

taipan wrote:

beamer wrote:Yeah, I'd rather that than players who aren't quite good enough and don't seem to be giving it 100%, which goes for a lot of players in the current team! He's still young and has the chance to get better with both bat and ball. Not suggesting he's necessarily going to turn into a Test all-rounder but could be a player capable of turning the momentum of a limited-overs game.

Similar to Jesus Flintoff?

Well if he's half as effective as Flintoff in any form of the game he will be an asset to the England side.

Flintoff's overall career stats are ordinary, but he produced match-winning performances, so was more valuable than someone who drifts along averaging around 40 with the bat or low 30s with the ball but rarely if ever actually influences the outcome of a game - a criticism you could aim at a few in the England setup.

Flintoff's bowling in such places as Pakistan (where the pitches are deader than the Dinosaurs) showed that he is always a useful ally to have in your ODI side.

While he might deceive with the lack of match winning efforts, he certainly keeps the batsmen thinking. Unlike other English bowlers, who relieve the pressure, Flintoff is the man you call in to tighten that loose valve that the others have re-opened.

I reckon his batting might improve with Test Cricket off his mind, along with the increasing assurance of fewer injuries, which might help him clear his mind and bat more freely. His natural game is a big hitter. 2003 style (vs SAF).

DJ_Smerk wrote:Strauss
Carberry
Pietersen
Collingwood
Trott
Prior+
Flintoff
Rashid
Broad
Swann
Bresnan

You really think Prior is anything other than a lost cause in limited overs cricket? His List A average is 26.88. It's strange to have an attacking batsman who can't play the shorter game, but I guess he just has the wrong shots for it.

I suppose you could pick him as being a better keeper than some of the alternatives... that would have been unthinkable a year or so ago! It's a bit of a trend with keeper-batsmen, you pick them for their batting, their keeping improves dramatically and then they end up being dropped because they stop scoring runs.

beamer wrote:

DJ_Smerk wrote:Strauss
Carberry
Pietersen
Collingwood
Trott
Prior+
Flintoff
Rashid
Broad
Swann
Bresnan

You really think Prior is anything other than a lost cause in limited overs cricket? His List A average is 26.88. It's strange to have an attacking batsman who can't play the shorter game, but I guess he just has the wrong shots for it.

I suppose you could pick him as being a better keeper than some of the alternatives... that would have been unthinkable a year or so ago! It's a bit of a trend with keeper-batsmen, you pick them for their batting, their keeping improves dramatically and then they end up being dropped because they stop scoring runs.

The Prior case, stems from the theory "he's either got one thing right or the other, but seemingly never both". Either his keeping is ripped to shreds and his batting shines, or vice versa. I think he needs some further momentum and opportunity, for everything to click into place in all formats. While he is still a bit of a qunt, he should be banned at batting at 3 or opener. 5 is his position.

DJ_Smerk wrote:The Prior case, stems from the theory "he's either got one thing right or the other, but seemingly never both". Either his keeping is ripped to shreds and his batting shines, or vice versa. I think he needs some further momentum and opportunity, for everything to click into place in all formats. While he is still a bit of a qunt, he should be banned at batting at 3 or opener. 5 is his position.

I still think he is a valuable batsman to have in the side at Test level, and his presence is vital to the balance of the side without Flintoff. But I just think the stats, domestic and international, categorically prove he can't play one-day cricket.

Well, he's pretty much only got Test Cricket to fall back on (never a bad thing), with Foster making the T20 role his own combined with his [Prior] ODI form which is on a downward spiral.

Might aswell continue with him for the rest of the series White Wash.

Foster making the T20 role his own? He wasn't picked for the recent Australia washouts, which suggests the selectors no longer have him in their plans.

beamer wrote:Foster making the T20 role his own? He wasn't picked for the recent Australia washouts, which suggests the selectors no longer have him in their plans.

Hmmm. Possibly. England never seemed to be settled in the Wicket keeping department.

DJ_Smerk wrote:Hmmm. Possibly. England never seemed to be settled in the Wicket keeping department.

Poor selection policy?

Whatever Prior is, he isn't an one day player and his domestic stats show that.

Some players are like that for some reason - fast scorers in tests and yet don't really cut it at the ODI game.

JKLever wrote:Whatever Prior is, he isn't an one day player and his domestic stats show that.

Some players are like that for some reason - fast scorers in tests and yet don't really cut it at the ODI game.

Is it because their range of shots is too heavily based on the orthodox coaching manual? Vaughan for example, had a great cover drive, scored quickly in Tests when in form but in ODI's it never worked in the same way as you don't get as many balls to drive, and there's more chance of just picking out a fielder with that kind of shot. You wouldn't have seen him work the ball around, or play anything inventive like a reverse sweep, or even the basic slog over the top very often, and if he did try anything like that he'd probably just have got himself out.

As I've said before, most English players seem very one-dimensional and unable to adapt to different types of cricket and different game situations.

Jonathan Trott, Nick Compton, and Alex Hales all average over 40 in List A cricket. Craig Kieswetter does as well, so he'll be worth a look at when he qualifies, although having him, Pietersen and Trott in the same team might be pushing it a little bit (morally speaking) as far as the number of players in the England team who were brought up in South Africa is concerned.

Henry wrote:Jonathan Trott, Nick Compton, and Alex Hales all average over 40 in List A cricket. Craig Kieswetter does as well, so he'll be worth a look at when he qualifies, although having him, Pietersen and Trott in the same team might be pushing it a little bit (morally speaking) as far as the number of players in the England team who were brought up in South Africa is concerned.

No room for morals when you're as crap as this. I'd have a whole team of them if it would improve results!