5th ODI: Australia v England at Brisbane

Owzat

International Coach
Joined
Apr 4, 2008
Online Cricket Games Owned
Unless Tremlett is injured, its pretty dumb that he has been left out for Finn who really is not suited to bowling in limited overs cricket.

----------

Haa i cant remember the last time i saw a ODI inning where every batsman got a stars & then threw it away (except for White) SMH :facepalm

I said a while back that Finn would probably be too expensive for ODIs, could be his expense is at England's if we lose a close one. Tremlett wouldn't be the worst choice to replace Shahzad, but England's problem will be the middle order and a lack of all-rounders. If they fill the middle with Yardys, Wrights and Tredwells then they are adding just half players, two might just about offer what one good player would.

Woakes bowled well, it's a shame England waited until a month before the World Cup to start trying some of these players. And instead of giving Yardy and Wright a half century of doing nothing much they could have tried to find a genuine all-rounder who could do a much better job and bat seven, or a batsman who could bowl well enough to get away with that approach - a Blackwell, Stevens or Collingwood TYPE.

If they're going to try and get away with using Collingwood as a fifth bowler then can they put Prior down the order. Collingwood at seven would be a waste, most feel Prior opening is a waste too. Why not open with Morgan and put Prior at seven?
 

sifter132

Panel of Selectors
Joined
Oct 29, 2006
Location
NSW
Online Cricket Games Owned
Only good thing we saw from Finn was his pace.
6 fer for Woakes can only think of one good delivery to White, rest were gifts but still good on him.

Indeed. That's one of the luckiest 6fers you'll ever see. I won't say Finn's at the Gabba during the Ashes was quite that lucky but it was essentially the same reasoning ie. because you're the weakest in the attack the batsmen either switch off against you or try to belt you.
 

aussie1st

Retired Administrator
Joined
Dec 16, 2003
Location
Auckland
Apparently Marsh out with a hamstring injury, that boy is the new Watson, can't go a few matches without an injury. If its serious should mean one of Paine, Ferguson or Christian get a run.
 

Owzat

International Coach
Joined
Apr 4, 2008
Online Cricket Games Owned
England are a shambles, three wickets for two runs with the captain showing little urgency and the pinch-hitter not really being up to it and out trying to play too many shots.

This situation called for a Trott, but he decided to get himself out. There's one surefire way to make least of the fielding restrictions. Australia were 73/2 after 15 overs, England will be lucky if they're not 4-5 down.
 

Biggy

Panel of Selectors
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Location
Australia
Online Cricket Games Owned
They are really pushing Collingwood as an all-rounder now aren't they. He's probably almost a bowling all-rounder now lmao.
 

angryangy

ICC Chairman
Joined
Oct 1, 2004
He's a really underrated bowler, especially when you consider how much part-time spin is offered up in limited overs. He bowls a lot of balls at the stumps, he gets them to do a little bit and varies his pace. It's simple, but nagging.
 

aussie1st

Retired Administrator
Joined
Dec 16, 2003
Location
Auckland
Hes like James Hopes, you could probably play him as the 4th bowler but you wouldn't be confident in particular for the wickets. But where ever you bowl him you can expect him to keep it tight.

Hastings gets a well deserved wicket, has kept it tight and bowled some really good slower balls.
 

Owzat

International Coach
Joined
Apr 4, 2008
Online Cricket Games Owned
They are really pushing Collingwood as an all-rounder now aren't they. He's probably almost a bowling all-rounder now lmao.

I don't think they have a lot of realistic alternatives, Yardy can bat a bit and usually bowls tidily without taking enough wickets, while Wright is a nothing all-rounder, can bat a bit and can bowl a bit, but why I tend to have goes at those two is the frequency with which they don't bowl all their overs or, in Wright's case, don't bowl more than a handful. That means Collingwood is usually filling in anyway and doesn't do any worse! Collingwood has an ODI bowling average of something like 38, better than the 50+ that both Wright and Yardy have thus far - Wright over 43 ODIs and Yardy over 23. Wright some might argue is more of a batsman, trouble is he's not much of a batsman

Yardy and Wright by overs bowled

0 : Yardy 0, Wright 10
1 : Yardy 0, Wright 5
2 : Yardy 0, Wright 5
3 : Yardy 0, Wright 4
------------------------------------
4 : Yardy 2, Wright 1
5 : Yardy 3, Wright 2
6 : Yardy 3, Wright 8
7 : Yardy 2, Wright 4
-------------------------------------
8 : Yardy 3, Wright 1
9 : Yardy 3, Wright 2
10 : Yardy 7, Wright 1

0-3 overs

Wright (24 ODIs = 56%) : 27 overs, 1 wkt @ 173.00 (SR 162.00, ER 6.41)
Yardy (0 ODIs = 0%) : n/a

4-7 overs

Wright (15 ODIs = 35%) : 90 overs, 9 wkts @ 46.00 (SR 60.00, ER 4.60)
Yardy (10 ODIs = 43%) : 55 overs, 3 wkts @ 90.67 (SR 110.00, ER 4.95)

8-10 overs

Wright (4 ODIs = 9%) : 36 overs, 5 wkts @ 38.80 (SR 43.20, ER 5.39)
Yardy (13 ODIs = 57%) : 121 overs, 13 wkts @ 41.46 (SR 55.85, ER 4.45)

Yet BOTH are in the World Cup squad, Wright not good enough because his batting is hit and miss, more miss than hit, while Yardy bowls enough overs to be a main bowler only half the time, leaving overs to be filled in by Collingwood et al, and his batting is even more miss than hit than Wright's! Yardy has only made more than 20 on three occaisions, despite batting six or higher in NINE innings. Wright has made more than 25 on 10 occaisions, but more than 40 only five times and his two fifties come at a maximum of 52 - he hasn't scored a fifty since his 7th ODI and he bats six or higher 1/3 of the time.

Bottom line is they are not really all-rounders, and neither bowls enough overs often enough to be batting lower than six.




Bye bye Pietersen, needed to bring in Collingwood in my opinion, consolidate and save Morgan for when the platform is set. Not much batting after that so one of the remaining three batsmen need to stay in and bat with the tail.
 

aussie1st

Retired Administrator
Joined
Dec 16, 2003
Location
Auckland
Bye bye Pietersen, need to bring in Collingwood in my opinion, consolidate and save Morgan for when the platform is set. Not much batting after that so one of the remaining three batsmen need to stay in and bat with the tail.

A little too late :p I do agree would have been better doing that as Collingwood loves this situation.

That boy Smith does it again, commentators have no idea what he bowled just not his normal ball.
 

Owzat

International Coach
Joined
Apr 4, 2008
Online Cricket Games Owned
Hes like James Hopes, you could probably play him as the 4th bowler but you wouldn't be confident in particular for the wickets. But where ever you bowl him you can expect him to keep it tight.

Trouble is he's the only really reliable alternative bowler of the batsmen, Trott can bowl a bit and so can Pietersen, but you wouldn't really want to use them in ODIs. For that reason alone you'd want him as a 6th bowler rather than 4th or 5th, but with noone making seven their own England have a big problem - one they should have addressed 12-18 months ago, but muddled on through with no long term planning whatsoever :rolleyes

Oh hey, we won an ODI series, oh hey, we won another, oh heck the World Cup is in a couple of weeks and we don't have an all-rounder :facepalm (official ECB transcript ;) )

----------

A little too late :p I do agree would have been better doing that as Collingwood loves this situation.

That boy Smith does it again, commentators have no idea what he bowled just not his normal ball.

Strauss, the selectors and in fact noone in the England camp seem to have much of a clue on tactics etc.

Anyway it only delayed Collingwood's arrival by a few minutes :facepalm

If I'd have picked that set of players I'd have had Morgan opening, Collingwood at six and Prior at seven. Then again I wouldn't have picked an XI with a tail of Woakes, Shahzad, Finn and Anderson as that is an 8-11 more suitable for Tests than ODIs.
 

aussie1st

Retired Administrator
Joined
Dec 16, 2003
Location
Auckland
Trouble is he's the only really reliable alternative bowler of the batsmen, Trott can bowl a bit and so can Pietersen, but you wouldn't really want to use them in ODIs. For that reason alone you'd want him as a 6th bowler rather than 4th or 5th, but with noone making seven their own England have a big problem - one they should have addressed 12-18 months ago, but muddled on through with no long term planning whatsoever

Yep for you guys it would look a lot worse than us. Also helps that Shahzad and Anderson know what they are doing and Woakes today. Compared to us Bollinger and Lee have a good idea but Johnson and Tait are a bit ify so a guy like Hopes (Hastings for the WC) gives that defensive option as 3rd seamer to go with the other options of Smith, Dussey and Watson.

----------

If I'd have picked that set of players I'd have had Morgan opening, Collingwood at six and Prior at seven. Then again I wouldn't have picked an XI with a tail of Woakes, Shahzad, Finn and Anderson as that is an 8-11 more suitable for Tests than ODIs.

Is Bell worth opening looked good in the T20I which is the last time he has looked good?
 

Owzat

International Coach
Joined
Apr 4, 2008
Online Cricket Games Owned
Is Bell worth opening looked good in the T20I which is the last time he has looked good?

Bell's SR overall in ODIs (71.92) would be deemed to low for opening, he has done that for England before, but I think Strauss is deemed too conservative for England to think about reverting to Bell. Maybe someone could pluck out Bell's SR for opening in ODIs (and Strauss', it is around 80 which isn't bad but most people deem anything under 90-100 as too slow) Bell's average opening is only a couple of runs lower than his average overall.

I don't know why Strauss is so conservative in ODIs, he can be very aggressive, but perhaps when he is and gets out it sticks in his mind ie is a psychological thing.

OPENING ODIs

Bell : 26 inns, 880 runs @ 33.33
Strauss : 74 inns, 2656 runs @ 37.41
Morgan : 3 inns, 98 runs @ 49.00
Prior : 31 inns, 708 runs @ 24.41

Prior's SR in ODIs is around 76, not quite sure why he has been deemed pinch-hitter material as it isn't much faster than Bell and his average much lower. Who would you pick out of those?

Morgan

For Ireland : 23 ODIs, 744 runs @ 35.43 (SR 71.68)
For England : 36 ODIs, 1137 runs @ 42.11 (SR 88.07)

His record for England boosted my three unbeaten hundreds, one against each of Bangladesh, Australia and Pakistan. I must admit I thought Morgan's batting average was going to be lower for England than Ireland, but not so. I think they make least not most of his batting though

And as I post I see Collingwood is out :facepalm

----------

And bye bye Woakes, shame England had to talk up our chances of winning the series. If this series isn't the wake up call England needed then I don't know what is, then again it's too bl**dy late for them to do anything about it.
 

aussie1st

Retired Administrator
Joined
Dec 16, 2003
Location
Auckland
Bell's SR overall in ODIs (71.92) would be deemed to low for opening, he has done that for England before, but I think Strauss is deemed too conservative for England to think about reverting to Bell. Maybe someone could pluck out Bell's SR for opening in ODIs (and Strauss', it is around 80 which isn't bad but most people deem anything under 90-100 as too slow) Bell's average opening is only a couple of runs lower than his average overall.

Guess if you guys wanted a pinch hitter then he would go more effective than a Prior especially with his form but now that seems to be disappearing.

I don't know why Strauss is so conservative in ODIs, he can be very aggressive, but perhaps when he is and gets out it sticks in his mind ie is a psychological thing.

He showed that last year, averaged 58 and had a strike rate of 96 in 14 games. Was actually shocked when I saw those stats so that definitely shows what you mentioned.

Hastings looks a lot more settled, hope to see more of this from him in the next two games. Johnson has come back well after a poor start.

Interesting yet another run out stuffed up.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top