cricket_icon
International Cricketer
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2011
t20 international matches have just been shoe horned in to make extra money. 1 or 2 matches per series? man the ICC are mad. leave t20 to domestic level comps and t20 wc.
The thread title is wrong
Yeah, I meant those meaningless series they play each tour. There really is no point in them at all other than getting a few more crowd numbers. Apart from the T20 world cup the rest of twenty20 at international level is ridiculous. It's good how its done at domestic level with the tournaments, but its the kind of format where I dont really think a series would work. I think if they had a small tri series or something that could be quite interesting.
Iridium said:In T20 you are expected to score at a million miles an hour whilst in the 50-over format, you have a bit more time to play yourself in get set and then at the end go at a million miles an hour, which will suit Cook well (except for the fast scoring at end bit).
I wonder if Cook will look to take a few more risks in his strokeplay in order to up his scoring rate. And if he does, will those shots slowly creep into his batting when he's playing Tests?
Don't know why people are saying KP should have got it, or have they forgotten his time as captain? I don't see him getting it again, I'm not even sure he wants it and the setup want him to focus on batting.
I really don't get why people are already berating this as a terrible decision. Cook is captaincy material and is more than good enough to open the innings and bat through. Best players are your best players. I don't see anything wrong with:
Cook
Kieswetter/Davies
Trott
KP
Morgan
As a top five in ODIs. It was obvious Cook was getting the job, whilst granted, him not playing in ODIs before being made captain is a bit unusual and a strange decision, I don't think it's particularly bad, least not because can I remind people that since being announced as full ODI captain he's not even played!
As for the claims that Broad doesn't have the tactical nous for T20, again, yes, he doesn't have any experience captaining, but then this is T20, it's about as tactical as a cluster bomb. He'll lead by performance in T20s and that's what you need. It could well do his game wonders, make him grow up a bit and mature in to, potentially, one of the greatest cricketers of his generation.
Ultimately. Give them a chance!
I'm going to back decisions from a management team that has led us to successive Ashes victories and our first limited overs tournament trophy and at least give Cook and Broad a chance to prove themselves.
It's fair enough to say that they made bad decisions with Yardy in the WC and Prior's return, because they didn't work. But they've not even played yet, it's most bemusing.
Had a Test batting average of 23 when he played his last ODI, so if anything he's an argument for second chances. Although he gained his ascendancy in Tests with upper order grit and graft, he was actually a most effective lower order hitter who also doubled as a keeper. In the modern game, Healy's ODI record is rather unthinkable and it's funny to imagine that only Gilchrist could take his spot. Meanwhile, Langer fashioned an excellent state and county record, doing nothing to suggest he could not have re-emerged in ODIs during his Test peak.Langer
Why if its obvious to the world that Broad has no captaincy experience @ senior cricket level, why do we need to be giving him such a serious when he never showed us in all his years of playing for England??. Even if a man has never captained serious before @ any level, i would think he @ least on the field of play needed to show he was a leader of men on the field of play via performance or attitudeor something - Broad always is peripheral figure on the field when ENG play (expect for his tirades to opposition batsmen at times). Someone like Swann does the above.
Thirdly. Why do need to go back to Cook - a proven ODI failure who represent old style played out ODI opening.
Also again nobody is question whether Cook is captaincy material, its obvious
he has that. The problem is ODIs should be used as training ground for his captaincy in tests.
Flower & the England management are making the same mistakes in ODI selections that their predecessors since the 1992 world-cup have made. So the restraint towards critiquing them just because he lead us to an Ashes win & T20 WC win & the "GIVE THEM A CHANCE" cry towards Cook & Broad leading doesn't hold water my friend. Repeating the same mistakes for 20 years is borderline stupidity.
Had a Test batting average of 23 when he played his last ODI, so if anything he's an argument for second chances. Although he gained his ascendancy in Tests with upper order grit and graft, he was actually a most effective lower order hitter who also doubled as a keeper. In the modern game, Healy's ODI record is rather unthinkable and it's funny to imagine that only Gilchrist could take his spot. Meanwhile, Langer fashioned an excellent state and county record, doing nothing to suggest he could not have re-emerged in ODIs during his Test peak.
Not sure you can really call an ODI batting average of 33.00 over 26 ODIs with an (admittedly modest) SR of 71.38 a "proven ODI failure".
I did wonder about his captaincy credentials when doing my previous post, but wasn't sure how much he had and frankly who is experienced who you could pick who wouldn't have to be picked mainly on that grounds? We wouldn't want ourselves a Lee Germon.
Focus is way too much on excuses and reviewing captaincy, the problems lie much deeper and we should follow the bangladeshi example and have a full blown enquiry and review of what was a pretty feeble World Cup - we only got to the QFs because neither Ireland nor Bangladesh were consistent enough to make most of our slips.
Our excuses were more of less self-inflicted, players tired because we picked most of the Test XI after a tough tour Injuries are inevitable as well if you do that. It reminds me of some Premiership clubs that bemoan injuries and a small squad, well do something about it then You keep picking your best players week in, week out, they will be tired and get injured
Thursday, May 5th
What a splendid idea! Three captains! Everyone agrees that having a captain is a good thing. Far better, for example, than not having a captain. So three captains must be three times as good! And England have added a nice touch, ranking their captains based on the calibre of their private school. Extensive analysis reveals that their innovative three-headed skipper strategy will have the following outcome:
1. After a poor series against India and having relinquished two-thirds of his power, Andrew Strauss will be under intense pressure to step down.
2. Deputy Alastair Cook will be unavailable, a broken man, having dropped himself from the one-day team due to a strike rate of 7.00.
3. Deputy deputy, Stuart Broad, will be serving his third ban of the summer, this time for setting fire to the umpire’s shoes after a marginal wide call.
4. In the absence of anyone else, a fourth candidate will emerge, unite the three formats and lead England into a glorious new age of arm-waving, top-of-the-range sunglasses and flashy defeats. All hail the second coming of KP!