Collingwood named new England One-Day Captain

He's not really an all rounder, only taken 39 domestic one day wickets IIRC. Nevertheless, I agree that he is a good call up.
 
The same could have been said of Vaughan before he took over captaincy from Nasser. He went onto become England's all time best test captain.
Vaughan wasn't just a contributor, he was basically the best batsman in the team when he got selected for captain. His batting has seemingly detierated since then.

The complaining about Cook that shouldn't be in the ODI side is lame. His young & talented. Had he not being playing Test Cricket for England, he'd probably have several OD centuries under his belt so far. You gotta find out if his any good or not. There is no use in holding your best prospect in county cricket for several years before unleashing him the real world like you've done with no-so-talented players. If he doesn't do well, bring him back then.

Ideally, Pietersen should get the captaincy after Collingwood. Cook should be getting the reigns when his 29-30.
 
I always thought that Bell would end up being the sucessor to Vaughan, not my choice but I thought he would
 
errr Yes, that tell's his performance..

What Simbazz is trying to say is, how does how a player do against one country have any relation to their potential as captain? Paul Collingwood hit a hundred and a fifty against Australia, you don't need to order or motivate a side to do that. No one will know his potential as captain until after his first series or two with England.
 
I think it's a good decision. In my opinion it had to go to a player who has done well enough to guarentee their place in England's one day team, which at the moment is only 4 players for me. Collingwood can also lead by example with most aspects of his game and seems like a laid back guy in the style of Vaughan.
 
The bottom line is you don't pick players who haven't proven themselves in domestic one-day cricket. (This also applies to Monty) In picking Cook, Moores is ignoring the county system which contradicts what everyone has been saying.

However out of all the players with below par one day averages, he would be the one to pick, though I'd prefer if we only picked people who were proven.
So? Care to explain this then...

Ricky Ponting's OD seasons before getting selected for Australia.
Code:
Name                Mat    I  NO  Runs   HS     Ave     SR 100 50   Ct St
RT Ponting            3    3   0    40   22   13.33  52.63   -  -    2  -
RT Ponting            5    5   1   122   36   30.50  73.49   -  -    2  -
RT Ponting            4    4   0    95   59   23.75  67.37   -  1    -  -
RT Ponting            3    3   1   126   87*  63.00  69.23   -  1    1  -

Ricky Ponting's First-Class seasons before getting selected for Australia.
Code:
Name                Mat    I  NO  Runs   HS     Ave 100  50   Ct St
RT Ponting           10   17   1   781  125   48.81   3   4    9  -
RT Ponting           11   20   2   896  161   49.77   3   3   10  -
RT Ponting            5    9   0   681  211   75.66   3   2    1  -
RT Ponting            5    9   3   488  131*  81.33   3   -    3  -
Hardly proven in OD cricket was Punter? But he sure was in FC cricket yet he made his ODI debut several months before his test debut and now Ponting's gone onto be possibly & most probably the best batsman of all time. The only player in the history of Test Cricket to touch an average of 60 & over after playing over 100 games. You don't not select a player because they haven't been proven in the OD game. Their young, you can't make a judgement and for the 1st 4 or 5 years of his International Career his OD average was on par with his Test Average of hovering around the high 30's to low 40's. Also look at Ponting's strike-rate in the OD matches, hardly impressive are they? Nothing Cook couldn't acchieve? In some terms Cook is already infront of where Ponting & all of the other great Australian batsman over the past decade were when they were at his stage of his career.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top