Commonwealth Bank Series

[mattfb]

Fulton seems like a decent player, maybe wait a couple of games and if New Zealand have NO chance of making the finals they can try it out, or try it out now as they seem short of an opener

 

[aussie1st]

Well they may as well give it a try, there isn't really any openers putting their hands up in the NZ domestic comp from what I've seen. Most of them have been tried and failed.

 

[aussie_ben91]

im not so sure, he averages about 34 in ODI's and generally openers average a good 10-20% more in tests...even at an average of around 42-43 and scoring at a 80 strike rate he will still be a handful and he could have opposition sides fighting for a draw by tea day 1, but in saying that he wouldnt be a long term option so i would prefer probably Rogers on current form

Gilchrist has been averaging in the middle 40s over these last few years.

If we dropped Strauss, id say get KP at four and Flintoff at five.

Say Vaughan gets injured again, id say Flintoff at 3. and KP at four.

In the WC, Pietersen should be at 3 in ODI's regardless as it is only a 50 over match and if you lose an early wicket you should give him all the time possible for other players to play around him and then Bell or Collingwood at 4 & then Flintoff at 5; Flintoff should never bat infront Pietersen. I don't know why people are choosing Collingwood over Bell. Collingwood's bowling isn't all that great & Bell has been looking better then Collingwood has with the bat. Both have been going at slowish strike-rate but in the end Bell has a better record to back himself up.

I'm not a big rap for McCullum, I don't really check out his wicketkeeping, it looks pretty good to me but I keep hearing how his supposed to be soooo talented but his been around for a fair time and hasn't acchieved anything with the bat. I think there's a line you have to draw weather a player's capable or not because if he can't be successful at the highest level then you in the end you're not very capable.
Fulton looked good against Australia, played some nice shots. Just need to see a big innings from him now. It'd be worth trying him as an opener.

 

[m_vaughan]

Yup thats right. KP and Freddie should be seperated by a somewhat more orthodox player (Collingwood, Vaughan, Bell types). So KP at three and Freddie at five sounds just fine.

 

[aussie1st]

Collingwood has done his good work at 5 so that is his best spot but he would go just fine at 6 if it suits the team better. He can nudge the singles which can be handy in the latter overs and can hit a 6 or two.

 

[Sureshot]

Collingwoods fielding abilities is yet another example of the English press being desperate to build up anyone English and hail them the best in the world.

Yes he is a very good fielder, but every team in the world has someone as good as him (Pakistan excluded) and there are a fair few people better than him in the field, Symonds, Clarke, De Villiers to name just three. Collingwood isn't even that much better than Bell in the field.

One thing I would like to know is why they haven't worked on Bells bowling at all? When he first made it into the England team he was a more than useful seam-up bowler for Warwickshire, yet England seem to have made no effort to develop that string in his bow. Much the same happened with KP and his off-spin, with it only being recently that he seems to have started working on it again.

I don't tend to disagree with you, this is an exception.

Collingwood is bloody good and certainly in the top 3 in the world. What makes him so good is his ability to stop balls he shouldn't. Anyone remember that catch he took at Lords (iirc) in the summer?

It looked like a catch from an EA game with the ball being a foot above his head and catching the ball despite not looking like he actually got to it.

Collingwoods one of the best because he stops lost causes.

 

[Mars Maximus]

Hodges catch wasn't bad as well hey?

 

[langerrox]

Gilchrist has been averaging in the middle 40s over these last few years.


In the WC, Pietersen should be at 3 in ODI's regardless as it is only a 50 over match and if you lose an early wicket you should give him all the time possible for other players to play around him and then Bell or Collingwood at 4 & then Flintoff at 5; Flintoff should never bat infront Pietersen. I don't know why people are choosing Collingwood over Bell. Collingwood's bowling isn't all that great & Bell has been looking better then Collingwood has with the bat. Both have been going at slowish strike-rate but in the end Bell has a better record to back himself up.

I'm not a big rap for McCullum, I don't really check out his wicketkeeping, it looks pretty good to me but I keep hearing how his supposed to be soooo talented but his been around for a fair time and hasn't acchieved anything with the bat. I think there's a line you have to draw weather a player's capable or not because if he can't be successful at the highest level then you in the end you're not very capable.
Fulton looked good against Australia, played some nice shots. Just need to see a big innings from him now. It'd be worth trying him as an opener.

KP should never bat at three, his technique can't handle the new ball and by exposing him to it would just be stupid

 

[Leicester Fox]

Hodge's catch was good but it wasn't up there with some of Collingwoods best

 

[aussie_ben91]

KP should never bat at three, his technique can't handle the new ball and by exposing him to it would just be stupid

Ponting hasn't got the best techinque to handle the new ball either but look at his record? It's a ODI not a Test Match. His matured as a player during this tour of Australia. His one of the best batsman in the world, let him get on top of the top line bowlers and build the England innings throughout the period of 50 overs.

 

[Mars Maximus]

Hodge's catch was good but it wasn't up there with some of Collingwoods best

Good? Good? Good?!?!?! It was fandamntastic! :happy

 

[Leicester Fox]

shame he couldn't back it up with his batting. i like Brad Hode though. he was great for Leicestershire so that makes him a good player in my eyes

 

[Simbazz]

Bahhh your all wrong. You wouldn't pick Bellio over Collingforest (Collingwood )

Collingtree's has been great for England in most departments in ODI for yonks, and only recently has the selectors thought, "hey up, he's alrite this lad, lets stick him in the tests,"

Bell can rack up big scores, but Collingrainforest can knock up bigger ones.

Everyone like my use of wonderful changed to Collingwobbles name?

 

[aussie_ben91]

Bell's more consistant in ODI's then Collingwood. In Test Matches, I'd probably have Collingwood over Bell though.

 

[Simbazz]

Ben, Collingwood is more useful than Bell in both forms. Collingwood was at one time classed as a ODI specialist so im gunna stick with him!