England in Australia limited overs series

[Spickery]

James Faulkner you bloody beauty! We were in a worrying position when Glenn Maxwell and Brad Haddin got out around the same time. The comforting fact was though we batted all the way down the order. Sending in Nathan Coulter-Nile ahead of James Faulkner was a bizarre decision considering how well James Faulkner batted in India. In the end though it didn't matter as my man and fellow Tasmanian James Faulkner showed his composure and skill with the bat to get Australia home 9 wickets down. It showcases what a great all-rounder he is and that he is more than just a bowler. Remarkable victory from Australia and it will go down in history as one of our greatest ODI wins!

 

[swacker]

Of all the embarrassments this series, this one has to be near the top.

I'm actually impressed that Aussies managed to win that.

 

[Aalay]

Indeed, his potential is the real deal. Drop Bailey, bat Haddin @ 6 on current form. This way maybe we could let Watson bat more & more less, to see if it helps him score more consistently @ # 3.

I think Bailey was the highest run scorer in Australia's last ODI series with some ridiculous numbers. One bad match and he should be dropped?

 

[War]

I think Bailey was the highest run scorer in Australia's last ODI series with some ridiculous numbers. One bad match and he should be dropped?

Was talking about the AUS test team.

 

[MUFC1987]

Pick another bowler. Root who is average at best with the ball had great figures, just imagine what another specialist there could have done.

And if we can't do that, at least bowl first. Trying to defend any total with 4 bowlers is going to be difficult. Strange decisions.

----------

Oh and on Ian Bell. It's all very well and good getting to 50 or so, but with that strike rate he needs to go on. People complained about Trott batting at that pace to 50, but at least he carried on to get a big score more often. Bell needs to either score quicker or bat for longer. 50 off 70 balls is ok, but he needs to turn that into 100 off 120 balls, which is then a great contribution. Shows why his average has been good the last year or so, but also why his strike rate is so poor.

 

[Left_Hander]

What a win by Australia! I did think back to the tour of India when Faulkner pulled one out of the fire to win but I didn't think it would happen when Australia were 9 down. 5-0 is still a possibility. Having said that, Australia will probably lose in Sydney

 

[SpitfiresKent]

Pick another bowler. Root who is average at best with the ball had great figures, just imagine what another specialist there could have done.

Totally agree. Bresnan needs to be dropped for Tredwell in my opinion.

 

[IceAgeComing]

perhaps they should actually pick four proper bowlers before they start dropping any of the attack...

 

[Haarithan]

Playing without their best four bowlers (including Swann, who's retired). Hardly unexpected. Won 4-0 in Dubai against Pakistan in 2011-12 when Jimmy, Broad, Swann and Finn all started at once. Coincidence? Don't think so.

 

[Owzat]

England somehow managed to lose that despite having the aussies 120/5 after 23 overs.

There may be a good reason, but why did Jordan come off after only four overs with figures of 4-0-20-2!?!? It's very interesting to compare the figures before and after that 23rd over point, from where the aussies scored 181/4 off 26.3 overs. Fair enough that is only a run rate of 6.745, but with half the batting order gone you'd make the bowling side favourites to win nine times out of 10

England bowling split - up to 180/5 after 23 overs, and after


Rankin : 6-0-34-1 >> 1-0-2-0
Jordan : 4-0-20-2 >> 5-0-33-0
Bresnan : 4-0-17-0 >> 5.3-0-47-2
Stokes : 4-0-29-0 >> 6-0-45-1
Root : 5-0-19-2 >> 4-0-27-0
Bopara : 0-0-0-0 >> 5-0-19-1

Not sure what Rankin is bringing to the England side that other similar bowlers wouldn't. Jordan bowled the 8th over and then came back in the 26th to get hit for 19 off his first three overs back and taken off again.

With no proper fifth bowler England stuck with Root and Bopara, Root bowled well enough but isn't a frontline bowler so England pushed their luck a bit hoping he could take wickets, but then which of the England bowlers is so good they're wholly reliable?!?

But still, a well executed chase showing how to do it even when you are in a difficult position.

Should England have bowled first? The balance of the side needs to be such that they can bat first or second, if they had bowled first it is possible the aussies might have posted a fair bit more than 300 and England not managed to chase it, don't assume because the scores were around 300 that it would have been thus had they batted in reverse order.

Should England have played a spinner? Probably, the balance of the side is all wrong. With Stokes in the side he should be batting seven unless there is a genuine all-rounder higher up the order such that there is that one plus Stokes at eight and bowlers 9-11. He's still very raw, but without Broad, Swann and even Anderson in the side then the attack will be vulnerable.

You could point at Bresnan as the weak link, but it was all-round inability to finish off the aussies that cost England, and the aussie determination, resolve and ability to chase the runs down.

While Bresnan was expensive, the lack of wickets and relative expense after that 23rd over contributed. Between Jordan, Root and Stokes thereafter they took 15-0-105-1 which is seven an over with only one wicket, compared to 2/47 albeit at nine an over from Bresnan

And of course from (the aussies being) 244/9 England suffered another frustration of not getting the last man out, I think they just don't have the knack, the know how, the ability even. When it comes to the balls the aussie batsman had it, England didn't.

 

[sifter132]

^Obvious solution is drop Root for a spinner. Broad back in for Rankin.

What would your distribution of overs been Owzat? (Given that Rankin couldn't bowl). Seemed Bopara could have been used more, but Cook clearly didn't want to use him right at the death.

Wow wow wow, what an innings by Faulkner, quickly making a name for himself for finishing. Would be tempted playing him in the top 7 and get another bowler.

You'd think they would play Doherty in Sydney, and that would mean a fast bowler dropped OR a batsman rested and move everyone up a spot. eg. George Bailey could get a rest, move everyone up a spot.

Whatever they do I'd bring Pattinson in for McKay. McKay just doesn't get enough deliveries in the right spot with the new ball. It still baffles me how a guy who is probably in the 10-15 range for guys who would make the Aussie Test team is given the new ball in ODIs. I know he's done well recently in ODIs, but I'd prefer to see him used in the middle of the innings more. Use that new ball with your most likely guys to strike ie. Test quality bowlers.


And what an absolute kick in the guts for England. Finally get in that winning position and can't finish it off. Faulkner just didn't falter...he can't do that every time you'd think

Aussie batting was pretty egotistical. They clearly don't fear anyone in this England attack and a lot of them were out trying to make statement shots when they weren't necessary. It's an increasingly viable strategy in white ball stuff these days, bowl the worst guy you think you can get away with, and the batsmen might push too hard and throw it away.

 

[SpitfiresKent]

Stronger looking team this time round for England, nice to see Tredwell get a game and Root has rightly been dropped.

PS: I swear I just heard the super marios bros theme tune being played in between overs

 

[dancingmongoose]

Insane catch from Michael Clarke there. Just wow

 

[sifter132]

Stronger looking team this time round for England, nice to see Tredwell get a game and Root has rightly been dropped.

PS: I swear I just heard the super marios bros theme tune being played in between overs

Got enough Marios in the crowd, it makes sense

And both teams made exactly the changes I thought...EXCEPT for Mitch Johnson being out. Seems an odd one. In the Test series, Ryan Harris played through pain to make sure the Aussie foot remained on the throat. If there is no injury for Mitch, then surely the same 'foot on throat' principle applies. He's much more intimidating with new ball than Faulkner.

Doherty's done quite well, so Maxwell will probably bowl his 10 as well, meaning Christian might not get a bowl! Doherty's effectiveness will also mean that Tredwell's overs will be interesting...going by the Gabba, the Aussies will just try and impose themselves on him with more arrogant batting. We'll see how it goes.

 

[Owzat]

^Obvious solution is drop Root for a spinner. Broad back in for Rankin.

What would your distribution of overs been Owzat? (Given that Rankin couldn't bowl). Seemed Bopara could have been used more, but Cook clearly didn't want to use him right at the death.

Obviously with Rankin he couldn't bowl, but then I ask has he brought anything to England except a lame duck that theoretically could take wickets?

It's rather moot, Cook as captains before him don't captain so much as go through some kind of preset rotation. What decent captain, or indeed anyone with a brain, would take ANY bowler off when they've taken two wickets in just a four over spell?!?!?

England show too many traits of trying to get throw overs rather than take wickets, taking wickets contains as well as offers the chance of bowling a side out and putting you in charge.

I read that England were going to change things, I half expected Root to be dropped for the second time in not many weeks, I didn't expect that to be Stokes batting three.

Well England have now got five bowlers, how it should be. With Stokes, Buttler and Broad all able to bat they just need the top order/five to make about 180+ runs and not leave them to do a lot of the batting because the top order have failed.

It may be much closer, not the best of totals with the side collapsing from 177/4 to 198/8, but much maligned Bresnan who seems to be most people's scapegoat managed to put some runs on the board late on to set a half decent target.

Be interesting to see which bowlers the aussies target, Stokes perhaps, Bresnan and/or Tredwell, or maybe chance it on Jordan to put pressure on him. Or maybe they'll just set themselves up to around 150/3 or better and cruise.

England definitely need to take wickets regularly, I wonder if we'll see the opening pair bowl the first eight and be taken off One thing is for sure, you need to have their splits in mind and I'd probably lean towards 6-2-2 or 6-4 if the opening bowler(s) is/are bowling well early on, you just don't know if they will be as effective when they return.

----------

Stronger looking team this time round for England, nice to see Tredwell get a game and Root has rightly been dropped.

Is kinda inevitable it will look stronger when Broad is coming back into the side and when Root has done nothing with the batting order overloaded at the expense of bowling.

Better balanced, not sure about the personnel being 100% right or the order, but an improvement on the previous games.

it is odd that losing 0-5 in the Tests someone would risk going 0-2 down in an ODI series by resting key personnel, or maybe England were/are so convinced they're just "unlucky" in some way or things will go their way that they don't question their own performances etc

I've long wondered if England don't think ODIs are down mainly to luck, like some think of penalty shoot-outs. It is funny how some teams are "luckier" in ODIs and shoot-outs than others...............