England in New Zealand

[irottev]

Bell did indeed nick it. It was one of many bad decisions by Asad Rauf. He still did the damage. His partnership with KP took the game away.

 

[m_vaughan]

Good win for England in the end and brilliant knock from Collingwood. The partnership between Bell and KP was crucial as well but England should have got the Kiwiz out for less than 150. Need to work on finishing teams off.

 

[Sureshot]

Bell did indeed nick it. It was one of many bad decisions by Asad Rauf. He still did the damage. His partnership with KP took the game away.

Yes, however, would it be fair to say that despite the poor decisions they didn't have a resounding impact on the result of the match?

For Joe...

http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru...=2;template=results;type=bowling;view=innings

In his last 10 innings, Stuart Broad has taken 2 wickets or more on 8 occasions. If you compare the top half to the bottom half there is an incredible turn around. And at only 21 too.

 

[evertonfan]

Wahey. My optimism and refusal to critiscize pays off. Collingwood is immense.

 

[angryangy]

I think Collingwood is a reasonable size. Maybe even a little thin.

 

[manee]

critiscize

Interesting word you have there, Evo.

Collingwood is certainly a gun batsman. He is so underrated, just because of his ability to hit singles. Today showed that he can play to whatever situation necessary. He is the anchor that the England ODI team need. However, to be successful, England need KP and perhaps one more agressive batsman to be successful. England are certainly far too weighed down with batsmen with strike rate of near 70.

 

[karnog]

Interesting word you have there, Evo.

Collingwood is certainly a gun batsman. He is so underrated, just because of his ability to hit singles. Today showed that he can play to whatever situation necessary. He is the anchor that the England ODI team need. However, to be successful, England need KP and perhaps one more agressive batsman to be successful. England are certainly far too weighed down with batsmen with strike rate of near 70.

Well the way Bell played today you can class him along with KP... i have to say Bell is the dark horse for a future star. He's 25 right? And well considering some of his performances since late 2006 such as his world cup performance against Australia he's a future captain for sure. Reminds me of Ricky in 1999.

 

[Sureshot]

Interesting word you have there, Evo.

Collingwood is certainly a gun batsman. He is so underrated, just because of his ability to hit singles. Today showed that he can play to whatever situation necessary. He is the anchor that the England ODI team need. However, to be successful, England need KP and perhaps one more agressive batsman to be successful. England are certainly far too weighed down with batsmen with strike rate of near 70.

Cook and maybe Bell, though his summer form strike rate was near 90.

 

[manee]

Bell is in the ODI form of his life though, I do not expect such agressive batting to continue for much longer with him.

 

[karnog]

Bell is in the ODI form of his life though, I do not expect such agressive batting to continue for much longer with him.

I disagree but i guess only time will tell if Bell is the real deal. Its no coincidence he's hit 14 half-centuries and only 1 century in 62 games. Whats frustrating everyone (or atleast the English) is his inability to convert to the centuries. You look at collingwood who has played double his matches and has only got 4 centuries and 18 half-centuries (and colly wasn't always number 5).

 

[Sureshot]

We miss Trescothick that's without doubt. And yes more hundreds would be better.

12 centuries in this current line up. (top six only)

That is from 310 innings. Colly has the most with 127 innings.

New Zealand:

398 innings, 7 centuries. (I went down to 7 due to Oram batting there)

Maybe England moan too much about lack of hundreds?

Australian top six today. 62 hundreds from 1022 innings.

England - Century every 25.8 innings
New Zealand - Century every 56.8 innings
Australia - Century every 16.4 innings

I wonder if people thought the figures would read like that?

http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/cbs/engine/current/match/291364.html?view=averages

and the same page for the England series.

 

[SciD]

Why the hell bother with hundreds in top order. Sachin alone has 41 ODI hundreds for India and our top 2 will have more hundreds than any other nations put together if ganguly had been playing.

England have a lot of potential but somehow they dont deliver to often. Im simply amazed that team which won last 2 series aginst good ODI teams and won 20-20 matches comprehensively will be this terrible in first 2 matches.

Today also they had NZ in real trouble but let them off hook to get 234.

 

[Animator!]

I wouldn't say we really let them off the hook. Oram played fantastically, but we should have been able to clean up Vettori cheaper than we did, but thats why he's such a good all-round cricketer.

In other news, Asad Rauf was awful today.

 

[gary0808]

On the centuries matter, I couldn't care less about a century conversion rate. After all its a difference of one run between a 'fifty' and a 'hundred'. About Ian Bell, I am still unconvinced he has only produced one dominant series in his career against India and was hugely dissapointed with his Sri Lanka batting because I thought that series was going to be a turnaround for him. Hopefully it was just a blip and can produce inning's under pressure like he did today.

Good Performance from England today, Broad was very good in particular

 

[Kiko_97]

Giggity giggity giggity goo we won finally