England

[War]

It's also not the cleverest tactic, if fielding first then the keeper has to concentrate for 50 overs before opening the batting. It's so much better if England just use someone else to open, no reason Davies can't bat down the order (or not at all, I think too many fixate on keepers, if it isn't Jones vs Read it's something else)

Davies wouldn't be fixated however, since he has spent his career opening domestically successfully. When we tried Jones, Prior that was fixating since they where lower-order keeper bats domestically (although Prior opens for Sussex).

Yeah, shame really as England could have gone with someone who is a more useful spinner than KP. Then again England already dug their grave by including Yardystick, Shight and Tredcarefully. There's three wasted spaces, although Yardy has been used and done like the Football Association (FA)

I wonder if Shight wasn't picked deliberately as a sub fielder, would make sense given he's a sub(standard) cricketer.

Ye Tredwell & Wright where awfully wasteful selection. But Yardy has his uses, he is just batting too high @ # 7, but his bowling is fine.

ENG dont have much ODI depth though. I can only think of Patel, Shah, Trego (maybe) who you could have picked instead of Wright & Tredwell. But of course Patel's fitness issues that Flower & co openly condemned before the WC, prevented him from being picked.

 

[Rehan_24]

Good things are happening for England. First a confident gaining win against the South Africa and now Peterson getting injured is a blessing since Eoin Morgan is replacing him most probably. So England should now open with Struass and Bhopara and put Eoin Morgan in his usual batting spot. Peterson departure won't hurt England much because He was doing nothing special as an opener. I was always against this bold yet a very risky and silly decision to make him open the innings.

 

[angryangy]

I don't think the failings of one or even a group of keepers at the top of the order is an explanation for what another keeper's performance will be like. Plus with Prior at the moment, it seems to be far and away his best position.

 

[Owzat]

Davies wouldn't be fixated however, since he has spent his career opening domestically successfully. When we tried Jones, Prior that was fixating since they where lower-order keeper bats domestically (although Prior opens for Sussex).

You've either missed the point or deliberately danced around it, my point was that who keeps wicket seems to be given WAY too much attention and debated ad nauseam compared to other equally or more important issues like the batting (5-6 players) and bowling (5-6 players) Happened with Read vs Jones, so much focus on which should be the keeper when in fact was it that important??!?!? (rhetorical question, answer is no) There are TEN other players in the side, I've maintained in the past that the keeper should be last picked (in Tests certainly) and whether it is best bat or best keeper will depend on the balance of the batting ie if you have a strong batting side, pick your best keeper, if you are a little lacking and the keeper needs to bat 6-7 then pick your better batsman.

Or maybe you don't understand the concept of fixation

----------

I don't think the failings of one or even a group of keepers at the top of the order is an explanation for what another keeper's performance will be like. Plus with Prior at the moment, it seems to be far and away his best position.

The point was it is a failed strategy, trying to bat keepers at the top of the order and probably simply because Girly batted there so well for the aussies. Why oh why can't we just pick an OPENER!?!?! Let the keeper bat down the order, the problem being if we aren't picking Davies then it's Prior or Pietersen or someone else who's not an opener.

The selection of Pietersen as opener at least took us away from having a keeper there, a fixation if ever there was one, even if he was like a whale out of water and frankly needs a time out of the side to get focused.

 

[Sureshot]

Looks like Broad is out of Bangladesh game, and possibly rest of the tournament. That would be a big blow, he's our biggest wicket taker in ODIs.

 

[Themer]

Its suprising at how much of a quality ODI player Broad is on account of people bagging him constantly for taking so long to look decent in Test matches. Would be a massive loss if we lose him and probably lose any hope of winning.

 

[Haarithan]

The last thing England needed

World Cup 2011: Broad out of World Cup with side strain | Cricket News | ICC Cricket World Cup 2011 | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[Kabooka]

So fellas , who do you think is the perfect replacement for Broady ? I'd say get in an extra batsman from home (maybe Kieswetter if he is fit) & play Shehzad in place of Broad.

 

[mohit_dude10]

Will Woakes be considered? He looked alright in the Aus tour.

 

[Sureshot]

It's a big blow, but it gives a chance to Shahzad. I think they'll bring Tremlett in, whether they give him Broad's spot, I'm not so sure. I think Shahzad has a bit of an x factor, but Tremlett has impressed the selectors of late and is more dependable.

Tremlett is touring with the WC squad btw, as bowling back up. So I guess it'll be him.

 

[Bhargav]

So fellas , who do you think is the perfect replacement for Broady ? I'd say get in an extra batsman from home (maybe Kieswetter if he is fit) & play Shehzad in place of Broad.

I think it'd be Chris Tremlett!

 

[Haarithan]

Will Woakes be considered? He looked alright in the Aus tour.

He is a hit and miss type of bowler so they probably wont consider him . Tremlett is the hot favourite to replace him given he's been with the squad throughout the WC . Personally , i would have gone with a Davies or a Rashid to get rid of Prior or Yardy from the playing XI and give Broad's vacant slot to Shahzad .

 

[Sureshot]

And then we'll be a bowler light in the case of a small injury, which is just stupid. Besides, I doubt the ICC would allow such a replacement.

 

[Themer]

Besides, I doubt the ICC would allow such a replacement.

As far as I can see you can bring anyone in. Hell, Hussey came in to replace Bollinger last week.

 

[Sureshot]

Fair point, I've always understood there is a bit of a gentleman's agreement that you don't bring someone in for an injured player to replace another player who is out of form or who you don't want in the side.