England are poor tactically and selection wise. Not sure picking players on whims of county fans is going to change much, it would be same story, different names.
As for the current crop
Bell - solid enough, but doesn't go on to make big match-winning scores (often/at all)
Prior - stupid pinch-hitting theory needs knocking on the head and has been, not sure he's the right keeper to bat down the order
Shah - still not 100% convinced he's good enough, the effective 20-20 match stituation seemed to suit him
Pietersen - captaincy may take it's toll on him, before and early in this series he was averaging 50+ as captain, now it's down to 36
Collingwood - no doubt about his place, one of few definites, but where to bat him
Bopara - need to find a slot for him, batting at eight is a waste of someone who won't bowl much
Flintoff - batting up the order is ok, needs to hit bowling form and take more wickets - an ongoing weakness
Patel - bit too bits n pieces for my liking. Unless England select a fixed number of batsmen and he plays as one and as second spinner then I'd dump him
Broad - poor in Tests, arguably our only decent ODI bowler so far
Harmison - rightly dumped, his hero return in England was a waste of time as many of us suspect(ed) it would/will be a different story in India. Never likely to be accurate or consistent enough to trouble Indian batsmen in India
Swann - not the frontline spinner I would hope for, but do we have one. Wasted batting at ten
Anderson - still not consistent enough, too expensive and an expensive passenger
So in essence I think we've packed in way too many all-rounders, ONE bowler who's matching the Indian bowlers and that's not enough to be competitive, and frankly the individuals may be the best available but they certainly make a poor team. We're trying to play too many all-rounders (bits n pieces in some cases) - Prior, Swann, Patel, Flintoff, Collingwood, Broad and Bopara. I'd say it probably has to be Swann or Patel, neither is strong enough to be first choice spinner and we need a better spinner than both of them in India. Our quick bowlers aren't doing the business, Broad apart, so why include (at the start) so many of them? Do all the players have a defined role? Patel and Bopara seem merely to be fitted in where convenient as theoretical good ODI players, but if we have Bell, Pietersen, Collingwood and Shah then do we need both of them?
I think it's about time England started choosing either/or. Replace Swann or Patel with a frontline spinner regardless of batting. If we dumped Patel for a spinner then the either/or between Patel and Bopara becomes redundant. Or drop Bopara and play a spinner, that might work better. And bring in a keeper who can bat effectively like Nixon down the order, except we didn't take one!
As for the current crop
Bell - solid enough, but doesn't go on to make big match-winning scores (often/at all)
Prior - stupid pinch-hitting theory needs knocking on the head and has been, not sure he's the right keeper to bat down the order
Shah - still not 100% convinced he's good enough, the effective 20-20 match stituation seemed to suit him
Pietersen - captaincy may take it's toll on him, before and early in this series he was averaging 50+ as captain, now it's down to 36
Collingwood - no doubt about his place, one of few definites, but where to bat him
Bopara - need to find a slot for him, batting at eight is a waste of someone who won't bowl much
Flintoff - batting up the order is ok, needs to hit bowling form and take more wickets - an ongoing weakness
Patel - bit too bits n pieces for my liking. Unless England select a fixed number of batsmen and he plays as one and as second spinner then I'd dump him
Broad - poor in Tests, arguably our only decent ODI bowler so far
Harmison - rightly dumped, his hero return in England was a waste of time as many of us suspect(ed) it would/will be a different story in India. Never likely to be accurate or consistent enough to trouble Indian batsmen in India
Swann - not the frontline spinner I would hope for, but do we have one. Wasted batting at ten
Anderson - still not consistent enough, too expensive and an expensive passenger
So in essence I think we've packed in way too many all-rounders, ONE bowler who's matching the Indian bowlers and that's not enough to be competitive, and frankly the individuals may be the best available but they certainly make a poor team. We're trying to play too many all-rounders (bits n pieces in some cases) - Prior, Swann, Patel, Flintoff, Collingwood, Broad and Bopara. I'd say it probably has to be Swann or Patel, neither is strong enough to be first choice spinner and we need a better spinner than both of them in India. Our quick bowlers aren't doing the business, Broad apart, so why include (at the start) so many of them? Do all the players have a defined role? Patel and Bopara seem merely to be fitted in where convenient as theoretical good ODI players, but if we have Bell, Pietersen, Collingwood and Shah then do we need both of them?
I think it's about time England started choosing either/or. Replace Swann or Patel with a frontline spinner regardless of batting. If we dumped Patel for a spinner then the either/or between Patel and Bopara becomes redundant. Or drop Bopara and play a spinner, that might work better. And bring in a keeper who can bat effectively like Nixon down the order, except we didn't take one!
