Yep, this is what I've gleaned from watching T20 as well. West Indies are a good example: plenty of guys who can bat and bowl a bit means that you can throw the ball to whoever gives you a good matchup and you can keep attacking with the bat, and hopefully never have to consolidate the innings.
New Zealand in England May - June 2013
- Thread starter IanG
- Start date
Yep, this is what I've gleaned from watching T20 as well. West Indies are a good example: plenty of guys who can bat and bowl a bit means that you can throw the ball to whoever gives you a good matchup and you can keep attacking with the bat, and hopefully never have to consolidate the innings.
Pretty much our whole middle order is more suited to 50 over cricket where they can build an innings before having to up the aggression, so I think that balances out England bringing back most of their big guns. I think we'll do well to win just one of the games again though, unless Taylor can find some form pretty much overnight.
Decent total from England, but the bowlers will have some work to do to win it. Not convinced by Woakes as a #7 ahead of Swann, and Broad has done next to nothing with the bat in ODIs.
I've never felt that Woakes or Finn are controlled enough with the ball for the shorter version of the game. Perhaps makes no difference in crash bang wallop slogs, and in Tests it can be fine as long as you're taking wickets, but in ODIs you will get taken out of the attack and easily notch up 7+ an over without a wicket.
kiwis are progressing along nicely, Woakes and Swann 33 off 6.4 undoing a lot of the opening three seamers' 1/40 off 13. Still can't believe we played three crash bang wallop slogs
I've never felt that Woakes or Finn are controlled enough with the ball for the shorter version of the game. Perhaps makes no difference in crash bang wallop slogs, and in Tests it can be fine as long as you're taking wickets, but in ODIs you will get taken out of the attack and easily notch up 7+ an over without a wicket.
kiwis are progressing along nicely, Woakes and Swann 33 off 6.4 undoing a lot of the opening three seamers' 1/40 off 13. Still can't believe we played three crash bang wallop slogs
Nicely poised, Woakes pulling it back and taking out Taylor and Elliott, the run out perhaps the turning point. Assuming Guptill, if he returns, plays no major part then
McCullum and Franklin will need to see the kiwis home, tough ask. Maybe too tough with effectively five down at the moment and around seven an over needed. They were in box seat before the last two wickets fell so quickly, normally it is England who pass 100 with 0-2 wickets down then are around 130/4 soon after. When that does happen England struggle, can't see the kiwis not.
McCullum and Franklin will need to see the kiwis home, tough ask. Maybe too tough with effectively five down at the moment and around seven an over needed. They were in box seat before the last two wickets fell so quickly, normally it is England who pass 100 with 0-2 wickets down then are around 130/4 soon after. When that does happen England struggle, can't see the kiwis not.
Magnificent from Bazza and Guptill. ICC does need to revamp the retired hurt rule though - any player could call time-out and come back whenever he wanted to, in that case. Would've said this regardless of Guptill winning the match for the Kiwis tonight.
Guessed McCullum would play a key role if the kiwis were to win, turns out it wasn't Franklin but Guptill, other McCullum and Ellis who played the supporting roles.
I suppose the target wasn't quite enough, you have to doubt it will be when you lose reqular wickets to go from 220/4 to 258 all out
I suppose the target wasn't quite enough, you have to doubt it will be when you lose reqular wickets to go from 220/4 to 258 all out
angryangy
ICC Chairman
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2004
If you don't have an injury or illness, you can't come back. So abusing the law requires faking it. And doing so would imply an inherent advantage to abandoning your innings. Generally, nobody wants to restart their innings, that's a disadvantage. Unless you've made 100 and are starting to cramp up, I can't really see a positive. Sure, Guptil got to come out at a useful time, but it would have been more advantageous for Guptil to have made a big score at the top and see NZ win the game easily.
I don't think you can blame England's bowling for that today. You're going to go for double figures in some overs, it's the nature of the game. The problem was that our top 4 used up too many balls without going anywhere. That puts pressure on Morgan and Buttler to come in and try to smash it about from ball one, which is hard. Someone in that top 4 needed to go on and they didn't, that was the problem.
When we just had Trott it wasn't as much of an issue, but now there's 4 similar type of players and when they don't have brilliant days, this will keep happening.
When we just had Trott it wasn't as much of an issue, but now there's 4 similar type of players and when they don't have brilliant days, this will keep happening.
Yeah there isn't anything to be gained from my point of view. The positives of: having a rest; a shower; some treatment etc. are at very least equalled by the mental difficulties of having to restart your innings, and walking out knowing you aren't quite right physically.
In future though I think this is an area which could be abused, by a thinking team. Picture a batsman who has no clue against Ajmal, Narine etc. In a limited overs match, he could feign cramp/injury/whatever and go off just long enough so that those bowlers were finished their overs. Or one of your stodgier batsmen could retire 'hurt' just at the beginning of the batting powerplay to let a big hitter come in. Maybe your guy can't play very quick bowling well, so he retires when the oppositions quickest bowler comes on. There are some interesting possibilities
I like the way you are thinking. This potentially can be used as a very good weapon. But, I daresay , the ICC will come up with a law for the same. Just like they did away with the runners. The possibility I see here is- retirements won't be allowed for the ODIs and T20s. They will still be in place for Test matches.
The fact trego never plays for the lions probably tells us he'll never play for England. personally i think his bowling would get hammered at international level. i do agree however that he probably brings more to the t20 batting line up than root and more to the bowling line up than woakes. it will be interesting to see his guys like clarke, stokes and overton get on in Australia. particular stokes as he would fit perfectly at 7.
War
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2010
- Online Cricket Games Owned
Lumb is so one dimensional that he's frustrating to watch. Purely legside player. Will never be in my best England T20 playing XI. Nor will Trego (Luke Wright ftw).
Yea they have their major faults, but T20 is one format where many players who may have deficiencies can still survive.
Look at windies players like Johnson Charles & Dwayne Smith. Pollard also early his career looked like a village slogger until recent improvements also.
So although Lumb may not be perfect, he can still be of much use in T20s for England.
Same thing goes for Trego & Wright. ENG have no perfect all-rounder like Flintoff, but if you combine the bits & pieces strength's of both of them in a T20 XI - you could get a get some good returns.
----------
Yep, the windies have figured out this T20 trick better than most teams in recent times.
----------
If Wright's bowling is surving at international level, i reckon Trego bowling can more than hold his own, even if he gets tonked from time to time. After all Trego open's the bowling for Somerset, his New Zealand domestic team fairly often.
Overton probably impresses me more of that lot based on how he looked in the under-19 world cup. Still don't think Clarke is international quality despite his improved domestic numbers.
Stokes is pretty much a batsman that can contribute handy overs with the ball, like what Collingwood did. Not really the "perfect # 7" that the ODI/T20 teams need to be fair.
----------
I used to be very concerned about this up to a couple months ago. But now that bowlers have two new-ball at their disposal, having Cook, Bell & Trott in the top order may not be such bad idea looking ahead to the champions trophy & 2015 world cup.
Those will be conditions where quality quick bowlers will have a big say & teams may need technical sound top order players to be able to do well.
Similar threads
