The ODIs (Various times in September)

[MUFC1987]

We don't seem to have a thread for these. No idea if this is in the right forum, as it's not technically the Ashes, but never mind.

England's top order currently being rolled over chasing 300+. Interesting team selection as always.

 

[Owzat]

By "interesting" do you mean cr ap? A powder puff bowling attack made up of bit-part bowlers and not a lot of worthwhile experience, I don't know if the selectors are using this as preparation for the World Cup or just writing it off as a contractual obligation.

This is about the time we should be settling our ODI squad down ahead of the World Cup. Not sure why Carberry was picked, maybe someone does want him to be a one cap wonder in every format because he's been lucky to get a first cap every time he has!

And when will England learn they won't win anything playing a bowler light. It's not necessarily final ERs, it's a lack of wicket threat when you need it. At 116/3 after 21.5 overs England had a foothold in the game, by the time the next wicket fell England were neck deep in doo doo.

Tredwell has done well in the past, but I'm unconvinced he is going to win us many matches. Stokes looks like he needs to either be given a run in the side, or more time in the counties, he most certainly doesn't look a 3rd seamer.

And Bopara does well also from time to time, but is as likely to be hit around as pose a serious wicket threat, when he's in the side the temptation is to consider him an all-rounder when he should just bowl mainly when someone else is being carted all over.

We exercised no bowling control and have collapsed chasing a target 40+ runs higher than it should have been. I see Buttler now has his scenario for batting, it will be in vain but at least he'll help himself to runs to con the selectors he is the right man for the job



Not many pluses for England, Pietersen batted quite well but got himself out when we more than just needed an anchor, Morgan was playing a captain's innings in vain and no doubt Buttler will help himself while the aussies know the game is all but won so not pressing too hard and just control the innings to a conclusion knowing England will either bat out the overs or they just wait until they get themselves out tilting at windmills attempting to win from an impossible position.

As for the bowlers, some credit may go to Rankin but I think the aussies set about their innings well and didn't need to smash him about, with a couple of late wickets perhaps a little flattering to Rankin who gave little away but 2/49 with both wickets coming on or after the score was 283/5 definitely not a reflection of his tidy but largely ineffectual bowling.

Bopara bowled neatly enough, I think he benefited from the early wicket allowing him to come on early and a shall we say gimme wicket as Watson made a meal of a shot that was more batsman error than bowler forced, and a second late on as the batsman put the ball down the fielder's throat. Bopara will have better days and far worse days, when England needed that 4th wicket it didn't come when needed.

I'm still unsold on the theory pressure buys wickets, in ODIs it allows a side to reach the latter overs with wickets in hand and after 23 overs the aussies were in a decent but not breakaway position of 118/3 (5.13 rpo), after 28 overs the run rate had dipped to just 5.00, but with wickets in hand the aussies could charge and score a further 197 runs off just 22 overs (8.95 rpo), the killer blow dealt to England

Stokes has now gone for just 5 and England may not even score 197 - 30 runs to go, Tredwell, Finn and Rankin left to come. While England may be missing a few key names like Cook, Swann, Anderson, Broad and Bresnan, if this truly is the best the rest can achieve without them then we haven't a prayer at the World Cup.

Poor poor poor from England, not even sure if bowling first was the right decision but with only four supposedly frontline bowlers I guess chasing is always in the captain's mind rather than trying to control the innings with only four bowlers.

 

[MUFC1987]

Well, I didn't actually see the Australia innings, but yes the team selected was a bowler light. I think Stokes could be a decent guy to bat at 7 and be the 5th bowler, but as you say 3rd seamer he is not. We should have dropped one of the batsmen for another bowler, for sure.

On Buttler, you can be critical all you want, but that partnership with Morgan was exactly what I said he could do. Comes in with time to build an innings and he's ticking over at almost a run a ball with 10 overs to go to smash the ball. Unfortunately, there's no one there to help him. Oh, and should he be keeping wicket? Probably not. But he should be getting a run batting at 6 for sure. The guy has got serious talent. Just needs time to show it.

 

[Umair7]

200 up for England.Butler is doing a good job but no matter what England will lose in the End Clarke and Bailey did a great job and if i am not wrong this is Clarke first century against England in ODI's.McKay and Johnson have bowled very well till now and Fawad is no Warne

 

[Owzat]

On Buttler, you can be critical all you want, but that partnership with Morgan was exactly what I said he could do. Comes in with time to build an innings and he's ticking over at almost a run a ball with 10 overs to go to smash the ball.

We can go over the same ground time and again, assuming you are the one who cited any and every excuse for him which I assume is the case given the reference to when he comes in.

I'll say three things, one repeated and one relevant to this match. The game is over, what he does here is of little consequence so proves nothing of his ability in a proper situation.

You'll probably argue the opposite, but it is a question of doing it when it matters.

The repeat point is Buttler needs to do a job when he's needed, not just when he comes in at a point set up for him nicely on a decent batting track with time to make runs - especially in a game all but over.

And the third thing is simply the pitch is good enough for the aussies to score 315, the aussies don't need to panic now the game is all over, and what will matter is when Buttler is needed to come good in another game when the opposition haven't eased off and he hasn't come in at a fine and dandy time for him to help himself to runs.

I'll take your disagreement as a given, but as I say we could go over this back and forth.

Unfortunately, there's no one there to help him. Oh, and should he be keeping wicket? Probably not. But he should be getting a run batting at 6 for sure. The guy has got serious talent. Just needs time to show it.

He shouldn't be keeping wicket, in my book he shouldn't be in the side so keeping wicket is probably the price he has to pay for getting in.

When he's scored a few runs in different, tougher situations, and not one set up for him to score a 'consolation' 75 on a good track with nothing to lose coming in with plenty of time to build an innings, then we'll see.

One swallow a summer maketh not, you'll say he needs to bat higher, I'll say if he's a good enough bat to be in the side he wouldn't need special dispensation

 

[MUFC1987]

So coming in today is when the game is over, yet when he comes in needing 15 an over off the last 4 overs, the game is very much 'on' and he gets the blame from you when he doesn't come off?

If you don't realise how crazy that is, then I suggest you step away from the keyboard. I've said time and time again that when he gets the chance to play himself in, like every other batsman in the order gets, he will average a lot more and show how good he is. No batsman in the history of the game has come in to the situations that he's been forced to bat at and won the game every time. Yet you expect him too? The England strategy is flawed and they're wasting Buttler's talent. You could put Viv Richards at 7 and give him 4 overs to score 60 and he'd look poor too. Have some sense. And when he came in, the game wouldn't have been 'gone' if the top order hadn't batted so poorly and taken so long to get nowhere.

Oh and he came in on a decent batting pitch today, which was easy? Perhaps you want to tell that to the rest of the order. And he is good enough to bat higher, that is Giles fault, not mine. Like I said, the tactics are flawed. We can score 200-4 in 45 overs every time, but you can't expect Morgan and Buttler to add 90 to that in the last 5 overs every time. If that's Buttler's fault, then the world has gone mad.

 

[Owzat]

200 up for England.Butler is doing a good job but no matter what England will lose in the End Clarke and Bailey did a great job and if i am not wrong this is Clarke first century against England in ODI's.McKay and Johnson have bowled very well till now and Fawad is no Warne

Buttler is making hay while the sun shines, coming in at 103/5 after 23.4 overs on a blameless track he knew the odds of a win were remote.

But as I say to MUFC over and over, it isn't about coming in when the situation is well set for an innings, he needs to score runs when it isn't so well set, and scoring runs in a hopeless situation won't count for anything when he next bats and the situation undoubtedly won't be hopeless.

When he comes in at say 200/5 after 38 overs we need runs, if he comes in at 250/5 after 44 overs we need runs, if he comes in at 230/5 after 48 overs we need runs, the point is he can't just score runs when it is 'perfect' for him. We can't build the side around him on the premise he's awesome, if he weren't wearing the gloves he might well not be in the side.



So game over, England out for only 30 more than Australia scored off their last 22 overs. Too many early wickets for England in their innings, not enough wickets in the middle part of the aussie innings allowing them to set up an unsurmountable target. We'll see if England fight back next match, I'm hoping my 'slating' of Buttler produces a reaction from him, not his PR person elect, but time will tell. If he exists as a one trick pony then we'll only ever see the consolation knocks, if he is going to bat six or seven he can't expect to come in in a good situation with overs to spare very often, but you can't tell some people

 

[MUFC1987]

Buttler is making hay while the sun shines, coming in at 103/5 after 23.4 overs on a blameless track he knew the odds of a win were remote.

But as I say to MUFC over and over, it isn't about coming in when the situation is well set for an innings, he needs to score runs when it isn't so well set, and scoring runs in a hopeless situation won't count for anything when he next bats and the situation undoubtedly won't be hopeless.

When he comes in at say 200/5 after 38 overs we need runs, if he comes in at 250/5 after 44 overs we need runs, if he comes in at 230/5 after 48 overs we need runs, the point is he can't just score runs when it is 'perfect' for him. We can't build the side around him on the premise he's awesome, if he weren't wearing the gloves he might well not be in the side.

Read what I'm saying! He shouldn't be coming in at 200/5 after 38 overs or whatever low run rate we have whenever, he should be coming in at 165/4 off 33 overs (when the top order play aggressively rather than the plodding we get from Cook and Bell) rather than watching Bopara or someone come in and score 5 off 15 balls and then get out.

Notice praise for Buttler from the Commentators too. You being overly critical to 'spur him on' makes little difference and just offers you an excuse for when he inevitably comes off, if he gets the chance. Not when Cook and Bell have taken 120 balls to get to 70 each. ODI cricket is not just a slightly faster version of Tests which is how we treat it.

Pick the right team and surprise, surprise, we'll start playing better. You just expect super-human feats because you have some personal vendetta against him. I suggest you move on and focus on someone else.

 

[Owzat]

So coming in today is when the game is over, yet when he comes in needing 15 an over off the last 4 overs, the game is very much 'on' and he gets the blame from you when he doesn't come off?

If you don't realise how crazy that is, then I suggest you step away from the keyboard. I've said time and time again that when he gets the chance to play himself in, like every other batsman in the order gets, he will average a lot more and show how good he is. No batsman in the history of the game has come in to the situations that he's been forced to bat at and won the game every time. Yet you expect him too? The England strategy is flawed and they're wasting Buttler's talent.

Reductio ad absurdum, if he had no chance of winning the game then I wouldn't blame him and yet you're accusing me of being crazy?!?!? Where do I say that, what I said is he needs to produce runs more often, not hard to grasp so "step away from the keyboard" yourself and come back when you can debate it with sense.

Better still, don't bother. You won't convince me and I doubt he'll go out and convince me with the bat. If his talent were that obvious

And why do you insist in turning this into a "win the game" argument?!?!? I've said nothing about winning the game, he could equally come in with 5-10 overs left batting first, I think you should take a chill pill and look at what's being said not your paranoid misinterpretation

I said it was a soft situation to bat in, that is true regardless who was batting. He made runs, but he needs to do that when the game is very much alive as well as when it is all but over.

You could put Viv Richards at 7 and give him 4 overs to score 60 and he'd look poor too. Have some sense. And when he came in, the game wouldn't have been 'gone' if the top order hadn't batted so poorly and taken so long to get nowhere.

"Have some sense" yourself, comparing him to Richards and putting words in my mouth . I don't absolve the top order, that isn't where the match was lost, but the game was completely up before Buttler came in

It wouldn't surprise me if someone like Richards could come in and win the match from there, but that has no bearing on Buttler or the England situation

Oh and he came in on a decent batting pitch today, which was easy? Perhaps you want to tell that to the rest of the order. And he is good enough to bat higher, that is Giles fault, not mine. Like I said, the tactics are flawed. We can score 200-4 in 45 overs every time, but you can't expect Morgan and Buttler to add 90 to that in the last 5 overs every time. If that's Buttler's fault, then the world has gone mad.

Yeah, it was a terrible pitch because three batsmen got out for next to nothing while others must have performed miracles in scoring a hundred (Clarke) and three fifties (KP, Morgan and Buttler)

There were too many runs to chase, but again you're talking nonsense by suggesting those early wickets were indicative of the pitch. Zimbabwe got bowled out a few Tests ago for 51, as indeed England did against the West Indies a few years ago, does that mean 51 isn't a poor excuse of a score?

I suggest you "step away from the keyboard" and "have some sense" yourself before advising others, all you've done is make daft assertions as if that's what I was saying then reductio ad absurdum.

I'm talking SOLELY about Buttler and his run scoring abilities in a VARIETY of situations not just the one you want him to come in at to optimise his performance. I've said NOTHING about blaming him for defeats, I am talking about him scoring runs in all situations and even then not always as you can't expect batsmen to perform every time, but you might expect them to perform a bit more often than Buttler does.

If you can't grasp that runs scored when the game is lost on a flat pitch are not representative of all situations he may come in to bat in then I suggest you take your own advice not toss it at others in some ridiculous fashion. You've wound yourself up something chronic, and I'm going to leave you now expecting you'll carry this on but realising that this kind of debate that you've dragged it into with hysterics does the forum no favours.

----------

Read what I'm saying! He shouldn't be coming in at 200/5 after 38 overs or whatever low run rate we have whenever, he should be coming in at 165/4 off 33 overs (when the top order play aggressively rather than the plodding we get from Cook and Bell) rather than watching Bopara or someone come in and score 5 off 15 balls and then get out.

Damn, I'm arguing with some fool who believes his own gospel too much - and there was me planning to go.

I read what you said, I get what you said, doesn't mean I have to subscribe to it He is batting seven, get over it. And as I said before, we can't set the situation up nicely to suit one player in his perfect batting scenario, do you even get cricket?!?!?!? If he wants to bat higher he needs to prove his worth, laughably someone might promote him on the back of this but even then no doubt if he fails you'll come up with more excuses.

Notice praise for Buttler from the Commentators too. You being overly critical to 'spur him on' makes little difference and just offers you an excuse for when he inevitably comes off, if he gets the chance. Not when Cook and Bell have taken 120 balls to get to 70 each. ODI cricket is not just a slightly faster version of Tests which is how we treat it.

Wow, people praising someone for scoring runs, whatever next Grasp context ffs

Pick the right team and surprise, surprise, we'll start playing better. You just expect super-human feats because you have some personal vendetta against him. I suggest you move on and focus on someone else.

"I suggest YOU move on and focus on SOMETHING else", I have no personal vendetta you just can't accept I don't agree with most of what you say as if I'm denying gravity or some other accepted fact or theory.

I don't expect super human miracles, you can't argue so you just make sh1t up to try and denounce what I say. I couldn't give two sh1ts about Buttler other than his contribution to England, so quit putting words in my mouth and making ridiculous made up false allegations in my direction so I can go


As it's taking the keyboard warrior so long to type I'm off, definitely this time

 

[MUFC1987]

So much waffle, so little time. Two points though:

1: I didn't say the low scores were indicative of the nature of the pitch, it was a GREAT batting pitch. But if the top order had scored at a reasonable rate, Buttler and Morgan would have been together needing 7 an over, rather than 9 an over. That's my point. I'm not saying the top order needed to score more even, just getting out quicker would have benefited Buttler and Morgan.

2: Players scoring in a variety of situations? Yet we pander to Cook and Bell etc, telling them to take their time and play their natural games, to the detriment of the team. Why do the rules change? We need to get the best out of the players, which is not happening with Giles in charge. This is my entire point.

We have players with massive potential in One day cricket. What we don't have, is a Coach who can get the best out of them. That's because our tactics are so poor. Hence the bad team selection as well. But hey, let's blame one player instead.

 

[Haarithan]

Interesting post match debate on Sky where Nick Knight suggested he'd drop Joe Root to fit in an extra bowler. Personally disagree regarding Root and would drop Carberry instead, and move Trott up top to open with KP.

Trott
Pietersen
Root
Morgan
Bopara (6)
Buttler
Stokes (5)
Tredwell (4)
Finn (1)
Overton (3)
Rankin (2)

Still a fairly rubbish bowling attack, but not bad enough to concede 300 on a consistent basis.

 

[whiteninness]

More proof that McKay is a world-class one day bowler. He won Australia's ODI player of the year award last year. He's boring as fearsome tweak, like Johnny Unitus below, but he knows how to bowl in one day cricket. Not a bad first class player either, but lacks the variety for test match cricket I think.

It's not surprising that Fawad is getting a game but it's surprising that Doherty isn't even in the squad.

Okay, it's not really surprise knowing our selectors, who seem to get an idea in mind and go full throttle and completely throw out old ideas (i.e. players).

 

[sifter132]

Everyone complained about England being a bowler light, but 2 of the 3 specialists (FInn and Tredwell) had the highest economy rates. Thought Stokes was rubbish to be honest, where is Chris Woakes? Shouldn't he be getting first crack at this bowling all-rounder slot? Not that I think Woakes is awesome...just curious.

Some good stuff from Aus last night, happy to see M.Johnson cracking that 90mph consistently and bowling impressively. And McKay as well always seems to do the job. Was worried Australia wouldn't have enough at one stage, they kinda stalled in their last 5-10 overs, arguably should have got close to 340-350.

 

[War]

Interesting post match debate on Sky where Nick Knight suggested he'd drop Joe Root to fit in an extra bowler. Personally disagree regarding Root and would drop Carberry instead, and move Trott up top to open with KP.

Trott
Pietersen
Root
Morgan
Bopara (6)
Buttler
Stokes (5)
Tredwell (4)
Finn (1)
Overton (3)
Rankin (2)

Still a fairly rubbish bowling attack, but not bad enough to concede 300 on a consistent basis.

Yea i would agree with the current bowling attack given the current squad. Although i might play Jordan over Overton. I still can't believe the selectors thought so highly of Stokes bowling to select him as basically a 3rd seamer - that made me spit out my tea this morning when i saw the line-up.

 

[ferg512]

Where is Kieswetter? I thought he'd be a better option at the top than Carberry. The English bowling attack looks extremely average without Broad, Bresnan, Anderson etc. I'm assuming Meaker would get a run if he hadn't been injured. I'm glad the Aussies went after Tredwell like that, he is exactly the kind of average cricketer that gets away with being average because one day cricket allows him to bowl his 10 overs in the middle when no ones going after him.