Eng in Lanka

First topic message reminder :

From not being keen on Moeen's position, Cook now uses him to open the batting and bowling sometimes.
While I am a fan of Moeen's temperament, I dont think he is the saviour that Eng is looking for.

also he won't do well as an opener for too long.

Cook has strong dislikes and it seems now Hales is on that list.


Lanks has been Mauled by India and must be at lowest possible morale.

Eng is not a great ODI side and lagging by the day as Morgan observed.

Should be an even series if not a high quality one. Lanks might still win

Mad for Chelsea wrote:commentators banging on about why didn't Bops bowl? must confess to a bit of a as to why England's main bowlers should have bowled even less than they did, unless they mean that Moeen shouldn't have bowled his 10 overs.

Overall I thought it was decent from England.

Agree - Bops is there as an option. If anyone had gone round the park then he would have been brought on, but was always going to be at the back of the queue behind the four specialist bowlers and the part-time spinners (given the nature of today's pitch). I am sure on another day, in other conditions, his more than handy bowling will be utilised

Mad for Chelsea wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:

... With rain about, looks like DL wil l come into play - over to MfC

well given that SL completed their innings this is a pretty simple computation actually

...

Mfc - I was more thinking of if we get started and then have a few interruptions whilst losing the odd wicket during some of the sessions! That really cries out for your expertise!

If we don't bat at all today, do we then get the full 50 overs tomorrow?

I have an up to date DL calculator but it's on my home computer so hardly any use at the moment. It was put to a bit of use in the 4-nations tournament this summer as we had one 5 minute rain interruption (no overs reduced but chance of rain later on meant we got the calculator out). There were no printers at the ground (!!!) so we had to transcribe the numbers onto paper by hand (this was done rather frantically but still took a while), and then get the spreadsheet out to our skipper. As things turned out, it wasn't needed and we rolled over the Germans for 70odd (we were in front on DL throughout as things happened) - surprisingly the Germans didn't seem too fussed about DL.

I suspect you may have the commercial/general public version MfC rather than the pro one the ICC uses. The pro one is more up to date as it gives generally higher scores for the lower number of overs. I would have expected about 150 in 20 overs TBH. 135 would have been more a sort of 200 score reduced down.

As regards the 5th bowler thing, I'm not entirely sure what the current thinking is on that one sorry.

yep full 50 tommorow if possible.

But as long as we reach 20 overs its a game.

http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sj2ps6

This is very good

guildfordbat wrote:Hi Dog - you mean Woakes but, yes, the best ever performance by an England bowler in SL.

General view is that SL's total is very good for this ground and will take a lot of beating. With rain about, looks like DL will come into play - over to MfC

Ooops. Yes Guildford. I meant Woakes of course. I must have been overcome with excitement at the time.
Had to retire myself when I saw the ground completely covered. Good idea to have the reserve day.

Yeah, it's a decent idea.

Interesting to read the ODI cricket ideologies on here. Think I'm probably just disillusioned with ODI at the moment. Watching Sharma score 264 pretty much convinced me that it's not worth taking seriously. Best laid plans of men and mice and all that.

The problem with the World Cup is it stretches on so bleedin' long!

The first group game for England takes place on the 14th of February, and the last (the sixth) occurs on the 13th of March.

Y-A-W-N!

Not much more than this laborious ODI series though, duty... stretching from Nov 21-Dec 16.

The WC will be far more interesting despite the inevitability of a few lop-sided matches.
Also, more variety of conditions with matches spread out over the 2 countries will make each match more of an event hopefully.

Australia/NZ is by far the most exciting place to watch cricket matches for a multitude of reasons and far less monotonous than watching an ODI series in England, India or SL by comparison.

The Loaded Dog wrote:Not much more than this laborious ODI series though, duty... stretching from Nov 21-Dec 16.

The WC will be far more interesting despite the inevitability of a few lop-sided matches.
Also, more variety of conditions with matches spread out over the 2 countries will make each match more of an event hopefully.

Australia/NZ is by far the most exciting place to watch cricket matches for a multitude of reasons and far less monotonous than watching an ODI series in England, India or SL by comparison.

For you in Sydney maybe.. For us it means sleepless nights and getting to work late..

Oh, I know. Same applies here of course.

I'm talking about the "watchability" of matches though... regardless of time zone constraints.

Good point made on a cricket podcast I was listening to earlier

"Chris Woakes is a good Tim Bresnan."

And that's probably true, in that Bresnan was always "no mug with the bat" when actually he was, a lot of the time. Woakes is actually no mug with the bat

One can get odds of evens for England to win this game.

It will be an absolute, bloody doddle to the finish. Cook will be in his element: chasing a score at under five an over for fifty overs. And if it rains a bit and D/L comes into play, then it will be easier, as ever, for the chasing side, and Buttler will be in his element.

A stroll. A chance to print money.

Come on England!

We all know senanayake is taking 4 for 30 as we're bowled out for 185 off 45.4 overs.

Duty281 wrote:The problem with the World Cup is it stretches on so bleedin' long!

The first group game for England takes place on the 14th of February, and the last (the sixth) occurs on the 13th of March.

Y-A-W-N!

Well at least that means we'll be in it for a month. We were out of the football World Cup after something like 8 days!

Olly wrote:We all know senanayake is taking 4 for 30 as we're bowled out for 185 off 45.4 overs.

We can call him a chuicker though and claim a moral victory!

Insanity, doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result

Or picking Cook as ODI captain

How can it make you feel if you're a player in this team scrapping for a place in the world cup squad and you have a failure (like hales) and you're dropped, but you alastair cook who hasn't scored a odi century for two and a half years, barely makes 50 anymore, yet he is guaranteed his place in the side.

Get him out the side for crying out loud

Agree of course, a nothing innings, 20 off 30 balls from captain marvel awful. You can't help but feel the selectors were relieved with Hales's duck in the last game as it gave an easy explanation for who to drop so the plodder could come back in

We are keeping up with the rate. No problems so far. The lads just don't need to panic. Our best two in at present as well.

Odds on Taylor being dropped for Trott.

I'm struggling to work out where England have gone in the last decade of ODIs.

We still plod along and hope to bash our way to near par at the end

No chance GSC.

the selectors are playing cook as he is the captain- is a better player in aus conditions and only wants 1 of the old guard and trot is obviously out of the equation. They are part looking at the future.

but if they do do what you say then I may become as pessimistic as the rest of you

There's a World Cup coming up though, we have nothing to lose by making Morgan captain and replacing Cook with someone more dynamic (which could mean almost anyone!).

It won't happen of course, but when we limp out in QF's (I am assuming we will just about get there) then it will all be a waste of time.

The infuriating thing is, if England beat the teams they really should be beating in the group, then you have three one-off games to win the World Cup. It is an outside chance for a team like England, but we are not good enough to afford a complete dud in the batting lineup.

He isn't a complete dud and certainly not in OZ..How has this nonsense festered on this board?

Trott isn't even in the 30-man squad is he? So not much chance of him playing...

Well it's based on the following:

1. He hasn't scored an ODI hundred since 2012
2. He can't manufacture a boundary off a good ball
3. Unimaginative captaincy
4. Last ODI series in Aus - played in all 5 games and didn't score a 50
5. Any idea he is good in Aus can only come from his amazing Test series 4 years ago

He only averages 28 or so in Australia with a highest score of 44. Not that good.

In 5 innings. Don't be silly dog. Its based on his ability in those conditions and he is much better based on more significant data.

mystiroakey wrote:In 5 innings. Don't be silly dog. Its based on his ability in those conditions and he is much better based on more significant data.

Like what? His performance in the last Ashes (very poor), or the one 4 years ago? Are we playing that game here: "defend the indefensible"?

Yes mysti, only 5 innings. You're not including Test form from 4 or 5 years ago are you? His current form is shot.

Any other batsmen had his ODI form from the last 2 years wouldn't be near the side.

tell you what, I really like the look of Taylor. When I last saw him a few years ago against Ireland he made 25 or so but looked awful, consistenly losing his shape on the drive. Here he looks composed, hits the ball much harder, and an all-round better player.

Also think him and Root is a good partnership, with Root mostly hanging back and nurdling the spinners, while Taylor likes to run down the pitch at them, makes it hard for them to settle.

50 up for Taylor, well played .

VTR wrote:Well it's based on the following:

1. He hasn't scored an ODI hundred since 2012
2. He can't manufacture a boundary off a good ball
3. Unimaginative captaincy
4. Last ODI series in Aus - played in all 5 games and didn't score a 50
5. Any idea he is good in Aus can only come from his amazing Test series 4 years ago

Its reactionary nonsense.

The fact is England have the youngest squad out there but are keeping the captain on.

Why.

Because they want to.. And we can't change it.. But dispute what you want to believe he can be quality. A proven legendary performance in aus. But lookeven if he is lacking in odi form. They want  1 experienced player. And heck it might as well be the captain. Why put pressure onto any other player that we just need to concentrate on his own job. The others are not experienced enough. We will be going into the world cup with the lowest average caps from a top nation.

Why burden another with captaincy just yet.

A proven performance that he has failed to replicate at any other time

nippy little b#ggers between the wickets these two also...

Well its face it or get wound up. This place is getting boring. A captains job is to win.

In a few hours time he may have won the last two games . yet the daggers get deeper and deeper.

Morgan is a senior and very experienced player. He is a bit out of form at the moment but has the game for ODI's. He is the obvious choice.

I know Cook can't be dislodged, they have already named him as World Cup captain, which is exactly the kind of thinking that gets us nowhere time and time again.

And he is not potentially good in ODIs, he simply does not have the game to put pressure on the bowlers and never will.

It's not reactionary, I have wanted Cook out of the ODI side for a long time.

I tend to side with mysti on this one. While I agree that Cook shouldn't be in the side, he is, and appears to be for the foreseeable future, so it's easiest to just accept that and move on IMO. Otherwise discussions will get very wearisome.

why don't we talk about the actual cricket being played?

Mad for Chelsea wrote:I tend to side with mysti on this one. While I agree that Cook shouldn't be in the side, he is, and appears to be for the foreseeable future, so it's easiest to just accept that and move on IMO. Otherwise discussions will get very wearisome.

why don't we talk about the actual cricket being played?

Well today's debate stems from another p!$$ poor performance from Cook. So it is relevant to the actual cricket.

But fair enough, let's be positive, Taylor looks like he is fulfilling his potential at last. The way he has played the last couple of games you'd think he had 100 caps behind him.

Ta chelsea.

This 3 and 4 needs to be kept. It is potentially as good as any other in world cricket. Then if Morgan becomes the player he is again(the burden of captaincy probably wouldn't help)

Is this side that bad?

Anyway. Great partnership so far and looks like a winning one.

I remember when we had this debate about Graeme Smith... Tough times. Thank god he jumped so he couldn't get pushed.

100 partnership, very good effort

Cook wont jump

The selectors wont push

England will fail at a world cup yet again, and look a decade behind the rest of the world again

In a strange way I would welcome a couple of wickets here and let's see if Ravi can bring the run chase home. I think we know enough about Taylor and Root to say they have cemented their position. Ravi often seems to play a nice innings then not quite see it through. I think it would benefit our World Cup chances if he was able to play a confidence boosting innings.

Gsc look at the positives. We will have the lowest average capped player. So is that behind. Or potentially ahead of the game.

Does it matter if the approach is a decade old

Well played tayor. Vtr you have your wish.

thanks a lot VTR

Right Ravi, over to you, bring it home.

Good knock by Taylor, a bit unlucky there, his hand seemed to slip on the bat and that caused him to lose control.

Sorry for that! Thinking bigger picture though. We do need to win this game in general though, if we lose from here collective confidence will be down!

Another thought, Morgan would usually come in ahead of Bopara wouldn't he? So the management are thinking along the same lines? Does this mean I could be up for a job, I won't say what my first recommendation would be