BBC Home

Explore the BBC

New visitors: Create your membership
Returning members: Sign in

645 comments

user rating: 4 star

Can England still progress?

Twenty20 England
by extratime (U3808796) 17 September 2007
comment on the article

It’s a new format, perhaps, but England’s performance at this World Cup is much the same as their efforts in the recent 50-over ones. Above all, they struggled – just as they did in the Caribbean – with maximising the fielding restrictions.

Their policy to use Twenty20 specialists has been much discussed. I was in favour of it, but expressed reservations about the selection of Luke Wright. Wright is a potentially exciting talent but lacks the technique and experience to open against international bowlers, and it was rather perverse to promote him after a pair of failures at number three. Mark Ramprakash, in stunning form, inventive and highly effective in Twenty20, and with technical prowess, should surely have gone; with hindsight so should Ian Bell, although, when the squad was selected, he in no way merited selection. Of course, the man who could have made a real difference, and is a true match for Hayden, Gayle and Gibbs, is Marcus Trescothick.

Either way, England are stuck with Wright, Matt Prior, Vikram Solanki and Darren Maddy. Prior, as he proved yet again today, is not an international opening batsmen; his trademark is run-a-ball 20s which, in Twenty20, is simply not fast enough. By process of elimination as much as anything else, I would advocate opening with Solanki and Maddy. They have enjoyed success in this form of the game over its five seasons, and also possess huge experience. Certainly, however, Kevin Pietersen should be at number three.

With the ball, England have been a little better. Had Paul Collingwood caught Albie Morkel, Chris Schofield would not have been clobbered for three sixes and would have returned excellent figures, so it would be unfair to criticise him. On the positive side, Stuart Broad, James Anderson and Andrew Flintoff were very good against South Africa, only to be let down by some abysmal catching that cost England the game.

So England find themselves in a familiar position in World Cups: they are on the verge of an early exit unless they can get their act together and win consecutive games. Ultimately, England probably lack the big-hitting skills necessary to win the tournament, but they were not helped by the truly inexplicable decision to bat Snape ahead of Mascarenhas. As per usual in shorter cricket, England are tremendously reliant on Kevin Pietersen. But if they are to progress, their opening pair must contribute far more.

How can England progress to the semi-finals? Is this the best side: Maddy, Solanki, Pietersen, Collingwood, Shah, Flintoff, Mascarenhas, Prior, Schofield, Broad, Anderson

Article - third-umpire.blogspot.com/20...

Latest 10 comments

Read members' comments or add your own

posted Sep 19, 2007

"I truly fear the carnage the Sri Lankan's might wreak next week."
dont worry phonemarket1, I am sure Colingwood is prepared to learn from every damning defeat imposed on the team. I am sure he will get more relaxed by visiting another strip club..

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Sep 19, 2007

what's not good enough, paying for a dance before a big game. yes i agreed with you. what do you call Collingwood - ex captain would be good!!!!!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Sep 19, 2007

Never mind, it's all over now. No more worrying if we'll make it, calculating mathematical possibilities, elation followed by despair as England £$%^-up etc. All that's left is the taunts from other fans. We can shrug them off.

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by AndyW (U4583624)

posted Sep 19, 2007

England are close but not quite there in 20/20 cricket. They should have finished off both South Africa and New Zealand. Some bad decisions in the SA match cost them.
In the end, that over by Yuvraj separated India from England in that last match.

When I say close though, I'm not saying the same class as Australia and Sri Lanka who are above the other teams in one day cricket. On another day we can take on SA, India and NZ and win - as was shown by the series with India.

Don't think we need to get too excessively negative!

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by walgert (U6926229)

posted Sep 19, 2007

cricketchat..thats spot on!!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Sep 19, 2007

Cricketchat you are without doubt an idiot.

Are you suggesting Ravi Bopara, Vikram Solanki and Dimitri Mascarenhas are foreigners because I assume you are basing this on the colour of their skin?

The majority of England lost that kind of attitude along long time ago. Its idiots like you really do put things into perspective. Yeah we got beat, and got knocked out of a cricket tournament, but muppets like you make normal people think that there is a lot more worrying things going on in the world - like how someone can still have this kind of attitude.

Well done for putting things in perspective.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Sep 19, 2007

Good total by England, but once again we showed not enough flexibility in our batting order to give ourselves the best chance.

Collie should not have come in at 4 - he can't hit quick enough.

Dimi/Wright should have come in then Shah after. Freddie was never going to get the runs for us and can't scamper for 2's.

Also, I can't help wondering if Freddy cost us the game by what he said to Yuvraj.

Any, What the Hell, its all water under the bridge now. I will revert to supporting Hampshire and hope they can beat Yorks.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Sep 19, 2007

coolwolf - I do agree with you. I'm saying fair play to them for their batting tonight, but by no means am I saying this makes up for their terrible performance over the tournament. Many times it has been absolutely pathetic and the selection was just horrendous.

I don't buy any excuses and the usual "we'll learn from this" and "we'll take the positives" attitude are just not good enough. They need to start hating to lose a whole lot more and not just being content to 'learn lessons' - one day they're going to have to actually do something with what they have apparently learnt.

A comment on us being an experienced Twenty20 nation - unfortunately it seems our experienced Twenty20 players/specialists aren't experienced international players and our international players miss so much domestic Twenty20 through international fixtures that they aren't really experienced Twenty20 players. I don't think that we have as much overall experience as people suggest. No excuse, just an observation!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Sep 19, 2007

There is a sense of this team knowing how to lose and not minding it too much, and as for learning from our defeats, if we did, we would be awesome!

There were simple problems with selection, but also more worrying problems like not thinking on our feets. The South Africa test where Snape, a nurdler, was sent in ahead of the big hitting Mascharenas!

Don't the management know you don't have to stick to the batting order you start with it!

And we still have not learnt that when the pressure is on and you need to hit big, that basic cricket strokes are the way forward.

Yuvraj Singh stood is ground and hit each ball on its merits. Every time our lads felt they needed to heave ho - they either went for reverse sweeps, or went walkabout around the crease. IT DID NOT WORK ONCE!

We not only need to learn from our mistakes, we need to learn from the way it should be done.

add comment | complain about this comment

Comment on this article


RATE THIS ARTICLE

Rate Breakdown

  • 5 66.67%
    10 votes
  • 4 13.33%
    2 votes
  • 3 6.67%
    1 votes
  • 2
    0 votes
  • 1 13.33%
    2 votes

average rating:
4.20 from 15 votes