posted Jun 28, 2008

comment by 4thecaptain (U9383617)
posted 1 Hour Ago

What a shambles.
This has proved that:

KP is no captain.
Bell flatters to deceive.
Ambrose is a poor wicket keeper who can't bat.
England's "front line" bowlers aren't smart enough.
Wright didn't look comfortable right from the start. As Nasser said "he's trying to hit the ball too hard".

SA must be rubbing their hands with glee.
------------------------
give bell a chance please, if i recall this is the first ODI series where he has opened the batting, give him a couple of series to adapt to that position, i for one thing he is good enough to do it.

I have long said Mustard is a far better choice for ODI wicket keeper, scores runs (which ambrose doesn't - but i think ambrose should be test keeper) and mustard can open the batting with bell, allowing wright to drop down the order where he usually plays best

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 28, 2008

sorry but we have to blame the ecb, they talk a good talk, produce statistics, but the proof is in the performance, it is clear that we are not getting the best from a team, man for man we have better players-apparantly, i wonder if we offered them large sums of money the performance would have improved.
I say, because of the sport england (tax payers) and lottery funding the ecb get we demand results and these results should be transparent, it is like a private members club. they need a vote of no confidence

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 29, 2008

The problems have been mounting since 92.

We now have little idea of how to play one day cricket or Twenty/20.

Our county sides use three or four overseas players during the summer, sides are then topped up with kolpakkers while youth and reserves are rarely promoted into the first team.

While others sides in the world have learnt and developed we have lagged behind and are now just becoming the whipping boys.

We have major problems all through the side, from the batting and not scoring enough runs in power plays, bit part bowlers who do little to stem the runs and fail with the bat. Front line bowlers who never perform consistenly, either from over to over or match to match. The fielding is second rate and the wicket keeping position is now regular material for most stand up comedians.

If these players are the best we have for the short form of the game, then we might as well just pack it in and stick with test cricket.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 29, 2008

A lot of talk about how England should have won the series here

BUT the fact remains NZ are a better ODI team so credit where credit is due please!

We're not ranked 3rd in the world for no good reason - we know how to fight back in the ODI's and our players, who although may be limited when it comes to test cricket, are better man for man than your boys when it comes to the shorter form

Having said that it was a very entertaining series and I can see Eng and SA having a great test series, should be very fiery!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 29, 2008

Our county sides use three or four overseas players during the summer, sides are then topped up with kolpakkers while youth and reserves are rarely promoted into the first team.

Here we go I was wondering when the world and his mum was going to get the blame for englands incompetence. YES INCOMPETENCE. Did anyone hear the coachs comments on "lack of experience"...apparently now you have to play 100 matches before you get experienced. Tim Southee (man of the series) 5 MATCHES.

New Zealand are a "depleted" side but still won the series. This is a one day side that would relish the choice england gets for picking players with the overseas stars and kolpakkers.

The players on the county circuits are plentiful, the wicketkeepers to choose from are plentiful, as are the bowlers and batsmen it is NOT their fault that the selcters CHOOSE not to CHOOSE them.

We hear excuses,too old, trying to build for the future etc etc. butwhere is the evidence? If this were true MV would not be captain, Adil Rashid would be in, we would not be so focussed on the return of freddie and jonesey as if these 2 were the saviours of cricket.

Footballers face the same foreigner argument, but look to euro 2008. Foreigners who play in the EPL have shone in this tournament yettheir english counterparts failed to get there.

DIFFERENCE IN MENTALITY METHINKS

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 29, 2008

Kiwibloke

Yes indeed NZ is a decent side and you fully deserved your victory. But what we Poms regret is that from our 18 County system, with upwards of 400 professionals, we continue grotesquely to underperfom in One Day cricket. New Zealand, by comparison, has six State sides and well under 100 full-time players. If you can wipe the floor with us despite the huge imbalance in our respective domestic games it does suggest that you must be doing something right on selection, focus, management and leadership. It is shameful that England, with all its financial and other advantages, continues to be outplayed by the Kiwis. Since January 2007 England has played New Zealand in 15 ODIs winning just 4 of them to New Zealand’s 9 (one tie, one no result).

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 29, 2008

I am not blaming the World and his mum, I am blaming the counties.

I have no objection to overseas players, my point is counties will sign an overseas player for the summer, but when he is not available for x amount of games they sign others to cover, why not give youth its chance.

So what next in the EPl, Adebayor is available for Arsenal August to October, December and March to May, his replacements will be Henry in November and Robihno in Jan/Feb.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 29, 2008

no team plays perfect cricket.In the end of the day the better team wins.NZ won because of their perseverance and their skill(Admit it).Any way when reading this article I would say it was some Indians whining.It is that ridiculous.Only thing you haven't suggested is dropping the coach.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 29, 2008

As Kiwibloke says, NZ is, on all the evidence, a better one day side than England. And, conversely, England is stronger in tests.

Also the return series in England has mirrored the first in NZ in a big way. The team that had the opportunity to play it's stronger form of the game first came out comfortably on top (NZ in NZ in the ODIs, then England in England in the tests). When they swapped to their respective weaker form, the victorious sides carried their momentum and confidence into their weaker form of the game, but eventually the better side prevailed.

I hope that makes sense.

Point taken re access to players and finances, etc for the English. Play more one day cricket. Develop a successful strategy, but don't panic when things are not going well. And stop focusing on the Ashes as the be all and end all to existence. It isn't and I think causes the english to drop the ball when it comes to playing half the other sides. Like NZ.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 29, 2008

The problem with the England team is that they do not approach the game in a professional way. Just watch Australia play and you will see that Ponting simply will not tolerate mediocrity. To play in the Australia team you either perform to the required standard or you do not get in.
Look at the England team, too many players play like it really doesn't matter if they win or lose. Anderson bowls too many loose deliveries. Pietersen might have all the ability in the world but is becoming hopelessly erratic, one day he plays just about the best one day innings ever, the next four games he can't even get into double figures. Ambrose looks completely useless. Wright is too unreliable.
One day cricket is quite simple really. The bowlers job is to keep the run rate down, this puts pressure on the batsmen and then they get themselves out by playing stupid shots. The batsmens job is to score as many as they can in the required amount of overs. It isn't rocket science. Yet still after all these years the England players haven't grasped this.
One day bowling is all about accuracy. You need bowlers who can string together several yorker type deliveries when required. Why on earth can't the England bowlers do this? Why doesn't the captain or the coach insist on this?
And you need batsmen who are reliable. You don't necessarily need 100 run partnerships but batsmen who can be relied upon to at least get into double figures.
And a bit more imagination might not go amiss either. As spin bowlers are amongst the most successful one day bowlers why do England insist on only playing one?
And with the massive incentive of all the players becoming multi-millionaires, you would think they might just have a more professional attitude to the game by now?
I honestly can't see this England team winning anything when they take on the West Indies in the autumn, they simply aren't good enough and until they learn to play in a professional manner they never will.

add comment | complain about this comment