England v South Africa at Southampton, 2nd ODI

First topic message reminder :

With the wash out at Cardiff, this fixture has no less the importance of that as regards to whoever wins either keeps/gains the number one International ODI team position in the world. Both will give it everything they have.

Likely teams i would think pretty much as the first ODI, ie:

England.
AN Cook, IR Bell, IJL Trott, RS Bopara, EJG Morgan, C Kieswetter†, TT Bresnan, CR Woakes, GP Swann, JM Anderson, ST Finn.

South Africa.
GC Smith, HM Amla, D Elgar, AB de Villiers*†, JP Duminy, F du Plessis, R McLaren, WD Parnell, RJ Peterson, M Morkel, LL Tsotsobe

The boys are having some fun out there.

Patel with a 6. Going down fighting

Patel - 6,4,6. Machine.

eirebilly wrote:Patel with a 6. Going down fighting

That's one positive the English have shown this whole series, they never lay down.

Entertaining last wicket partnership here, really livening things up before the obvious conclusion. Run out refered to the third umpire and Finn's safe for now.

I am starting to believe again

Game over.

Until now

That's it, South Africa win by 80 runs!. comprehensive win, outbatted, outbowled and outfielded England.

I was against Patel but he has done a very good job this match.

Changes for the next match though :

Bairstow for Bopara
Woakes for Bresnan

We were well outplayed and well done to SA for that

For us we must remember that that was our first ODI defeat of 2012, and so no reason to panic too much. As ever defeats raise issues though, namely:

- The fielding. Has got worse rather than better this year.
- Bresnan's form. Despite a couple of decent efforts v WI has generally not had a great time this year. Might have to make way for Woakes or perhaps Dernbach (see the next point)
- Bowling at the death without Broad. Broad has been our main death bowler, and we look a little exposed with Bresnan and Finn bowling at that time.

On Bopara, he has had a great time of it of late in one-day cricket. No need to leave him out unless he still feels that his personal issues are affecting him - if that was the case I'm sure he'd have stepped aside. However, as a wider issue with Bopara he is a player who relies heavily on confidence as we have seen in the past. Whatever has happened has dented his confidence, which has probably effected him on his current run. He's an important cog in our one-day unit and must be stuck with though.

what England didn't do right and ther list is long.....
they can't pick the team right and I think strategize too much..instead of keeping it simple....

1) 77 mph Bresnan ( and Bopara was also bowling at 77mph today) is the best of the 3 frontline seamers they can find in Eng ????......then this big walloping is a par result.

However from what I saw of Jade D. he bowls a lot of slow balls but can hit 90mph with his fastest.......was a few classes above Bresnan.

and why is Onions not consdired for ODIs ?

2) The Mr. Stiff limb Kieswetter is medicore as a WK and batsmen........Street smart Prior is streets ahead....and Bairstwo can keep wkts too ?

3) Bell has to play like himself...the inning builder and not try to show off what he is not i.e KP....it's not sustainable over a period of time.

4) and once Bell undertstands his true self.....You can't put 3 get set type inning builders Trott, Cook and Bell in 1,2 and 3....with all the PP overs at the start.

you've gotta stagger and distribute them

Cook and Bopara Open...trott at 3.......and Bell at 5 with strokemaker like Bairstow coming at No.4...unbelievable that Bairstwo wasn't played...simply unbelievable

5) His cheap runs at the end in a meaningless cause notwithstanding...Patel is simply short of international class.....would be OK if BD or Zim were playing him......but Eng ain't going anywhere if they keep picking him.

SA looks superior to england throughout this tour.

I can see SA going on to become one of the great teams of all time.

Simillar to Waugh Aussies, Windies 70s/80s and the invincibles.

The best team in world cricket by a street mile. They will dominate for the next 5 years. A relatively young team as well. all they need now is a good wicketkeeper for test.

KP_fan wrote:what England didn't do right and ther list is long.....
they can't pick the team right and I think strategize too much..instead of keeping it simple....

1) 77 mph Bresnan ( and Bopara was also bowling at 77mph today) is the best of the 3 frontline seamers they can find in Eng ????......then this big walloping is a par result.

However from what I saw of Jade D. he bowls a lot of slow balls but can hit 90mph with his fastest.......was a few classes above Bresnan.

and why is Onions not consdired for ODIs ?

2) The Mr. Stiff limb Kieswetter is medicore as a WK and batsmen........Street smart Prior is streets ahead....and Bairstwo can keep wkts too ?

3) Bell has to play like himself...the inning builder and not try to show off what he is not i.e KP....it's not sustainable over a period of time.

4) and once Bell undertstands his true self.....You can't put 3 get set type inning builders Trott, Cook and Bell in 1,2 and 3....with all the PP overs at the start.

you've gotta stagger and distribute them

Cook and Bopara Open...trott at 3.......and Bell at 5 with strokemaker like Bairstow coming at No.4...unbelievable that Bairstwo wasn't played...simply unbelievable

5) His cheap runs at the end in a meaningless cause notwithstanding...Patel is simply short of international class.....would be OK if BD or Zim were playing him......but Eng ain't going anywhere if they keep picking him.

Strategising has been a key part of England's recent good one-day form. Its an important part of the game, particularly with the rules as they currently are.

To answer your points:

1/ Bresnan has earned his place based on his past performances with the ball. As I said in my previous post I agree that his form has been poor lately, and that his place is now under threat. Dernbach is a very good death bowler - fantastic slower ball and good yorkers. But he hasn't pulled up many trees for Surrey this year and the general perception is that his normal non-death bowling isn't that good. He also tends to over-do the variations from time to time. I think we might need him at the death without Broad though.

2/ The one-day 'keeping one is a very interesting debate given that anyone would probably give the same answer to "Who is the better batsman - Kieswetter or Prior?" and "Who is the better 'keeper - Kieswetter or Prior?" and it probably wouldn't be Kieswetter. Prior is certainly not a hopeless one-day player, as his form for Sussex indicates, and is now a super wicket-keeper. But on the other hand CK has performed OK with the gloves and done little wrong with the bat this year, and Prior has played ODIs for a number of years in a range of positions without much success. Mike might be somewhat correct about his one-day issues, but I tend to think I would be tempted to give him another go if CK struggles in this series on the basis of his recent form.

England clearly don't fancy Bairstow as a wicket-keeper, and I'm not going to oppose their judgment having not paid much attention to his keeping at domestic level. But I'd be surprised if there were much difference in 'keeping standards between Kieswetter and Bairstow, as Yorkshire have no qualms about Bairstow keeping in the four-day game. The question then turns to who the better batsman is. On the form of the last week its obviously Bairstow, but Kieswetter isn't that useless and Bairstow has had his awkward moments this summer too. In the long term, however, I would expect Bairstow to take this slot.

3/ That's very harsh in my view. He played himself in early on, and was hardly showing off when he got out, bowled by a good turning delivery from Peterson.

4/ I disagree. I have said time and time again that with one-day cricket as it currently is (two new white balls, a batting powerplay, and the skills batsmen have taken from T20) it is preferable to ensure that wickets are kept in hand for the last 15, and that openers have the skills to negotiate the new balls and go on to make centuries. Pinch-hitting type players simply aren't good enough to do that, and are better served batting in the last 15 overs. We did that well throughout the previous three series, and SA did today (even if they didn't quite capitalise as much as they'd have liked). Cook and Bell are good enough players to score quicker on flat pitches if need be.

5/ Patel is a fair second spinner for now. That he is a proper batsman helps his cause, and of course he is left-arm.

djkbrown2001 wrote:SA looks superior to england throughout this tour.

I can see SA going on to become one of the great teams of all time.

Simillar to Waugh Aussies, Windies 70s/80s and the invincibles.

The best team in world cricket by a street mile. They will dominate for the next 5 years. A relatively young team as well. all they need now is a good wicketkeeper for test.

People said that about England too though. Better to wait and see how they progress as a number one team before making those type of statements.

Clearly shows that our ODI plan is a bit too one dimensional and if the opposition puts up a big total, we struggle.

Bresnan quite simply has to go. I might not bother watching the match if he plays. He has been THAT hopeless this summer.

Shelsey93 wrote:
Strategising has been a key part of England's recent good one-day form. Its an important part of the game, particularly with the rules as they currently are.

To answer your points:

There is diffrence betrween strategizing and over staretgizing..........Eng are way too much over the line IMO.

My points can be answered not by you but by the deeds of Eng team on the ground....
Proof is in the pudding...and only botomline results matter in the games that matter.....
and what matters these days in limited overs....

1) 50 overs world cup
2) 20 overs world cup
3) IPL (much less so for English players)
:
:

:
4) and trailing by a long mile so bilateral ODIs in extremely foreign conditions....such as Eng playing in subcontinet or India playing in Aus.


and when we look at Eng show in foreign conditions....a 5-0 scoreline in India stands out.......they won a few in UAE against pak but that was on the back of a super hero who ain't there any more.

Eng's next test is T20 world ciup.......

let the results there answert further questions

If Kieswetter has been selected ahead of Bairstow because of his keeping, then its desperate times.

shankythebiggestengfan wrote:Clearly shows that our ODI plan is a bit too one dimensional and if the opposition puts up a big total, we struggle.

Bresnan quite simply has to go. I might not bother watching the match if he plays. He has been THAT hopeless this summer.

One dimensional enough to win the previous 10 games, with or without KP.

they were comprehensively outplayed, no stratergy is going to change that. If the other sides bats bowls and fields better than you then its no use having rommel deciding when the left arm spinner should come on or how deep mid on stands.
England have all sorts of problems at the moment, on of the big ones is they as a team are mentally shot. Patel has always been fat and lazy but has a good reputation as a catcher, Keiswetters no superstar gloveman but he usually does far better than that. Infact over the past few years England have been famed as a stand out fielding side, suddenly they have collectively become dunces. Psychology ishuge in cricket, and England are clearly shot.

Selections maybe didnt help, Bopara has always been mentally fragile so bringing him back when the sides shot for confidence against a great team when hes been playing badly is a bit silly. Bresnans place should be questioned when theres Woakes who could fill the same role, although he can blame the fielders for his figures. Bairstow is flavour of the month again and could have been picked ahead of Bopara (leaving england short of options in the bowling) or more controversially Keisweter (less controversial following his performance) . England didnt play either of their death bowlers as well, Broad rested and Dernbach not wanted...good idea or bad idea?
A lot was said about Patels inclusion, arguably he was Englands best performer filling his role as a mid game run stopper and bashing a few runs (too late) certainly the spin he was getting showed why he was picked. Im not a great fan but he did his bit even if he did end wicketless.

Lets be clear though Amla and Englands inability to hold catches against him was the difference between this being a tight contest and a walkover.
Saying "right we need someone to go out and score a p1ss load of runs" is tactics, its wishful thinking.

Biltong wrote:

eirebilly wrote:Patel with a 6. Going down fighting

That's one positive the English have shown this whole series, they never lay down.

They do the laying down in the top order unfortunately

Bresnan needs to lose weight, its an utter disgrace that someone under a professional sportsmans contract, particulary a fast bowler, is not in peak physical condition.

Gee, one defeat in what 14 games and all of a sudden England are one-dimensional no-hopers? Time for a reality check.

The main difference between the two sides today was that the South African who mastered the conditions (Amla) scored 150 whereas the English who did (Bell) scored 45. If you take Amla's knock away, the two innings are fairly similar. Apart from those two, no one looked anything like at home at the crease. Smith struggled, AB struggled (after getting a few freebies early on), Morgan struggled.

England didn't lose because they batted slowly, their run-rate throughout was more or less right on South Africa's, right up until Morgan got out. The problem was losing soft wickets regularly.

Loads of people calling for Prior, which reminds me that you always become a better player when you're out of the England side. Last time England tried Prior at 6 was at the World Cup (after the ashes, Prior was in excellent form) and he was between mediocre and hopeless. Why do people think things would be different now? Because he smashed a few medium-pacers from Kent around the place? Back of a length in at the body cramps him up, nothing has really changed there.

Having said that Kieswetter was useless today with the gloves (although AB was pretty hopeless as well - dropped two chances, difference being one of them ended up in Smith's hands). He looked decent with the bat though. Bairstow's keeping isn't even as good as Kieswetter.

The wicket-keeping slot is still a problem and has been for a while (since Stewart retired?). I think Kieswetter should get a run, if his keeping doesn't improve then try someone else. Probably not Prior though.

Patel was overall England's best player today. I'm not his biggest fan, but in those kind of conditions he is a good bet.

England looked very very jaded. Frankly half the team looked like they didn't really want to be there. To single out Bresnan over say Anderson seems a bit unfair to me, but yes he was poor and no he hasn't suddenly become a bad player. It's been a long stretch going back to the UAE, and with results not going their way they'll need to regroup if they don't want this to end in a whitewash.

A few thoughts on South Africa.

Amla played beautifully, he really is class (although even he needed a bit of luck).

England will feel that they can restrict Smith by bowling outside off consistently. If they do that, then Amla might just get frustrated and do something silly (like his early hack at Anderson which got him 4 down to fine-leg).

Elgar looked more of a test player than ODI player TBH.

The rest of the middle-order look class, and England won't be able to restrict them often as they did today. SA scored I think 80ish off the last 10 with 7 wickets in hand - they could have got another 15-20 runs quite easily.

Parnell bowled really well with the old ball I thought.

I'm still unconvinced by Peterson (that one good ball to Bell aside), I actually thought Elgar looked SA's best spinner.

Although there were a few misfields, SA's energy levels were far better, and by my random calculations they ended up 6 runs to the good in the field.

The difference so far between the 2 teams has been the new ball bowling of the Saffers. Consistently seem to nip a few out

Mike Selig wrote:Gee, one defeat in what 14 games and all of a sudden England are one-dimensional no-hopers? Time for a reality check.

The main difference between the two sides today was that the South African who mastered the conditions (Amla) scored 150 whereas the English who did (Bell) scored 45. If you take Amla's knock away, the two innings are fairly similar. Apart from those two, no one looked anything like at home at the crease. Smith struggled, AB struggled (after getting a few freebies early on), Morgan struggled.

England didn't lose because they batted slowly, their run-rate throughout was more or less right on South Africa's, right up until Morgan got out. The problem was losing soft wickets regularly.

Loads of people calling for Prior, which reminds me that you always become a better player when you're out of the England side. Last time England tried Prior at 6 was at the World Cup (after the ashes, Prior was in excellent form) and he was between mediocre and hopeless. Why do people think things would be different now? Because he smashed a few medium-pacers from Kent around the place? Back of a length in at the body cramps him up, nothing has really changed there.

Having said that Kieswetter was useless today with the gloves (although AB was pretty hopeless as well - dropped two chances, difference being one of them ended up in Smith's hands). He looked decent with the bat though. Bairstow's keeping isn't even as good as Kieswetter.

The wicket-keeping slot is still a problem and has been for a while (since Stewart retired?). I think Kieswetter should get a run, if his keeping doesn't improve then try someone else. Probably not Prior though.

Patel was overall England's best player today. I'm not his biggest fan, but in those kind of conditions he is a good bet.

England looked very very jaded. Frankly half the team looked like they didn't really want to be there. To single out Bresnan over say Anderson seems a bit unfair to me, but yes he was poor and no he hasn't suddenly become a bad player. It's been a long stretch going back to the UAE, and with results not going their way they'll need to regroup if they don't want this to end in a whitewash.

A few thoughts on South Africa.

Amla played beautifully, he really is class (although even he needed a bit of luck).

England will feel that they can restrict Smith by bowling outside off consistently. If they do that, then Amla might just get frustrated and do something silly (like his early hack at Anderson which got him 4 down to fine-leg).

Elgar looked more of a test player than ODI player TBH.

The rest of the middle-order look class, and England won't be able to restrict them often as they did today. SA scored I think 80ish off the last 10 with 7 wickets in hand - they could have got another 15-20 runs quite easily.

Parnell bowled really well with the old ball I thought.

I'm still unconvinced by Peterson (that one good ball to Bell aside), I actually thought Elgar looked SA's best spinner.

Although there were a few misfields, SA's energy levels were far better, and by my random calculations they ended up 6 runs to the good in the field.

Never said no hopers. And I am sure even Flower would struggle to argue that it is not an one dimensional plan. The plan basically does not make allowances for bowlers to have an off day. As its hard to see this line up chase down huge totals.

And Bresnan has been awful against SA. I'd question whether he was actually ever that good or just had a purple patch against the Aussies in the Ashes and against India. Because he was never really that good before the 2010/11 Ashes and has been poor since the India series. Maybe its because of his injury but I am not too convinced by him.

Not particularly aimed at you Shanky.

I disagree England can't chase down big scores. Today their run-rate was fine, the problem was wickets. Now you could say "but they lost wickets because they had to play more aggressively, out of their comfort zone" but that wouldn't be right IMO. No one got out trying an ill-advised shots. In fact apart from a few from Finn at the end and Anderson trying a switch-hit I can't remember anyone playing a shot which wasn't on.

I do share your concerns about Bresnan. I admit that prior to the Aus tour I thought he was a standard county-trundler who could bat. He proved me wrong there, but as you say has been below par for a while now.

Sorry burt whats the alternative plan? pick another 5 bowlers incase the first 5 are playing badly? Or just not bother picking bowlers and only pick batsmen?

The plan is to have balanced side where everyone has clearly defined roles. In the batting they have a mix of innings builders, stroke players and big hitters, in the bowling they have restrictive and attacking bowlers.

They shoulve taken the wickets, the bowlers created the chances

No need to change the bowlers (Bresnan aside). Just need one more naturally attacking batsman in the line up. Bairstow anyone? Ravi clearly hasn't got over his issues. So maybe let him have some more time off.

My team for the third ODI would be :

AN Cook
IR Bell
IJL Trott
J Bairstow
EJG Morgan
C Kieswetter†
S Patel (i know that i was very much against him but he did very well and deserves another chance)
CR Woakes
GP Swann
JM Anderson
ST Finn.

To me, Bopara is just not at the races and does not look confident at all. If he regains some confidence then he is straight back in but he is not high on confidence right now.

For me Bresnan has to certainly go, and one of Trott, Bopara and Kieswetter will have to give for Bairstow. I said Bairstow has to be in the ODI side before the last test, his temprament and big hitting ability stood out in his debut ODI innings against India.

I don't think Bell should try to be an innings builder in the classic English style. England has had ODI success when their openers scored quick enough runs and the middle order capitalized. Trescothick for a long time, Strauss too scored quickly enough, that is over a strike rate of 75+, Cook since last year, Pietersen and to an extend Bell. During the Vaughan era what used to happen was England would start slowly, and if Tresco gets out then would slow down further, pressure of not scoring would bring out a couple of rash shots and a wicket or 2, and then everything would depend on Pietersen, Collingwood and Flintoff to get them close to a decent total. It never worked.
This doesn't mean the openers will have to play like Chris Gayle or Virender Sehwag, not many can do that. Someone like a Gautam Gambhir can be the standard. take his time for the first 3-4 overs whil keeping the singles going and then open up further.
Cook for me has done this very very well over the last year or so, and Bell has showed he can take the challenge on and I reckon he should continue to play that way unlike the mentally shackeled version of him who was dropped from the team.

Who to make way for Bairstow is still a question, one of the 3, Trott, Bopara and Kieswetter will have to go. If Bopara's problems aren't quite sorted out then he's the obvious choice, but if his personal issues are done with, then his decent ODI form over the last year or so should see him getting a few more chances.
Kieswetter kept poorly in the last game, and his keeping has never been outstanding. He hasn't done anything massive with the bat, but he hasn't done badly either. Bairstow does keep in the 4 day game, I don't think his keeping standars would be way below that of Kieswetter.
With Trott its the most dificult call. He has been an ODI run machine for England last year, but he hasn't shown that form this year. We all know he bats one paced although his overall strike rate isn't bad at all. If he's on form and scoring the big runs, then his strike rate is not an issue, but the thing is that he's not in good touch, and is taking up a few balls at the start of his innings and get out. But the problem with dropping him is not just limited to his good previous record of last year, but also about the batting position. I don't think Bairstow is a good enough number 3, his temprament is more directed towards a number 5 or 6. Bopara has opened in the past, but I am not very convinced about him batting 3. But if Trott is the one to go then I see Ravi batting 3, Morgan 4 and Bairstow 5.
My team for the next match.
Alastair Cook
Ian Bell
Ravi Bopara
Eoin Morgan
Jonny Bairstow
Craig Kieswetter
Samit Patel
Chris Woakes
Graeme Swann
Steve Finn
James Anderson

Poor display. We made Robin Peterson look like Hedley Verity. Most of the batsmen got starts then got out - highest score of 40-odd says it all.

Something not right with our cricket at the moment. Poor fielding and confused batting, very similar to the Test series.

Mike Selig wrote:
Loads of people calling for Prior, which reminds me that you always become a better player when you're out of the England side. Last time England tried Prior at 6 was at the World Cup (after the ashes, Prior was in excellent form) and he was between mediocre and hopeless. Why do people think things would be different now? Because he smashed a few medium-pacers from Kent around the place? Back of a length in at the body cramps him up, nothing has really changed there.

All true, although he isn't a hopeless one-day player and comparing Kieswetter, Bairstow and Prior will always bring out one winner if you didn't know that Prior has struggled in ODIs. I'm currently split on this issue - time for one last chance?

On the subject of Trott you could argue that his natural one-day batting position is at the top of the order. But Cook/ Bell complement each other better as an opening pair, and so I think its right that we bat him at 3. In that position he serves a dual purpose. Firstly to take over the opener job if one of them falls early, and secondly to play the sensible albeit one-paced innings in a crisis. Should we not lose any wickets in the first 20 the option to drop him down the order is always available.

He didn't deliver yesterday but had he stuck around and made 80 at his usual pace we would have stood a good chance of winning. I think that that type of innings is important to us - they are a bit of a safety valve in allowing us to get at least moderate totals when we have a bad day.

Shelsey93 wrote:

Mike Selig wrote:
Loads of people calling for Prior, which reminds me that you always become a better player when you're out of the England side. Last time England tried Prior at 6 was at the World Cup (after the ashes, Prior was in excellent form) and he was between mediocre and hopeless. Why do people think things would be different now? Because he smashed a few medium-pacers from Kent around the place? Back of a length in at the body cramps him up, nothing has really changed there.

All true, although he isn't a hopeless one-day player and comparing Kieswetter, Bairstow and Prior will always bring out one winner if you didn't know that Prior has struggled in ODIs. I'm currently split on this issue - time for one last chance?

On the subject of Trott you could argue that his natural one-day batting position is at the top of the order. But Cook/ Bell complement each other better as an opening pair, and so I think its right that we bat him at 3. In that position he serves a dual purpose. Firstly to take over the opener job if one of them falls early, and secondly to play the sensible albeit one-paced innings in a crisis. Should we not lose any wickets in the first 20 the option to drop him down the order is always available.

He didn't deliver yesterday but had he stuck around and made 80 at his usual pace we would have stood a good chance of winning. I think that that type of innings is important to us - they are a bit of a safety valve in allowing us to get at least moderate totals when we have a bad day.

So he's a purely defensive option? Sorry, but you can't play Cook, Bell & Trott in the top 3 - you'll almost always be in trouble chasing a "bigger" total.

amanuensis wrote:
So he's a purely defensive option? Sorry, but you can't play Cook, Bell & Trott in the top 3 - you'll almost always be in trouble chasing a "bigger" total.

No. Cook and Bell will step up the rate if necessary, and have already done that on a few occasions. But the most important thing is to keep wickets in hand for the later overs of the innings, where under the current rules real havoc can be wreaked.

Yes, Trott is mostly a defensive option - we're yet to see that other gear - but I think there is room for that in 50-over cricket.

Just to get this clear, the reason engkland struggled to chase the total and had to slow their rate wasnt because they had 3 class batsmen at the top, its because one of them got out third ball.
all the batting plans in the world tend to go t1ts up when people get out cheaply. Its far more likely to happen when you open with Keisweter and wright though, a decision made because you need to make 400 in 50 overs when chasing a total well under 300?

England do not lose this game because their batting order is balanced and weighted to make competitve scores, they lost because they were outplayed in all 3 disciplines.

Picking pinch hitters has rarely worked out for England in 50 overs, picking test class batsmen has more often, especially in the last year. One game doesnt change that.

Trott's S/R in ODIS this year is 63. I am one of his biggest supporters but he needs to deliver sooner rather than later now.

its craziness that whenever england loses a game, knee-jerk reactions come flying out...remeber it wasnt long ago that we were winning everything!

I dont see many kneejerk reactions?

Most like myself would like to see Bairstow in for Bopara who doesnt appear to be completly over his issues and Woakes in for a visibly out of form Bresnan. No kneejerk reactions there?

Of course now that Swann is out, it will be tricky.

to be honest i would keep ravi in, and give Bairstow the gloves in place of kieswetter...that would be the only un-enforced change i would make..

All the build up over Kieswetter a few years ago, and to be honest he has been a bitter dissapointment..

Bopara just doesnt look like he has recovered CF which is why i would have Bairstow in for him. I would also prefer that Bairstow focus' on his batting which is why i would like Kieswetter to still be in the side.

Bresnan looks out of form (possible injury?) so Woakes in for him.

Craig has never been that good as far as I'm concerned. I'd much rather have Matty P who has been in great form all summer or equally Steve Davies

Jonny Bairstow or Jos Buttler for me in odi cricket..

Buttler is a better keeper but he dosent take the gloves at somerset because he is a far superior fielder as well for somerset.

Sure sure about Prior in ODI's, great scoring runs with test fields but not so much with ODI fields.

Daviesis a good call though.

also not overjoyed about Tredwell being called up..

would have liked to have seen Briggs or Borthwick get a go in the final 3 games..

Borthwick is someone I haven't been that impressed with, seams a less good Briggs to me!

Why tredwell is in the team I'll never know! He's the downing I England cricket!

Briggs would have been a good option, I liked what I saw at the T20, but England may have been wary of playing two left-arm spinners. I think Borthwick's got "something" but is probably much better suited to test cricket than ODIs. Tredwell? He's ok, I guess, but can you see him troubling Amla, Duminy, ABdV?

Prior was in great form after the 2011 ashes, and was still terrible in ODIs. A genuine question to those who want him back - where would you put him in the order?

I thought after the test match and finals day that England had to find a way to get Bairstow into the side, at whoever's expense it took. I stand by that. It will be harsh on whoever you drop (unlike most, I thought Bopara played himself into some form on Tuesday, the problem was he slapped a long-hop to cover), but you've got to.

Mike Selig wrote:Prior was in great form after the 2011 ashes, and was still terrible in ODIs. A genuine question to those who want him back - where would you put him in the order?

If I were to give him another go, and I'm still not 100% sure its the thing to do, it would be at number six.

CF wrote:its craziness that whenever england loses a game, knee-jerk reactions come flying out...remeber it wasnt long ago that we were winning everything!

What are these knee jerk reactions? Surely not Bresnan, who has been awful for a while? Surely not Kieswetter who has never ever done anything meaningful in his ODI career? Don't think anyone is suggesting that Bops should be dropped based on form but there is a feeling that he has still not gotten over his personal issues, which was evident in his batting the other day? Don't think I said Trott should be dropped either. Just merely pointed out that he has been disappointing this year and needs to deliver to cement his place.

"Knee jerk" is a term that is getting rather over used, sadly.