England v SA. 4th ODI, Lords

First topic message reminder :

Now that England have the number one position back, SA will be keen to beat them at Lords to regain the #1 spot and England will be desperate to consolidate the #1. This has the makings of a very good match.

I cant see any team making any changes from the third ODI.

England 1 Alastair Cook (capt), 2 Ian Bell, 3 Jonathan Trott, 4 Ravi Bopara, 5 Eoin Morgan, 6 Craig Kieswetter (wk), 7 Samit Patel, 8 James Tredwell, 9 Jade Dernbach, 10 James Anderson, 11 Steve Finn.

South Africa 1 Graeme Smith, 2 Hashim Amla, 3 JP Duminy, 4 Dean Elgar, 5 AB de Villiers (capt, wk), 6 Faf du Plessis, 7 Wayne Parnell, 8 Robin Peterson, 9 Dale Steyn, 10 Morne Morkel, 11 Lonwabo Tsotsobe.

eirebilly wrote:I do apologise for having an opinion on this. Obviously i have touched some nerves.

No billy, you're just wrong to say Trott generally puts pressure on the other batsmen to score quickly.

What, i never even suggested that Trott should be dropped!!! I simply had an opinion on his SR...

Hibbz wrote:

eirebilly wrote:I do apologise for having an opinion on this. Obviously i have touched some nerves.

No billy, you're just wrong to say Trott generally puts pressure on the other batsmen to score quickly.

Ok, generally was probably the wrong word but it has happened on many occasions, has it not?

Win this one, and Eng stay No1, no matter the result at Trent Bridge

Today Trott's SR is better than Bell's...

ChequeredJersey wrote:Today Trott's SR is better than Bell's...

And his ODI average has just gone above 50.

I think the worries over Trott's SR wouldn't be unfounded if they were true but I think they are based on a myth, at least in terms of recent ODIs

ChequeredJersey wrote:I think the worries over Trott's SR wouldn't be unfounded if they were true but I think they are based on a myth, at least in terms of recent ODIs

I am sorry but there has always been concerns over Trotts SR in ODI, not just by me.

Amlas ave of over 58 in Odi's really is stunning. He has to be the best batsman in the world right now.

Amla has just been immense this tour. I would say that on current form that he is the best in the world.

eirebilly wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:I think the worries over Trott's SR wouldn't be unfounded if they were true but I think they are based on a myth, at least in terms of recent ODIs

I am sorry but there has always been concerns over Trotts SR in ODI, not just by me.

Yes. And I think those concerns have been misled

eirebilly wrote:

Hibbz wrote:

eirebilly wrote:I do apologise for having an opinion on this. Obviously i have touched some nerves.

No billy, you're just wrong to say Trott generally puts pressure on the other batsmen to score quickly.

Ok, generally was probably the wrong word but it has happened on many occasions, has it not?

Well many could mean three times or it could mean twenty but I'd be staggered if Trott's strike rate has cost England more than his ability to stay in has profited them.

20 overs to go, England 132/1 and needing a mere 89 runs for victory. Should be a stroll.

ChequeredJersey wrote:

eirebilly wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:I think the worries over Trott's SR wouldn't be unfounded if they were true but I think they are based on a myth, at least in terms of recent ODIs

I am sorry but there has always been concerns over Trotts SR in ODI, not just by me.

Yes. And I think those concerns have been misled

Misled by whom? The top pundits that have said it as well? People who have played at the highest level in the game and know a thing or two about how its played?Or are you just saying this because its me that made the point?

ChequeredJersey wrote:

eirebilly wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:I think the worries over Trott's SR wouldn't be unfounded if they were true but I think they are based on a myth, at least in terms of recent ODIs

I am sorry but there has always been concerns over Trotts SR in ODI, not just by me.

Yes. And I think those concerns have been misled

In the past in all fairness, Trotts s/r was a contributary factor in Eng losing a couple of odi's. But not any more.

Hibbz wrote:

eirebilly wrote:

Hibbz wrote:

eirebilly wrote:I do apologise for having an opinion on this. Obviously i have touched some nerves.

No billy, you're just wrong to say Trott generally puts pressure on the other batsmen to score quickly.

Ok, generally was probably the wrong word but it has happened on many occasions, has it not?

Well many could mean three times or it could mean twenty but I'd be staggered if Trott's strike rate has cost England more than his ability to stay in has profited them.

Well his slow scoring has at times led to many a partner having to force the issue to keep a RRR under control and have gotton out for it?

Have you never seen this?

OOOOhaaa Bell dropped and then a cracking four.

skyeman wrote:Win this one, and Eng stay No1, no matter the result at Trent Bridge

Win the 3 match T20 series and we'll be No.1 in that format as well

Not the best of drops that

eirebilly wrote:

Hibbz wrote:

eirebilly wrote:

Hibbz wrote:

eirebilly wrote:I do apologise for having an opinion on this. Obviously i have touched some nerves.

No billy, you're just wrong to say Trott generally puts pressure on the other batsmen to score quickly.

Ok, generally was probably the wrong word but it has happened on many occasions, has it not?

Well many could mean three times or it could mean twenty but I'd be staggered if Trott's strike rate has cost England more than his ability to stay in has profited them.

Well his slow scoring has at times led to many a partner having to force the issue to keep a RRR under control and have gotton out for it?

Have you never seen this?

Yeah I've seen it for sure, but to say it generally happens and to say it has cost England many times is what you said and what I'm taking issue with mate.

eirebilly wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:

eirebilly wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:I think the worries over Trott's SR wouldn't be unfounded if they were true but I think they are based on a myth, at least in terms of recent ODIs

I am sorry but there has always been concerns over Trotts SR in ODI, not just by me.

Yes. And I think those concerns have been misled

Misled by whom? The top pundits that have said it as well? People who have played at the highest level in the game and know a thing or two about how its played?Or are you just saying this because its me that made the point?

Why would I be saying it because it's you who's made the point?

I think that people see Trott occasionally go at an inappropriately low Strike Rate and generalise that to him as an attribute, and that includes experts, because it's so easy to focus on the memorable and extrapolate it across as a rule. If you look at many of his ODI Innings, he frequently goes at a very decent strike rate-

Here is a list of his top ten ODI scores:

1. Jonathan Trott slammed 137 runs with 11 fours at a strike rate of 108.73 against Australia at Sydney on February 2, 2011, batted for 178 minutes and faced 126 balls. He was caught in the innings.

2. Booger piled-up 110 runs from 121 balls in 169 minutes versus Bangladesh at Birmingham on July 12, 2010. He hit 12 fours at a strike rate of 90.9 and was caught in the innings.

3. Trott smashed 102 runs including 6 fours at a strike rate of 80.95 against Australia at Adelaide on January 26, 2011 and batted for 143 minutes and faced 126 balls. He was bowled in the innings.

4. He whacked 94 runs in 130 balls at a strike rate of 72.3 including 8 fours versus Bangladesh at Bristol on July 10, 2010, batted for 170 minutes and was caught in the innings.

5. Jonathan stood on the crease for 126 minutes and nailed 92 runs in 92 balls with 9 fours at a strike rate of 100 against Ireland at Bangalore on March 2, 2011 and was bowled in the innings.

6. Trotters scored 87 runs including 8 fours in 119 balls at a strike rate of 73.1 against South Africa at Centurion on November 22, 2009. He batted for 167 minutes and was caught in the innings.

7. Jonathan Trott accumulated 86 runs with 2 fours at a strike rate of 74.78 against Sri Lanka at Colombo on March 26, 2011 and stood on the crease for 172 minutes and faced 115 balls. He was caught in the innings.

8. He was unbeaten in the innings and scored 84* runs with 3 fours at a strike rate of 70.58 versus Australia at Sydney on January 23, 2011 and stood on the crease for 206 minutes and faced 119 balls.

9. Booger smashed 72 runs including 3 fours at a strike rate of 82.75 against Sri Lanka at Manchester on July 9, 2011 and batted for 118 minutes and faced 87 balls. He was bowled in the innings.

10. Trott whacked 69 runs in 78 balls at a strike rate of 88.46 including 4 fours versus Pakistan at Chester-le-Street on September 10, 2010, batted for 106 minutes and was bowled in the innings.

I also think it is far better that he doesn't rush his rate artificially in situations where calm build up could be more useful and the only time his low strike rate, such as it is, would and has been an issue is with a similar player (ie Cook) also playing out there in which case is the problem not just as much with them?

That drop has effectively sealed the game.

Do you remember the game when Eng were around 230/2 after 40 and Trott only scored 9 in the next 10 and Eng lost. Just an example.

But he has vastly improved.

The other point with Trotts SR is that he is instructed to0 bat this way, his being low gives others the freedom to keep theirs high. Far from seeing it as "forcing others to get out" the England team see him as someone who enables others to play freely.

Also the games England have made 300+ in the last few years:

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/433572.html
Trott 92 from 92
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/446967.html
trott 137 from 126
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/426405.html
Trott 110 from 121
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/433568.html
Trott 16 from 19

All but one of those he was the major contributor and at a fair rate. If England are to make 300 its as likley to be because of trott as it is inspite of him.

Hibbz wrote:

eirebilly wrote:

Hibbz wrote:

eirebilly wrote:

Hibbz wrote:

eirebilly wrote:I do apologise for having an opinion on this. Obviously i have touched some nerves.

No billy, you're just wrong to say Trott generally puts pressure on the other batsmen to score quickly.

Ok, generally was probably the wrong word but it has happened on many occasions, has it not?

Well many could mean three times or it could mean twenty but I'd be staggered if Trott's strike rate has cost England more than his ability to stay in has profited them.

Well his slow scoring has at times led to many a partner having to force the issue to keep a RRR under control and have gotton out for it?

Have you never seen this?

Yeah I've seen it for sure, but to say it generally happens and to say it has cost England many times is what you said and what I'm taking issue with mate.

Ok, now read back. I did take back the 'generally' quote in here.

Trott's gone. Now who's coming out - Bopara or Morgan?

It's fair to say it can be an issue, just like every player's faults can be an issue, but I feel that the benefits far outweigh the risks (ironically through lack of risk) he brings to the ODI team

Please, please don't collapse!

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:The other point with Trotts SR is that he is instructed to0 bat this way, his being low gives others the freedom to keep theirs high. Far from seeing it as "forcing others to get out" the England team see him as someone who enables others to play freely.

Also the games England have made 300+ in the last few years:

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/433572.html
Trott 92 from 92
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/446967.html
trott 137 from 126
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/426405.html
Trott 110 from 121
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/433568.html
Trott 16 from 19

All but one of those he was the major contributor and at a fair rate. If England are to make 300 its as likley to be because of trott as it is inspite of him.

Ok, now that is a straw man quote. I never said that he forces other players to get out. I said that his slow scoring has at times caused other players force the issue which has led to them getting out. Never did i say he forces others to get out.

I had an opinion, prove me wrong by all means but dont start making things up.

skyeman wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:

eirebilly wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:I think the worries over Trott's SR wouldn't be unfounded if they were true but I think they are based on a myth, at least in terms of recent ODIs

I am sorry but there has always been concerns over Trotts SR in ODI, not just by me.

Yes. And I think those concerns have been misled

In the past in all fairness, Trotts s/r was a contributary factor in Eng losing a couple of odi's. But not any more.

Right, but then how many times has KPs rashness been blamed for losses? Or Boparas inability to actually do anything as a batsman?

Whilst his scoring has occassionally been a problem more often than not his scoring makes up for that, and theres as many examples of him scoring quickly and bailing england out as there are losses that can be attributed to him slow scoring.

To cap it all if England are chasing 300+ its because their bowlers have failed, not Trott.

eirebilly wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:The other point with Trotts SR is that he is instructed to0 bat this way, his being low gives others the freedom to keep theirs high. Far from seeing it as "forcing others to get out" the England team see him as someone who enables others to play freely.

Also the games England have made 300+ in the last few years:

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/433572.html
Trott 92 from 92
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/446967.html
trott 137 from 126
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/426405.html
Trott 110 from 121
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/433568.html
Trott 16 from 19

All but one of those he was the major contributor and at a fair rate. If England are to make 300 its as likley to be because of trott as it is inspite of him.

Ok, now that is a straw man quote. I never said that he forces other players to get out. I said that his slow scoring has at times caused other players force the issue which has led to them getting out. Never did i say he forces others to get out.

I had an opinion, prove me wrong by all means but dont start making things up.

Change it to "encourages other to play rashly" and the point still stands though. Its a "straw man argument" to use a slight misrepresentation to ignore the validity of a point and actual hard facts as presented.

ChequeredJersey wrote:I think the worries over Trott's SR wouldn't be unfounded if they were true but I think they are based on a myth, at least in terms of recent ODIs

Realised that this doesn't actually make sense- I meant the worries would be based on valid argument but the I disagree on the basis of that argument, if that makes sense?

Trott failing to see it out again, useless d**k

eirebilly wrote:

Hibbz wrote:

eirebilly wrote:

Hibbz wrote:

eirebilly wrote:

Hibbz wrote:

eirebilly wrote:I do apologise for having an opinion on this. Obviously i have touched some nerves.

No billy, you're just wrong to say Trott generally puts pressure on the other batsmen to score quickly.

Ok, generally was probably the wrong word but it has happened on many occasions, has it not?

Well many could mean three times or it could mean twenty but I'd be staggered if Trott's strike rate has cost England more than his ability to stay in has profited them.

Well his slow scoring has at times led to many a partner having to force the issue to keep a RRR under control and have gotton out for it?

Have you never seen this?

Yeah I've seen it for sure, but to say it generally happens and to say it has cost England many times is what you said and what I'm taking issue with mate.

Ok, now read back. I did take back the 'generally' quote in here.

Oh I saw you back pedalling as fast as you could don't worry about that.

Yeah. Luckily we have the master batter of Bopara to come...

ChequeredJersey wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:I think the worries over Trott's SR wouldn't be unfounded if they were true but I think they are based on a myth, at least in terms of recent ODIs

Realised that this doesn't actually make sense- I meant the worries would be based on valid argument but the I disagree on the basis of that argument, if that makes sense?

We knew what you meant

eirebilly wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:The other point with Trotts SR is that he is instructed to0 bat this way, his being low gives others the freedom to keep theirs high. Far from seeing it as "forcing others to get out" the England team see him as someone who enables others to play freely.

Also the games England have made 300+ in the last few years:

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/433572.html
Trott 92 from 92
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/446967.html
trott 137 from 126
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/426405.html
Trott 110 from 121
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/433568.html
Trott 16 from 19

All but one of those he was the major contributor and at a fair rate. If England are to make 300 its as likley to be because of trott as it is inspite of him.

Ok, now that is a straw man quote. I never said that he forces other players to get out. I said that his slow scoring has at times caused other players force the issue which has led to them getting out. Never did i say he forces others to get out.

I had an opinion, prove me wrong by all means but dont start making things up.

Come on Billy, you said generally/many not at times.

Hibbz wrote:

Oh I saw you back pedalling as fast as you could don't worry about that.

What? I still have the same thoughts, i just acknowledged that i may have been overzealous in my choice of words. No back pedalling here.

Rain stopped play. Doesn't matter really, I'm sure we're well ahead on Duckworth-Lewis.

EDIT: If online calculators are correct, we're ahead by 28 runs.

Stupid rain

Darn the rain.

It may quickly pass.

Don't like winning on D/L, but i'll take it

Yes i said Generally, it was overzealous of me (retracted it). Shoot me. Never did i say that Trott should be dropped nor did i say that Trotts forces other batsmen out (as PSW said). I simply had an opinion about Trotts SR.

I should have apologised to Hibbz, PSW and CJ immediately for my opinions, obviously if i dont share their opinions then i am a shocker.

Should be back out soon

I thought that it may pass quickly

eirebilly wrote:Yes i said Generally, it was overzealous of me (retracted it). Shoot me. Never did i say that Trott should be dropped nor did i say that Trotts forces other batsmen out (as PSW said). I simply had an opinion about Trotts SR.

I should have apologised to Hibbz, PSW and CJ immediately for my opinions, obviously if i dont share their opinions then i am a shocker.

No problem with having an opinion, I just adhere to my right to try and demonstrate why I do not agree with it

5 minutes and they will be back, maybe no DL

Just a quick ? in the stoppage. If i had of said, former SOUTH AFRICAN Kevin Pietersen has just scored a fantastic double hundred for England.

How would you see it, any hidden meanings, devalued in anyway?

Oh well, save that for another day. Play back on.