Champions Trophy - England and Wales 2013

First topic message reminder :

Jayawardene does bugger all but scratch around for 18 balls looking horribly out of form, then comes down the track and smacks the bowler straight over his head for a six. Class!

Ball again. Jesus umpires, get on with it

trebbel and the rest!

350 you mean

That as maybe Trebbs, but we were playing Sri Lanka today. 

Cheer up, Australia's worse than us.

The top order, nor the system are not to blame. The middle order is for blame for failing to perform, and the bowlers for a poor effort at a defendable total.

Half-century to Kulasekara, inspired move by Sri Lanka to promote him. Agree with Mysti, England would never have done that.

Jimmy Anderson on now, a white knight to ride to the rescue?

Fair play to SL, they've made light work of a good total.

Either way we wasted resources GSC - we shouldnt lose these games at home.

The fact that SL brought in a slogger and it worked shows the difference big time..

I wanted swann to come in instead of bresnan. that could have made all the difference.

I miss our ODI side under Flower. Didn't we stuff Pakistan 4-0 in the UAE under his leadership? Ashley Giles' England would never have been able to do that!

EDIT: KP opened in that series, scored 2 centuries. Would love him to open again in place of Bell.

Well played by Sri Lanka... But absolute crap by England, proving their batting gameplan is fundamentally flawed. Should have been a 320+ wicket.

Yet again too much pressure left on the lower middle order due to a pedestrian period of overs.

Anyway Well played SL..

Deserved win. Great decsion, great batting. Good acceleration.

We may have got out of jail if finn had played- we may have got out of jail if we did something different.

Eitherway though. I think we can beat NZ and we are not out of this. We can still top this group

England's bowling attack is toothless IMO

Broad in the last 3 years has 30 off wickets at nearly 40. Economy of 5.5rpo. That's not good enough. 

Bresnan over Finn is stupidity. 

If you need upur number 8 to slog 20/30, then your batsmen need to man up. 

Finn, who can bowl 150kph, wouldn't have been slogged around by Kula.

Cook, Bell, Trott, Root, Morgan, Bopara, Buttler, Broad, Swann, Anderson, Finn

That HAS to be the team at Cardiff. Finn must come in. We need wicket takers in our bowling, Finn is that. Broad/Swann can bat if needed. However they shouldn't be needed if Morgan/Buttler fancy turning up with the bat at some point

Well played Sri Lanka, Sangakarra in particular. 

Deserved winners. 3 of the 4 games now for the final group matches will effectively be quarter-finals, with only 1 dead rubber. Hope the weather doesn't spoil it.

By far the best team won,  well done and good luck in the semis.

6 fingered tractor boy wrote:Cook, Bell, Trott, Root, Morgan, Bopara, Buttler, Broad, Swann, Anderson, Finn

That HAS to be the team at Cardiff. Finn must come in. We need wicket takers in our bowling, Finn is that. Broad/Swann can bat if needed. However they shouldn't be needed if Morgan/Buttler fancy turning up with the bat at some point

NZ will prob get 350 at that ground and DV will make short work of us.

6 fingered tractor boy wrote:Cook, Bell, Trott, Root, Morgan, Bopara, Buttler, Broad, Swann, Anderson, Finn

That HAS to be the team at Cardiff. Finn must come in. We need wicket takers in our bowling, Finn is that. Broad/Swann can bat if needed. However they shouldn't be needed if Morgan/Buttler fancy turning up with the bat at some point

Tredwell has to play in Wales

The pitch there is very spin friendly. 

Get rid of Bresnan and Broad

Bring in Finn and Tredwell

And a brilliant chase by SL, Sangakkara played an absolute gem of an innings for them. Proving they are still a very dangerous team and contender for the trophy

Agree Gerry and I am broads biggest fan.

But you are spot on- those 4 bowlers are our form players- I would even pick treadwell on a less than friendly track next game..

Broad/Tredwell is one that is certainly debatable, although I would stick with Broad, I certainly wouldn't complain if we went in with two spinners, especially as New Zealand aren't exactly renowned for their world class playing of spin.

Finn/Bresnan is a no brainer however.

I'd also like to know why the umpires randomly changed the ball after 25 overs

In the NZ game I really want to see us chase ..

Hopefully it doesn't rain. If it does we all become Aussie supporters on Monday...

It was a poor move to drop Finn. He has done well throughout his ODI career, England have carried players for almost a year despite poor showing, but Finn was axed. It was a senseless move at that point, its shown up for the nonsense that it is today yet again. Anderson and Swann are the 2 bowlers in this side who can take wicket and present a wicket taking threat consistently regardless of conditions. The others, particularly Bresnan are dependent on conditions. Finn's pace could always present a serious wickettaking threat. Hope the senseless dropping hasn't knocked his confidence. Finn for Bresnan in the next game for sure. Tredwell for Broad, I am not sure, not because Tredwell can't hold his on, not because Broad has been particularly great form, but because it won't be a great move to go in with only 2 seamers in ODIs under the current regulations unless the track really turn big. Broad is one of the best 3 seamers for England in ODIS, so in my view he should play.
I have been critical of the England game plan, but today I won't blame the top order too much. Cook was on the slowish side today, but that has more to do with form rather than intent. Jonathan Trott was busy today, ran really hard between wickets, and kept up a pretty decent strike rate. He e ven walked at the bowler a couple of times!!!. Joe Root played a fine hand as well. And importantly, they didn't get out at the 35 over mark, in facted batted through the powerplay without damage, that in itself is an advantage for England. But they couldn't quite finish the job, the finishers didn't come to the party as both Morgan and Buttler failed. Bopara played a very good innings, but that middle order collapse proved to be too much in the end.
The England top order batters can take a lot from Sangakkara's effort today. He took the attack to England in the early part when Dilshan was struggling, then ones Dilshan got going he calmly settled down to play a long innings, without letting his strike rate getting affected too much. Then when Mahela walked in, he took up the early charge until Jayawardene found his touch. Did the same with Kulasekhara as well, and then batted well to see the chase through, and even at the end he was running hard for the extra run as if he was only just to the middle.

And what today's result mean also is that Australia aren't really out of it as yet. If they win against SL, and then England lose to NZ, they will be through. Even if NZ lose, the Australians can bring NRR into the frame if they win against Lanka.

I think England can be proud of how they played tbh. No harm in losing and we were simply beaten by a class side and they 100% deserved the win. Sr Lanker will probably will win the group. I think we can beat NZ, but it will be another very very tough game. 

I personally would drop Bresnan and bring Finn in, but that might have to be a forced change depending on if his baby is born.

Proud-!!


of losing to a worse team at home!

Forecast for Cardiff on Sunday is heavy rain, England could wind up relying on a narrow Aussie win to go through.

Well If it is forecast early- Then maybe the umpires could get in early enough to make it a 20/20 game

Well the result wasn't what I expected at all , after turning in at the innings break ! Without under rating Sri Lanka I really thought 293 was bulletproof ...Sangakkara proved that theory wrong...

Read through lots of posts on this and other sites and I am pleased to see this one appears to be the most rational ... Seem to be very few on here espousing the sophisticated game plan I have seen in some places (England should open with ....Swann ...or , basically : they should all hit lots of fours and sixes - and not get out ) 

However I still see complaints about England's batting ...why ? Surely nobody was complaining when the 200 came up in over 40 ...pretty sure everyone was happy then . Overdone panic about the collapse in overs 46/47 , but since the often reviled Bopara put the score back pretty much where we had all agreed would be an excellent total with his last over onslaught , we should have been reasonably happy , no ?

Well yes , the Oval is good for free scoring , and clearly this pitch , which was a bit slow early on , improved a bit over the course of the match ( one of the reasons Sri Lanka chose to bowl of course) but still it was going to take some poor bowling or a super batting performance to run it down.  I didn't see it so won't comment on the bowling , though I see others have ; but surely Sangakkara put on a master class?
Some are saying England might have made another 15-20 , if ...so what ? Sri Lanka would have won in the 50th instead of the 48th , and Broad would have gone for eighty plus 

Logically the one issue England have , and it is one which most of us agreed in advance might be a problem , is that the bowling is vulnerable to the sort of assault Sangakarra and co unleashed , on a good pitch. England cannot do the same , as without KP they just don't have a player capable of scoring big and fast ; it is pointless to expect Trott or Cook to play that way , and it usually isn't necessary.  So Sri Lanka can sometimes make a score England can't...on the other hand England probably won't be bowled out for 130 by NZ...

The fifth bowler is an issue. Before the thing started , I was in the five pure bowler camp: but I tend to think now that Bopara is more asset than liability ...it is a trade off , of course. But if Broad and Bresnan had been a bit more economical perhaps it wouldn't have mattered...

Anyway that's long enough...take this one on the chin , think about Finn or Tredwell for Cardiff , and hope the weather allows a game. If they can get through to the semis England still have a perfectly good chance.

Swann should have come on instead of bresnan. That was clear for me.. Infact that is what SL did.. and that is one of the reasons they won in a canter in the end!!

When you have wickets you can smash

Root should open..

Trott impressed me alot yesterday He really tried to score.. Bell as good as he can be is only a trott or cook minus....

You dont play 3 CM's in international football - and sadly we shouldnt play all 3 in ODI cricket..

Bell and trott are the international version of gerrard and lamps. Good in there own right. Dont play them together!!

So you will drop Bell , move Root to open , and bring in another bowler , eh , roakey ?
Seems hard on Bell after his two top scoring efforts , but it is an arguable plan , though not one I agree with.

Not quite sure what you mean by "when you have wickets you can smash" ?

England certainly had wickets when Trott and Root were together and the score was 201/2.   They did smash.  They got out. So did the next couple of batsmen...
Sometimes it goes that way...

I am satisfied with England's batting ...you aren't , I think. We will have to agree to disagree.

Apologies for disappearing yesterday - had some cricket stuff to deal with myself.

Sri Lanka's class players batted well - I mentioned early on that Sangakara was the key. England, apart from Anderson and Swann for 9 overs bowled badly. Sometimes it is that simple. Broad's over of long-hops to Jayawardene was particularly poor, and just when England had SL under pressure.

Thought Cook was a bit reactive rather than proactive with some changes.

The pitch improved during the day - thanks to the sun which hardened it a bit, and then under lights the ball skidded on a bit more, whereas early in the day it was holding up quite a bit; Bell and Cook struggled to time it, but Bell showed plenty of intent, just couldn't hit the ball properly. 

Root proved yesterday why he is ideal at number 4, coming in around the 25-30 over mark. He gets going straight away, knocks it around, and improvises for his boundaries. I just don't see how he fits in the top order, and as importantly I don't see who can possibly replace him at 4 - Bopara plays too many dot balls to play the "busy innings" (although as we saw yesterday he can hit a clean cricket ball), and Morgan always looked a place too high at 4 when he played there.

England's fielding was very very good, but SL had a few slices of luck going their way and made the most of it.

In the end 320 wouldn't have been enough the way England bowled, and I don't think it was a 320 wicket (certainly not when England batted on it).

It's a closely fought competition - no team can afford to have an off-day whilst the other has an on-day, as happened yesterday for the 2nd half of the game.

Mike

Moving Root becomes a moot point when KP returns.

Reasons we lost today:
the middle order not capitalising on the platform given by the top 4 (inluding the dodgy decision Mogs got). 20 more runs might have put more pressure on the SL batsmen early/mid game

Failure to maintain pressure with tight bowling. Indeed, much of the bowling was mediocre - Broad seems to have turned into Dernbach

A couple of good overs for the SL batsmen in the first part of the game (such as the 17 off Root) kept them ahead of the game.

Kula came off as a pinch hitter, Buttler didn't

Fantastic innings by Sanga and good support from Dilshan and Mahela.

Simply, Sri Lanka were the better side (bar their catching) on the day, and probably got a slight advantage in conditions as well.

An excellent summation I think dummy. Half of Englands team turned up to play, and Sri Lanka blew us away in the end.

I'm not sure the middle-order not performing was that much of an issue - Bopara's last over made up for their failings in effect.

The rest is spot on.

SL played better, and the sides are evenly matched enough that when that happens they win.

Bopara covered for them, but we had the chance to go over 300. Not as a big an issue as the bowling bar Anderson/Swann. Bresnan in particular offering Kulasekra free license to swing.

Alfie- when KP is back. who goes?

It has to be bell surely.

We cant play bell later on in the innings- He cannot just pick up and play- he needs to get in first.

So by that rationale - forget the extra bolwer- just stick TAYLOR or Bairstow in .(whislt KP isnt about)

Root can fill in for kp in the open position whilst he isnt there and play at 4 when he is..

Root is adaptable. He has all the shots .. He moves, he understands field placements and he hits it around the park.. It can be very easy to set a field to limited cricketrs- not with touchy feely players like root, or sub continent batsmen

Pietersen should replace Trott. The latter is a proficient scorer of runs, hence his average, but doesn't win matches, which is the point of the game. Simple equation - Bell scores runs (a regular event these days), England win. He's also a far better fielder.

well you can argue trott or bell i suppose.

Trott is more consistant though. Bell when in can increase his rate better.

You cant argue that bell wins games though. Neither do. Both just help build a platform.

When Bell posts a big score (80+), England almost invariably win - that's match winning batting from a top order batsman.

Not sure how you can say that about bell in comparison to trott.

They are the similar styled players.However  Bell has a lower RR and a 13 run lower average..

Trott avaerges 50 with a RR of 77, bell 37 with a rr of 75!

Its not really rocket science bud!

Career averages and strike rates don't win matches - big scores win them. Bell has 12 awards (9 MOTM, 3 MOTS) to Trott's 3 (MOTM).

Big scores dont allways win matches. Yet Trott has scored way more.

If we revesed bell and trotts scores from game 2 to game 1. Trott would have picked up MOTM first ODI, and we would have still lost the second!

MOTM can be completely immaterial.

BTW where did you get them stats

Actually Bell has more, with England winning most of those matches. In Trott's case the majority of those ODIs have been lost - funny that.....

Incidentally Trott's average is based on lots of scores in the forties, fifties and sixties - decent contributions, but not ones that win you much.

amanuensis wrote:Incidentally Trott's average is based on lots of scores in the forties, fifties and sixties - decent contributions, but not ones that win you much.

Trott scores a Ton every 14 ODI Innings.
Bell scores a Ton every 42 ODI Innings.

I am trotts biggest critic on here mate. But you are taking the biscuit..

Drop Trott and bring in Michael Lumb imo

Dorothy_Mantooth wrote:

amanuensis wrote:Incidentally Trott's average is based on lots of scores in the forties, fifties and sixties - decent contributions, but not ones that win you much.

Trott scores a Ton every 14 ODI Innings.
Bell scores a Ton every 42 ODI Innings.

Boom. Argument won.

For me, KP has to come in for Bell and open, just like he did in the UAE. If he gets out early, no worries as Trott can anchor. If he bats long, England have a brilliant platform.

South Africa off a decent start in a 31 over game. As ever in the shortened format, what matters is whether Chris Gayle comes off however.

I can't believe people still want to drop Trott. Honestly baffles me

6 fingered tractor boy wrote:I can't believe people still want to drop Trott. Honestly baffles me

Same here... Worse score in his last 10 or so ODIs is 37. You can say a lot for consistency, and knowing you have someone as reliable as Trott has to help the other batsmen play around him.

I agree with mysti - when KP is back, then he's in for Bell, and that's that. Harsh on Bell, but Cook is captain, and Trott has outplayed him even since his return I'd guess.