The New Start: England One Day Team

How about this for a squad, based on performance and potential at least as much as membership of the present failed set up:
Hales, Roy, Ansari, M Ali, Root, Taylor, Vince, Buttler, Stokes, Gurney, A Rashid, Tredwell, Woakes, Jordan, Broad, Anderson,

First choice team, in batting order (alternates in parentheses):
Hales, Roy (Ansari for either), Taylor (Vince), Root - capt, Buttler  - v-capt, Ali, Stokes, Woakes, Jordan (Broad), Tredwell (Rashid), Anderson (Gurney)

Double explosive power at the top of the order, stability at 3 and 4, quality dashers at 5-7, decent lower middle order and six frontline bowlers, including two spinners. And 13 of them (all bar Anderson, Trerdwell and Broad) young and healthy enough to be around for the next World Cup.

Anderson will surely be retiring from ODI's soon? If not then why persist, if he's not going to be in the 2019 squad?
I really don't rate Jordan either. Luckily for him, the cupboard seems bare, so he will be in or around the team this summer.

Problem was adjusting too late, Bopara should have been in, Probably drop Bell to 3, maybe drop him altogether although he was good today - Hales Moin open. Bowling was good, BD name and reputation isn't that good, but fact is we ran into a better team, they have many world class batsmen and decent bowlers - tough group compared to the other. The other has 2 solid teams, 2 average teams (one can suprise), and Ireland who are pretty good, this has 3 solid teams, with 2 Average teams, Afg who are pretty good and Scot are better than UAE

If you were picking on what they had produced in the last 6 months or so then only Buttler, Taylor and Root would get in. Tredwell by default.
Hales is picked on potential from what he did in a breif period in T20s some time ago, not on his crud ODI record. Stokes too gets a sniff on the grounds hes not tainted by the world cup debacle, and if we choose to overlook his poor international record.
Roy and Vince get picked because they havent had a chance to be rubbish yet.

Do England have any proper bowlers available to be able to afford to rest/retire Anderson or Broad? Gurney didnt do anything with his chances, and Rankin is toxic after the ashes tour.
They desperately need someone like Mills to have a breakthrough season and for Finn to remember how to bowl fast again.

Billings?

Lets face it the cupboard is pretty bare.

I have to disagree with Gooseberry - I don't think the cupboard is bare in terms of young batting talent at all. Root, Taylor, Ballance, Hales, Roy, Vince, Buttler, Billings all have vast potential - we need to nurture it  better. In the bowling cupboard - yes it is bare really.

As for the players I'd say bye to now ; -

Bell - Harsh to drop the leading run scorer yes, but ultimately he is just not doing his job correctly and really has never done so. Always, always gets off to a good start, gets bogged down, then gets out. I must have watched him play the same innings 50 times now in ODI stuff, and he hasn't learnt.

Anderson - Save him for the test arena, much more his strength anyways.

Morgan - One form alone, he needs to be dropped. Just not good enough at the moment.

No, the cupboard isn't bare but those key players (batsmen) involved in this tournament had trouble forming lengthy partnerships or scoring at the rate required to heap pressure on stronger opposition. Could be argued they didn't grind down weaker opposition enough too. Lack of killer instinct.

Agree the bowling lacked sustained penetration (there should be partnerships based on particular skill sets there too) and this was heavily exposed in the last few weeks. Not sure the team should be ripped apart again... they somehow need to take stock and pick up the pieces as best as possible. Amalgamate/reinforce rather than continually deconstruct and throw less experienced players into the fire each time.

Does that make sense? Maybe that is kind of what you are saying.

Some good names flagged by Simon in his opening article. However, not that many are the finished object yet (that's not a pop at them or the article).

I don't have the time or enthusiasm tonight for an answer but I think one of our biggest challenges is to decide how and where to develop these type of players so that they maximise their abilities and can play with confidence / freedom / flexibility / aggression etc for England successfully against not just Bangladesh but the world's leading ODI sides such as Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. I sadly suspect that Simon's team would have fared little better under the ECB's current regime and, more particularly, the way it operates.

The only other point I would make is that we don't need to unnecessarily restrict ourselves in the future by rushing to judgement and saying ''never again'' about certain players now. Particularly thinking about Morgan and Ballance. The former had a terrible tournament but that doesn't automatically mean he's a terrible batsman.

Olly wrote:I have to disagree with Gooseberry - I don't think the cupboard is bare in terms of young batting talent at all. Root, Taylor, Ballance, Hales, Roy, Vince, Buttler, Billings all have vast potential - we need to nurture it  better. In the bowling cupboard - yes it is bare really.

As for the players I'd say bye to now ; -

Bell - Harsh to drop the leading run scorer yes, but ultimately he is just not doing his job correctly and really has never done so. Always, always gets off to a good start, gets bogged down, then gets out. I must have watched him play the same innings 50 times now in ODI stuff, and he hasn't learnt.

Anderson - Save him for the test arena, much more his strength anyways.

Morgan - One form alone, he needs to be dropped. Just not good enough at the moment.

Dropping and finishing off the leading run scorer, nothing odd about it, that is been the English way anyways!.

Arent there any decent uncappedsouth afircans/australians/bangladeshis whove been knocking about the county game a couple of years?

Gooseberry wrote:Arent there any decent  uncappedsouth afircans/australians/bangladeshis whove been knocking about the county game a couple of years?

No

What about this for a England one day team :-

Gooch, Boycott, Larkins, Amiss, Woolmer, Willey, Knott, Emburey, Hendrick, Lever, Underwood

gboycottnut1 wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:Arent there any decent  uncappedsouth afircans/australians/bangladeshis whove been knocking about the county game a couple of years?

No

I wasn't sure if I understood this question or its purpose. Unless these people (ie uncapped South Africans, Australians and Bangladeshis) were English qualified in some way, I don't think they would be permitted to play in the English county game. I recall this type of comment being made by Richard Gould, Surrey's CEO, at a members' forum meeting a year or so back. In commenting upon the difficulties of signing an overseas spinner, Gould specifically referred to Ashton Agar; he made the point that Surrey wouldn't have been allowed to sign Agar before he was capped and then, after he had been capped, in all likelihood would be unable to do so due to the heavy international calendar and restrictions of Australian central contracts.

Gooseberry wrote:Arent there any decent  uncappedsouth afircans/australians/bangladeshis whove been knocking about the county game a couple of years?

Not sure if Gooseberry's being a bit of a cheeky WUM or just ironic here. Either way, let's try and encourage indigenous talent as a priority if we can first. I agree that the batting cupboard looks potentially less bare than the bowling one. I hope those who did well for the Lions in S Africa this winter have been noted and will be monitored, along with anyone else who starts the new English season at a consistent gallop - not just a couple of good early performances.

On balance, I tend to agree with those who feel the current squad should form the nucleus of the way forward - baby, bathwater, avoid. So I believe the next England one day team, absent any sudden collapses in form/injury, should feature at least Hales, Ali, Root, Taylor, Buttler and Woakes from the 11 who lost to BD yesterday. Most other places are up for grabs, though I'd be a strong advocate of adding the raw talent of Ben Stokes and Jason Roy into the mix (my username being a bit of a giveaway for advocating the latter, I confess).

Is it really a personnel issue here though?

To my eye England's failings is in the way the players are brought up or told to play ODI. It really is all too evident that England are playing a different game to the rest. I have seen them get many really good starts with the bat and then inexplicably they become introverted and settle for nudging the ball around thinking six an over is excellent. Sorry but when England are doing this and almost look to be consolidating other teams such as Australia, South Africa, New Zealand and India have players with the mentality to up the run-rate even more and go on the attack. They aim for ten runs an over and often achieve that in the middle overs of the innings whilst England's introverted style sees them getting throttled as nudging for singles can easily be throttled by strategic field setting. Their run rate drops and they dig themselves a hole and create problems for themselves as they then need to go chasing the ball and getting out in the most daft and needless ways. Is that the players fault or what has been drilled into them? I would say it is the latter as remember that many of the team play in the new Twenty20 leagues with great success.

I'll say this again. There are no middle overs in English county cricket. How can you expect players to play the middle overs well when they first run into them at international level? English players also "don't need" to improve their trade by plying elsewhere, so they don't even learn in countries that do play 50 overs. The surprise isn't the result... it's the "How did this happen" reaction every time

kingraf wrote:I'll say this again. There are no middle overs in English county cricket. How can you expect players to play the middle overs well when they first run into them at international level? English players also "don't need" to improve their trade by plying elsewhere, so they don't even learn in countries that do play 50 overs. The surprise isn't the result... it's the "How did this happen" reaction every time

I do think it is a Catch-22 situation as well in England's case - I may be wrong but this is my take on it. The ECB and the whole structure of English cricket and the psyche is far more geared to test cricket than ODI. The enormity of the Ashes plays a part in that I feel. Is there a fear in the English set-up in general of over-committing to the limited overs format in order to protect the longer format? Hence there is no deep desire to adjust players mindset from Test match mode hence you get players like Bell and Cook (formerly) largely playing ODI's in test match mode with no desire or mindset to take the strike rate from 80.00 to 100+?

SimonofSurrey wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:Arent there any decent  uncappedsouth afircans/australians/bangladeshis whove been knocking about the county game a couple of years?

Not sure if Gooseberry's being a bit of a cheeky WUM or just ironic here.

Its a definite wind-up. As there's no mention of poaching some of the Ireland players as well!

VTR wrote:

SimonofSurrey wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:Arent there any decent  uncappedsouth afircans/australians/bangladeshis whove been knocking about the county game a couple of years?

Not sure if Gooseberry's being a bit of a cheeky WUM or just ironic here.

Its a definite wind-up. As there's no mention of poaching some of the Ireland players as well!

Semi ironic semi serious, English cricket is clearly incapable of producing players capable of performing on the world stage. The Irish can keep theres, Morgan is a wreck, Rankin cant last a whole game and Joyce was just poor.

We used to do pretty well from second hand south africans, they and the ozzies must have a few spare left arm quicks?

The left arm quick thing reminds me a bit of our search for a legspinner. Once the Aussies have a decent one we want one!

So our Warnies have been Salisbury, Schofield and Borthwick. Our Mitch's look to be Gurney and Tymal Mills....

I think given that we'd best just pick the best quality available whatever they bowl!

The main issue for me comes down to our top players needing to play for their counties more - as so often feels the case now.

The experienced players, such as Bell, Broad and Anderson, that were expected to lead this side play very few one day or T20 games for their clubs these days. Add on top of that how often Broad and Anderson especially have missed ODI's due to injury or rest periods and it really isn't a surprise that they haven't stood up in world cup games.

Get the players playing more for their counties in the new 50 over tournament then pick on performance and form.

1.Hales, Vince, Roy
2.Moeen
3.Taylor
4.Root
5.Morgan, Ballance, Vince, Roy
6.Stokes
7.Buttler (wk)

We have the talent there in the batsmen if we back it.

In the bowling we desperately need some guys to throw their hands up but the only way that can happen is if players are playing one day games for their counties.

I'm quite surprised that both Root and Taylor have in effect been given free passes for their roles in the failure against Bangladesh.

Both had the perfect opportunity to prove their worth in a pressure situation against, with respect to Bangladesh, not the strongest attack and both failed dismally.

Whilst there is little or no case for dropping either given the paucity of alternatives I'd hardly have huge faith in England's future success if our plans are to build a team around either/both.

Hibbz wrote:I'm quite surprised that both Root and Taylor have in effect been given free passes for their roles in the failure against Bangladesh.

Both had the perfect opportunity to prove their worth in a pressure situation against, with respect to Bangladesh, not the strongest attack and both failed dismally.

Whilst there is little or no case for dropping either given the paucity of alternatives I'd hardly have huge faith in England's future success if our plans are to build a team around either/both.

Fair point. Root had been in decent form then lost it during the World Cup. Taylor had done really well at three, so Peter Moores obviously crunched some data and came up with the genius idea of Ballance (no ODI since September) there, then last minute panic of putting Hales in instead. So mitigating circumstances for Taylor I would say.

VTR wrote:

Hibbz wrote:I'm quite surprised that both Root and Taylor have in effect been given free passes for their roles in the failure against Bangladesh.

Both had the perfect opportunity to prove their worth in a pressure situation against, with respect to Bangladesh, not the strongest attack and both failed dismally.

Whilst there is little or no case for dropping either given the paucity of alternatives I'd hardly have huge faith in England's future success if our plans are to build a team around either/both.

Fair point. Root had been in decent form then lost it during the World Cup. Taylor had done really well at three, so Peter Moores obviously crunched some data and came up with the genius idea of Ballance (no ODI since September) there, then last minute panic of putting Hales in instead. So mitigating circumstances for Taylor I would say.

Root is hardly getting a free pass. He has a better average than any other England player. He scored a good century against Sri Lanka and had a decent innings against New Zealand, and some good scores in the warm ups. Whilst hes not truely fired in the world cup its hardly a dramatic slump or anywhere near as bad a performance as the majority of the side. Hes clearly got to be part of any rebuild, and quite possibly a future all formats captain.

Taylor getting bumped to 6 ...the previous two games against Aus hed played at 3 and scored 9 runs form 32 balls....moves to 6 (against Australia) and only missed out on a run a ball century by Anderson getting run out. In that context it was such a bad idea was it?

If moving someone from 3 to 6 causes them to freeze like a frightened rabbit when faced with the might of Rubel Hossain then I'm not going to pin my hopes on them for future success.

With regards to Root, yes he's done okay and yes he looks a good player but that makes his failure to produce when it really mattered even more worrying.

Finn over Jordan seven days a week, and twice on Sundays.

Azzy wrote:Finn over Jordan seven days a week, and twice on Sundays.

The same Finn who can barely bowl nowadays? Before that ashes series yes, but now? At least Jordan looks like he might take a wicket

For me the main issue for England is the bowling department, the top 7 for me picks itself:

Alex Hales / Sam Billings (wk) / James Taylor / Joe Root (c) / James Vince / Moeen Ali / Jos Buttler

This allows us Buttler to focus on batting (moving up the order if we lose a wicket with 10-15 overs left) without worrying about his keeping which is below par in my opinion.

The next two for me would be:

Ben Stokes / Chris Woakes

Again sort of picks itself with Stokes having to come in and Woakes being someone who I feel was really developing as our new ball bowler in Sri Lanka before the ridiculous decision to bring Anderson and Broad back. But here is my problem, Jordan is my number 10 based on the county scene really having no one at all who looks international quality. Which then leaves 11, my pick would be Mark Wood of Durham who has shown that he is able to swing the ball and take wickets regularly (25 ish average in div 1)

Which leaves us with a team of:

Hales/Billings/Taylor/Root/Vince/Ali/Buttler/Stokes/Woakes/Jordan/Wood

When you expand this to a 14 man squad this would also include:

Jason Roy/Ravi Bopara/Samit Patel

In exciting news, David Saker is the new head coach of the Melbourne Renegades (the red ones), so will not be extending his England contract which expires in September. He may well leave before the end of the Ashes this summer. When he first came in, he worked well with a bowling attack that got us to the top of the world; but it is impossible to deny his failings in helping players like Stokes, Jordan and even Finn (although his action did need changing) improve/sustain their levels. Time for a new start for all parties.

JDizzle wrote:In exciting news, David Saker is the new head coach of the Melbourne Renegades (the red ones), so will not be extending his England contract which expires in September. He may well leave before the end of the Ashes this summer. When he first came in, he worked well with a bowling attack that got us to the top of the world; but it is impossible to deny his failings in helping players like Stokes, Jordan and even Finn (although his action did need changing) improve/sustain their levels. Time for a new start for all parties.

Or indeed in helping Broad and Anderson producing what they are capable of. 
Bring back jelly beans.

Gregers wrote:


Which leaves us with a team of:

Hales/Billings/Taylor/Root/Vince/Ali/Buttler/Stokes/Woakes/Jordan/Wood

When you expand this to a 14 man squad this would also include:

Jason Roy/Ravi Bopara/Samit Patel

So to clarify we are stuck with no genuine spinners and only right arm medium fasts? Jolly good.

Who on the county scene is there though? Genuine top quality bowlers are incredibly rare (hence the post about how the top 7 is actually very strong)

Finn is not a genuine quick any more! Neither is broad.

I would say this, wouldn't I, but some salvation in the longer term may come from Surrey - despite our recent reputation for buying in.

This season could be an exciting one for the higher aspirations of several of our younger home grown players, notably Jason Roy, Zafer Ansari and Matt Dunn (and, possibly, Stuart Meaker).

JDizzle wrote:In exciting news, David Saker is the new head coach of the Melbourne Renegades (the red ones), so will not be extending his England contract which expires in September. He may well leave before the end of the Ashes this summer. When he first came in, he worked well with a bowling attack that got us to the top of the world; but it is impossible to deny his failings in helping players like Stokes, Jordan and even Finn (although his action did need changing) improve/sustain their levels. Time for a new start for all parties.

This is good news indeed

I think we have to pack the top 4 with power. Let's look at the Australia team that scored 342 against us in the World Cup. A top 4 of Warner, Finch, Watson, Smith. They all have career strike rates of 88-90 in ODIs. You get players like that in your top 4, and you only need one of them to come off. In this instance, despite Aus falling to 70-3 just after the powerplay, Finch hit 135 in 128 and Australia scored 342.

England played Ali in the top 4 with Bell, Ballance and Root. Bell scored at 80 and everyone else scored more slowly. Net result, we were 66-2 after 13.3 overs - way behind the rate - and then two wickets in two balls ended our run chase under a third of the way into it.

Would you rather Stokes and Buttler came in with 10-15 overs to go and hit 30-ball 50s? Or came in after 10-15 overs and hit 100-ball 150s? You could say that the personnel aren't right and they are not good enough players, but the game plan must be to get our biggest hitters into the top 4 and give them a chance.

For me, I'd go with:
Hales (who has poor ODI stats in his 9 sporadic appearances, but in T20s has 37.92 @ 138.46)
Ali (33.27 @ 103.09)
Stokes (poor record down the order for England - only batted in the top 4 four times - but has a List A stats of 30.67 @ 96.61 and recently made 151* in 86 balls at 5 for the Lions)
Buttler (32.00 @ 111.3)

After that, I'd have the stroke players such as Root, Taylor and Morgan at 5/6/7. They can come in and look exploit the field being pushed back to take singles and bring their big-hitting partner on strike, while hitting the odd boundary, before accelerating in the final 15 overs.

Finally, you have your Woakes and Jordans who can come in at 8 and 9 in the last 10 overs and just biff everything.

When I started watching cricket (2005), England had a theory of getting Flintoff in at 7 with 15 to go and hopefully he could bash a quick 50 and take England from 240ish to 280ish. The game isn't like that anymore, and sticking our explosive players down the order to convert what are now poor scores into average ones is not going to win us any games. We need to get someone doing what Gayle, McCullum, DeVilliers or Warner does and hitting a huge score at a fast rate to put 350-400 on the cards.

I emphasise that it won't come off every time. But if you hit 400 one day and 150 the next, you're at least likely to win one game, as opposed to losing both if you are consistently scoring 270-280. And as we get better with this style then we will have good days more often than bad days.

the first thing, and this may seem obvious, is simple: get these guys playing 50 overs cricket!! At the moment England don't play the middle-overs well at all, and the reason for that in my mind is partly because, well, their players aren't brought up playing them. A few years ago, when they were mostly a procession this didn't really matter, but nowadays you have to be pro-active throughout (batting and bowling). England do neither well enough. The SL game was a particularly noticeable illustration of this.

With that out of the way, the team. I disagree with Robbo in that for me there's little to no point batting Root and Taylor so far down, and moreover you want your 6-7 (and maybe 5 too) to be big hitters who will clear the ropes regularly. You point out Australia, but they've put Watson down the order, and have Maxwell/Haddin/Faulkner down there too.

Root is pretty much the perfect fit for the n°4 spot IMO: he takes a bit of time to settle, then nudges it around for a bit, before making up for his dots later on in his innings. If anything, I'd encourage him to open up a little earlier (when he's reached 30 from 45 rather than 50 from 70) which he should be capable of doing. For me if you bat him too far down he hasn't got the time for that crucial first stage, and I'm not sure he can get going from the word go, unlike say Buttler.

Having said that, Buttler is actually the one who puzzles me, but I'll come back to that in a moment. You do want some power hitters at the top of the order. I'm not convinced Moeen is the answer up top, at least not in all conditions, and actually think he could provide some big power down the order, which England, Buttler aside, seem to lack at times. I'd go with Hales and Roy at the top of the order, but (and this is important!) they need a proper run. They're both classy players, but think how long it took Buttler to settle into the side. Hales in particular has been messed around badly.

For N°3, I'm hesitating between two options: Taylor and Buttler. Taylor should definitely be batting higher than 6, for me he's at his best like Root when given a bit of time to set, before catching up with his innings later on. Obviously there's a slight risk of both him and Taylor taking time to settle together which isn't ideal, but I feel they're both pro-active enough to avoid that sort of problem. Buttler as I said is my big conundrum: when he comes in like he did against SL he delivers more often than not, but he's a fine player, and ideally you'd like him to bat longer innings to have the chance to make a real difference (let's face it, his knock against SL say gave England probably at most another 15 runs). Equally though, if you do move him up the order you still need to have guys who can give it some whack lower down. With that in mind, I'm hedging my bets slightly: Taylor comes back to 3, Buttler comes up to 5.

Root, as explained, stays at 4.

Your 6,7 therefore need to be fairly versatile, guys who can build an innings if necessary, but also give it a whack. One of them at least needs to be a good enough bowler too. Tempted to stick Moggs there (hoping he gets some form back), and Moeen or Stokes. Slightly worried about lack of bowling options though.

Which brings me to the bowling. England simply put need to identify the bowlers most likely to pick up wickets up front AND (most importantly!!) in the middle-overs! If a side are 3 or fewer down going into the last 15 it'll be carnage most of the time whoever's bowling, so we need to pick wicket-takers.

So who are England's wicket-takers? Anderson usually with the new ball, but TBH he didn't make an impact in this series, and is only effective in his first few overs in ODIs nowadays. I'd actually leave him out. Woakes should take the new ball, which he's done well recently, and is a decent death option, but won't go through sides in the middle-overs. Finn could be an option there, he still has time on his side. But TBH I'm not sure who England have? Jordan? Has that knack of picking wickets up. Stokes I suppose could do a job too. Any others knocking about the County scene? Tredders still our best spin option? He'll usually pick up a wicket or two. A bit of variety would be nice, but genuinely not sure who we have (who's good enough)?

So ultimately I would probably go with
Hales
Roy
Taylor
Root
Buttler (wk)
Moggs (capt.)
Stokes
Woakes
Tredwell
two other bowlers

It's Root or Taylor for me.

Plenty of power and depth.
Hales
Roy
Root
Stokes
Buttler
Morgan
Ali
Rashid
Woakes
Broad
????

Thing is its this attitude of get the big hitter in early has seen englands results get worse rather than better in an era where teams are seeking to balance fast scoring against preserving wickets against the new balls, then accelerate away in the last 15 T20 style.

The other point to remember is it doenst matter how you balance your batting line up if the players dont produce,  Hales ODI record or Morgans recent form a good example...in theory Englands best fast scoring bats have delivered f all between them.

The sides being suggested though look more like T20 ones, no solidity. Even Root is better when hes not feeling solely responsible for anchoring an innings as his teammates chuck their wickets away swinging wildly. Theres room for Taylor, especially if hes not on bouncy pitches, or perhaps Ballance to add some stability to the side if you do insist that Bell has to die ( you know the only England batsman to come back with anything resembling credit) and also assuming that going back to Cook or even Trott just isnt an option.

Id argue Morgan should only stay if he shows a significant return to form over the early part of the summer (perhaps slightly undoing my  argument in favour of some "proper" batsmen!) 

Guys like Billings and Bairstow should also be in the frame. 

In terms of bowling wickets is the issue, but Englands cupboard is bare in terms of quick fixes to that. Rashids record in limited overs is not great, like Borthwick before him ( and to some extent Ali) picking him would be more about not having a proper spinner demanding a place and Stokes' p*ss poor form than the wicket taking threat of his bowling...but at least he offers some form of variation without making the tail ridiculous. 

If Stokes continues his BBL form into the new season I think he gets back in. A bit of hustle and aggression with the ball and if he actually turns up with the bat in theory a top 6 candidate. Having him and Woakes and Ali in the side would allow England to pick 3 other bowlers solely on their bowling ability, whether thats outright quality or variety. If that included Rashid it would actually give them a heckins of a lot of batting depth, and the lack of genuinely good wicket taking spinners in the county game adds weight. 

Butttler...just bear in mind most innings he does fail. Sticking him high up the order puts a lot of added pressure on the side if he does fail, and added pressure to not play his natural game. Im not convinced we need to go back to the days of having the wicket keeper nailed on to open.

Id like to see at least one of Anderson and Broad rested in the summer limited overs. Partly for rotation, partly to give others a chance to get embarrassed for a change. 


Hales (on the grounds he has to score some runs sooner or later)
Root
Vince/Roy/Bell/Taylor/Ballance based on early season form
Captain Morgan (If he hes in the runs rather than on the rum) otherwise 1 more from the above
Ali (simply because hes another slow option)
Buttler
Stokes
Woakes
Radish
Anderson/Broad
Wood/Mills if he has a remarkable start to the season. 

To be honest though you might as well pick names out of a hat.

For me you've got to try and get to 30 overs and be around 150-170 runs for 2/3 wickets down - and then look to at least double the score.

Our big problem is scoring the middle overs, rotating the strike etc. Therefore I'd put Root/Taylor at 3 and 4 as these guys are busy between the wickets, with the potential to really push on. 

I'd go like this;

Hales
Roy/Vince
Taylor
Root
Ali
Buttler
Billings
Stokes
Woakes
Jordan
(Insert wickettaking seamer here)

With our bowling attack being well mediocre at best, I don't see why we'd put an extra bowler in, so I have gone with Billings to add some serious power with the bat

I also don't think Broad/Anderson are effective enough in the One Day stuff to really warrant them playing the volume of cricket that is coming up - keep them for the tests

Hmmm. I see there's support for Billings as England's ODI keeper with Buttler playing purely as a batsman.

I'm not as convinced as some that Billings will last the distance ... but, hey, he came up with the goods last season so I'll put that on that one side.

My issue more is, if this happens, will Buttler get enough experience behind the stumps and develop sufficiently as the Test keeper for which he's only recently been bloodied.

After the World Cup debacle, it's entirely reasonable and understandable that we're looking at ways to improve the ODI team. However, we should be aware if any of those possible improvements have implications for the Test side. That doesn't mean we can't go with them but it's important things are thought through in advance.

guildfordbat wrote:Hmmm. I see there's support for Billings as England's ODI keeper with Buttler playing purely as a batsman.

I'm not as convinced as some that Billings will last the distance ... but, hey, he came up with the goods last season so I'll put that on that one side.

My issue more is, if this happens, will Buttler get enough experience behind the stumps and develop sufficiently as the Test keeper for which he's only recently been bloodied.

After the World Cup debacle, it's entirely reasonable and understandable that we're looking at ways to improve the ODI team. However, we should be aware if any of those possible improvements have implications for the Test side. That doesn't mean we can't go with them but it's important things are thought through in advance.

We do have about 50 million tests upcoming - so I wouldn't worry about Buttler about not getting enough time behind the stumps personally Guildford! Tbh not sure it makes much difference who keeps between them - just go with the better one. But I do think Billings deserves a go - especially in this age of needing to accelerate at the end. He's another like Buttler who just hits it so cleanly and powerfully

Hales is a nailed on pick in my side. His T20I record is outstanding, and over a decent period too, and that should deserve him a long run in the side. All summer at least. And I think Hales enjoys having someone open with him who likes to have a biff from ball one and takes some pressure off him. This is where I think Roy would be perfect. From what I have seen of him, he likes to go hard straight away (although this is mainly from me watching him in T20s) but he can also make 100s, which is crucial. This is why he has the edge over Moeen as an opener for me, as I think Moeen will struggle to get more than a flashy 30 before getting out against the better attacks in world cricket.

Despite Taylor's modest ODI s/r, he has shown the ability to start slow and catch up and I think he deserves an extended run at 3. He has shown enough to get that. Root is England's outstanding player, he gets to bat in his best position at 4 and him and Taylor can run aggressively together in the middle overs.

Now is where it gets tricky, an in form Mogs is a brilliant player. But he hasn't shown it since Australia last year. I think he should get at least 1/2 more series because of past credit, but he is on a short leash. For that reason, he isn't my skipper. That goes to Root. Stokes is next in line, deserves a go at being a proper batsman. Like he is for Durham. Plus I can't justify him as one of England's five bowlers.

Buttler and Ali at 6/7 are fairly straight forward. Buttler is class and Ali is better as a lower order hitter, and his place is simplified by the fact he is England's best spinner. Or at least close enough to Tredwell.

Speaking of Tredders, he deserves to play. He has a great record in ODIs. Then three seamers. Anderson needs to pack ODIs up, Broad still could offer a bit but he needs time to recover from his latest injury. He was nowhere near 100% this WC. That means Woakes gets the new ball, and then the next two seamers could literally be anyone.

I like Mark Wood. But he is made of glass. Hopefully he gets a go in the Windies and we will see what he is made of. Topley seems to have lost a bit of pace last year, barely getting into the early 80s so will be interested to see how he goes early season. It is too soon for both Overtons. I actually quite like Jordan, I'd back him. I like how he can contribute in all three facets of the game. Finn is nowhere near the bowler he needs to be. He needs some time at the Middle again.

Hales, Roy, Taylor, Root (C), Morgan, Buttler, Ali, Woakes, Jordan, Broad, Tredwell. Stokes, Billings, Vince, Topley and Willey around the squad.

Olly wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:Hmmm. I see there's support for Billings as England's ODI keeper with Buttler playing purely as a batsman.

I'm not as convinced as some that Billings will last the distance ... but, hey, he came up with the goods last season so I'll put that on that one side.

My issue more is, if this happens, will Buttler get enough experience behind the stumps and develop sufficiently as the Test keeper for which he's only recently been bloodied.

After the World Cup debacle, it's entirely reasonable and understandable that we're looking at ways to improve the ODI team. However, we should be aware if any of those possible improvements have implications for the Test side. That doesn't mean we can't go with them but it's important things are thought through in advance.

We do have about 50 million tests upcoming - so I wouldn't worry about Buttler about not getting enough time behind the stumps personally Guildford! Tbh not sure it makes much difference who keeps between them - just go with the better one. But I do think Billings deserves a go - especially in this age of needing to accelerate at the end. He's another like Buttler who just hits it so cleanly and powerfully

Olly - I appreciate your usual good humour (which will certainly be tested at times as you are now also supporting Surrey!). However, I do think a young, fairly inexperienced keeper like Buttler needs to gain experience for keeping in Tests from elsewhere than just mainly Tests.

The limited amount of 'learning' cricket these guys play at county level is probably a connected issue.

I made the point a few months ago that Cook would almost certainly be a better England captain if he had first had the opportunity to learn the captaincy ropes at Essex (just as many England captains did in the past at their own counties) and questioned whether the arrival of central contracts (with Cook and other England internationals now playing far less county cricket) was a negative factor as regards captaincy. As a related aspect, there would often be 3 or 4 county captains in any England side back in the '60s and '70s - thus plenty of experience for the England skipper to call upon if required. Very different for captains like Cook and Morgan today.

Similarly, those England players with central contracts don't just get pulled from most CC matches but also many one day county games as well. I would question whether they are playing and learning the one day game enough before they reach the ODI stage.

Here are the bowling stats for the last two years.
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=2;spanmin1=29+Mar+2013;spanval1=span;team=1;template=results;type=bowling