England - the winter tours thread

[robbo277]

We can breathe a little bit easier now!

However, Morgan has to find another 4 overs of spin. I assume he'll wait until he can put an extra man out at 40. Hopefully eek out another one before then to give us a bit more breathing space.

[Duty281]

Six down and the match.

[robbo277]

I was wrong, but Rashid has come back and got Holder.

England red hot favourites now. Nothing certain with Carlos "Remember The Name" Braithwaite at the crease, but 118 required from 14.1, only 4 wickets left and two new men at the crease.

[Duty281]

Braithwaite slogging away, highest ODI score for him now.

[robbo277]

Could do with another wicket to slow them down. Nurse is scoring slowly, looking to turn the strike over to Braithwaite. Could do with getting him!

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Woakes has been utterly utterly abysmal. Club level bowling

[Duty281]

Nurse churns out three consecutive boundaries from atrocious bowling from Woakes. 47 off 30 now.

Surely England aren't going to lose their bottle again?

[robbo277]

Nurse churns out three consecutive boundaries from atrocious bowling from Woakes. 47 off 30 now.

Surely England aren't going to lose their bottle again?

Well, he was going below around 60/100, but those boundaries have got him over a run a ball.

Any wicket would do now. Wood finishes without turning his 4 into 5. 3 overs to go, properly into the death now. 32 needed, Morgan is going with Rashid.

[AlciG]

Crap... my stream just stopped

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

They don’t call him Rashenius for no reason folks

[Duty281]

And Rashid does the trick. Two in two, both of them the key batsmen.

Please someone send Cottrell back with a salute.

[robbo277]

Rashid has got Nurse! 30 from 16 with the number 9 striding out. A lot lying on the shoulders of Braithwaite now.

GONE NEXT BALL! Surely done.

[robbo277]

If you can ever award man of the match based on one over this is the time to give it!

2, W, W, . , W, W

And the 2 was a drop!

[Duty281]

Wow, four wickets in five balls, that's some way to end a bat-fest of an ODI. Brings Rashid's ODI average below 30, too.

807 runs scored today!

[VTR]

What an over from Rashid!

[AlciG]

If Hetmyer doesn't throw away his wicket WI's win this

[dummy_half]

If Hetmyer doesn't throw away his wicket WI's win this

You can't really say that, as if Hetmyer stayed in Gayle might have batted differently and Brathwaite might not have scored any runs. Would have been interesting though...

This shows why the chase of such a big target is such a problem - Windies were up with the rate throughout, but they just lost a wicket or two when the were getting the edge, and the new batsmen felt obliged to keep swinging, hence the failures. Still got a lot closer than I expected - I would have gone for all out 50-70 runs short once Gayle had gone. The modern ODI game, on a good wicket you can reasonably chase 350, even 375, but the incessant pressure of chasing 400+ is just too much.

[dummy_half]

Oh, and a quick note considering the carnage inflicted on most bowlers:
Wood: 10 overs, 4 for 60
Plunkett: 8 overs for 40

Just enough good bowling to keep the pressure on while others were struggling.

[Mad for Chelsea]

Well that was interesting. I really think something needs to be done about these ridiculously short boundaries TBH, with bastmen as good at hitting sixes as they are nowadays, 60 meter boundaries is just stupidly small.

Credit I think to Morgan for backing Rashid at the end there. Rashid's previous three overs had been fairly poor, he'd been too short and flat, and picked off easily, but Morgan gave him the ball anyway. I wonder if Morgan also had a word to ask him to give it more air, or if Rashid figured that out himself. Either way, he did, it worked, and won the match for England. Wood also excellent with the ball, and has certainly positioned himself as a first XI pick now IMO. Plunkett did pretty well too, albeit he bowled a lot of his overs when WI were re-building. Woakes bowled OK to Gayle in his second spell, but poor otherwise. Stokes had a poor first spell, but got the vital wicket when he came back. Moeen is a concern. Anyone can get tonked by Gayle at these grounds, but he doesn't seem to have really even though of a plan to change things beyond hoping that Gayle will hit one straight up in the air. He's mostly bowling straight, on a decent length, and getting panned.

With the bat, Buttler is a freak: short boundaries or no, his ability to hit very low full tosses back over the bowler's head for six (and most would have gone for six even on bigger grounds), is incredible, and unmatched by any other player, well ever really. Morgan was also excellent, Hales played nicely, and it was good to see Bairstow back in some form. The fact that England are genuinely likely to go into a WC with one of Roy, Bairstow and Hales (most likely the latter) sitting on the sidelines is a rather ludicrous position to be in, particularly given their travails to find openers in Tests (as Olly points out).

For WI, Gayle played very well. His fitness is still an issue, and contributed IMO to his dismissal (he looked dead on his feet, clearly fielding first took even more out of him). However, when he bats like that you can't really argue. Part of the problem is that WI aren't only carrying him in the field: Cotterell and Thomas are both lousy fielders, and Nurse not all that much better. It must be hard to tell those guys that their fielding has to improve mind, with Gayle being hidden at slip for most of the innings in the manner of elderly club cricketers.

I thought Bravo also played very well, as did Brathwaite down the order (with good support from Nurse). I really like Hetmeyer, but someone should have a word with him after that effort. There are several reasons why it was silly:
1) they were ahead of the game at that point after a fine partnership between Bravo and Gayle, plenty of time for him to at least have a look;
2) Hetmeyer is the last proper batsman before the all-rounders;
3) It's Wood bowling, England's only dangerous bowler at that point. This point also applies to Bravo I reckon, it was a rather silly swipe to play to Wood's first ball back.
They should point out that Buttler came out to bat for England also at 5, at a rather similar stage of the innings, and rather cruised to 50 before hitting the accelerator (with gusto!).

WI also need to look to their death bowling. When Buttler's smacking attempted yorker after attempted yorker into the stands (whether straight or wide), it might be a good idea to try something different. I reckon they bowled maybe 6-7 slower balls at him in total (he probably scored 12-15 runs off them before getting out), no bouncers, nothing really different. Just yorkers which they were narrowly missing and which were being dispatched.

[Mad for Chelsea]

Some stats.

Rashid's five wicket haul here (5-85) is the most expensive ever in an ODI, by some margin (next most expensive is 73).

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=2;filter=advanced;orderby=conceded;template=results;type=bowling;view=innings;wicketsmin1=5;wicketsval1=wickets

A couple of other recent-ish England efforts on there. One by Finn, in the opening game of the last world cup, where England's top 3 was Moeen Ali, Ian Bell and Gary Ballance. There's also an effort by Stokes in there, in another game where England were well beaten by Australia. In that one, they did have Root and Morgan at 3 and 4, but Buttler and Stokes batted 7 and 8, behind Luke Wright and Ravi Bopara. How times change...

Speaking of Buttler, here's the list of highest ODI strike rates (minimum 500 balls faced).

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/records/282919.html

Average of 41 at a SR of 119 is freakishly good. Roy and Bairstow are also on there, striking at better than a run a ball with very healthy averages. Hales strikes at a rather pedestrian 96 in comparison

De Villiers's record is worth a mention too: average of 51 while scoring at better than a run a ball is seriously impressive.

[Duty281]

Absolutely agree that something must be done about the short boundaries. The pleasure of seeing a boundary hit is chiefly drawn from the idea that they are hard to attain; well that wasn't the case today with a seemingly infinite number of fours and sixes.

It all adds up to make it such a one-sided contest between batsman and bowler. Short boundaries. Pancake wickets. Fielding restrictions. Restrictions on how long a bowler can bowl for. Not allowed to bowl too many short balls, not allowed to bowl leg-side or too far outside off. Powerful bats. Absurd 'free-hits' if a bowler oversteps. All adds up to the stupidly high run-fest we've seen today.

Got to say as well that the procession of dull comments that hit the BBC, and similar journalistic sites, about the so-called 'golden age of free-to-air cricket broadcasting in the UK' is getting beyond parody now. After every England game now you seem to get something along the lines of 'how disgraceful it is that I can't watch this on the BBC etc.' I remember cricket on Channel 4 - the production quality was awful and they used to bugger off routinely for horse racing and God knows what else.  Live overseas England games were never, ever shown live on terrestrial television, but you wouldn't know this from these commenters who hark back to a mythical golden age when everyone and their cat knew who Ashley Giles and Mark Ealham were, and who seem to think the ECB have committed something tantamount to a despicable war crime by flogging the rights to a dedicated, professional broadcaster.

Sky's coverage is, and always has been, superb and is excellent value for money.

[Dolphin Ziggler]

Free-to-air cricket would do huge things for the popularity of a game so desperate to call in numbers that it makes up some weird 100 ball s***

A home Ashes should be protected like the FA Cup final, but I'm ok with the rest being divvied up.

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

I agree there should be some cricket on free-to-air TV, but Duty is 100% correct in terms of the coverage - Sky's is extremely good (it just won an award at the Sports Journalism awards i see), and there was nothing worse than the bloody horse racing taking cricket off the air on channel 4 - it should also be noted, Sky have pumped a lot of money into the game (via the ECB) into the grassroots levels of the game...highly doubt the BBC would be able to do that for example.

I've also been impressed by Talksport's coverage when I have listened to it - the fact Agnew went after it on twitter recently just continues to show how far up his own backside that man is

[Gooseberry]

If Hetmyer doesn't throw away his wicket WI's win this

You can't really say that, as if Hetmyer stayed in Gayle might have batted differently and Brathwaite might not have scored any runs. Would have been interesting though...

This shows why the chase of such a big target is such a problem - Windies were up with the rate throughout, but they just lost a wicket or two when the were getting the edge, and the new batsmen felt obliged to keep swinging, hence the failures. Still got a lot closer than I expected - I would have gone for all out 50-70 runs short once Gayle had gone. The modern ODI game, on a good wicket you can reasonably chase 350, even 375, but the incessant pressure of chasing 400+ is just too much.

Its also worth noting that the West Indies tail is truely abysmal with the bat. The high risk approach for their top 5 can pay off (as per Gayle!) and very nearly did, but unlike England they dont have the likes of Woakes lurking down the order. Thomas and Cottrel are frankly embarrassing batsmen and Braithwaite wouldn't get in Englands top 10 (unles he changed his name to Moeen). Holder is batting at least a place too high at 6, he only averages 26 in ODIs (something about a test double century though ) Andre Russell will give them a bit more steel when hes back, and I assume he will play the last match. Hetmeyer was forced into going for it from the off because they were still a long way behind with little back up to come.

That the West Indies got close once Hetmeyer had failed should be very worrying for England, and had he come off then yes maybe they wouldve and maybe Gayle wouldnt have let his concentration slip. But Rashid did his job well in the end once that tail was exposed, and continues to show why his bowling is so important to England when defending a total and players are forced to attack him.

That Chris Gayle though, I think hes well and truley proven a point in this series. He might be fat old lazy and divisive but now hes had a chance to getting used to doing more than five minutes work in a day and been given a flat wicket and short boundary that hes still a force on the global stage. For all the praise of Buttlers inning Gayle did more, and against a fresh Wood (oo err). Hes scored over 300 runs in this series so far, not bad for yesterdays man. For all I dislike him as a human you have to say hes earned some of that ego. The West Indies have too many place fillers to leave him out, assuming they gave up on morality years ago. Just dont let him near any female journalists.


As for England I dont think we have learnt much again. They can bat, really well. The top 6 are all capable of match winning innings, and they could play a 7th bat every bit as good. The bowling attack is a bit lacking at times but having the 6 options gives them the flexibility to work around different situations, and Rashid is a real trump card.
The big problem seems to be Moeen. Hes never had a fabulous ODI record with bat or ball, but he used to at least be economical. Maybe his style and this type of match in particular plays into the west indies power hitting layers hands a bit but he really has struggled of late. he had an excellent series against Australia on home pitches but has not done much since. His batting really hasnt been up to scratch for the last 18 months either. At the minute he looks like an absolute passenger in the side ....but thats Moeen right? One day he will suddenly find his mojo again. But his place is as vulnerable as anyones, Id like to see Denly be given a game to see if he can bowl as the second spinner and would certainly offer more with the bat. England will absolutely want a second spinner for the middle overs to back up Rashid, but Moeens has been cannon fodder worryingly often of late.
Plunkett, Wood, Woakes looks like its staying as the first choice seam attack. Curran had an opportunity to press for inclusion but didnt really take it.
It also shows again that England are happiest batting first on flat pitches and setting seemingly unchasable targets.

[Dolphin Ziggler]

I agree there should be some cricket on free-to-air TV, but Duty is 100% correct in terms of the coverage - Sky's is extremely good (it just won an award at the Sports Journalism awards i see), and there was nothing worse than the bloody horse racing taking cricket off the air on channel 4 - it should also be noted, Sky have pumped a lot of money into the game (via the ECB) into the grassroots levels of the game...highly doubt the BBC would be able to do that for example.

I've also been impressed by Talksport's coverage when I have listened to it - the fact Agnew went after it on twitter recently just continues to show how far up his own backside that man is

Their coverage is good, but then I always enjoyed Channel 4's too. I'd be very surprised if the BBC's wasn't excellent; their coverage of sport across all platforms is generally magnificent. It's a balancing act too, I think Sky would likely feel somewhat cheated, but they should understand it is good for them too, if they continue to have everything else. They could do dual coverage, as we see with things like the FA Cup final. 

It would also be good for the Test format. We talk of players who are playing differently now, with less discipline, because the money/popularity is in the shorter formats. Were there free-to-air tests (I still stand by it being home Ashes - or maybe home test per year in a non-Ashes year), the popularity would be good for clubs, making it a more viable option to concentrate on a little more. 

The BBC can pull it off, what with the two main channels and their examples of Wimbledon and, to a lesser extent, the World Cup showing they can give the hours in the day and move channels for important things like the misery of the news. Channel 4 seem to have moved away from interest in sport, which is evident with their loss of the racing (which means it couldn't hamper their coverage)

I'd heard nothing good about TalkSport's coverage, so that's interesting.

[VTR]

Some free to air cricket would be a good thing, but the away ODI series to the Windies isn't it! If they'd shown the Test series it would have put an entire generation of schoolchildren off as well, no one would aspire to being 77 all out and letting Holder and Dowrich run riot

[alfie]

I will never love the short form as much as Test Cricket ; but I have to admit games like this are pretty exciting in a mad sort of way... Pity the poor old bowler under existing rules , especially playing on postage stamp grounds ; but as several have said already some of the bowling was pretty bad. And this match did feature a number of notable big hitters on both sides.
Wish I had seen the Buttler Mayhem Finish to England's innings ! He's done that sort of thing before , of course , but this seems to have been rather exceptional.  Came in at the ideal time , I think : always reckon his best innings come when he has time to set up at a (relatively) steady pace - and then go ballistic at the end. I've seen people suggesting he should bat higher up the order but frankly I am happy with him at 5/6 : if he sometimes gets in "too late" it is probable that he isn't really needed on the day - with the lineup England have - and on days like this it works just perfectly

Skipper seems to have had a good day too. Wasn't that long ago I recall mutterings around whether Morgan - then going through a dry patch - was good enough with the bat to command a place in the team...not from the wise people on here , of course ! But in any case his recent form has been fine and he fills that role of "steady to frenzied " depending on the situation , at four rather well.
I did manage to watch the opening stand - rather entertaining ! And can only concur with a comment I noticed above : it is ironic that England can put out any combination of two of their three regular players to do an excellent job at the top of the order but cannot muster anyone to perform reliably in Tests. I've seen speculation around Roy ; but having previously championed Hales for a Test job - with limited success - I tend to think he would suffer from the same sort of problems . For the same reason I wouldn't advocate YJB for an opener's spot. ODI aggressors sometimes can make it in Tests : but for every Warner there are a fair few failures ...and England seem to have had their share. Nice problem to have in the white ball game anyway...

Bowling issues for England seem to be a case of a couple of players down on form , no ? I do think the bowling is a potential weakness as they don't possess the firepower of some of their rivals ( no Starc , no Boult , no Bumrah) but they usually get the job done : on this occasion Woakes was replaced by a lookalike and Moeen continued a recent poor run ...though in fairness it was just two overs and he never had an opportunity to try and turn it around .(Not that I disagree with Morgan's choices : Moeen suffers from a fragile confidence and not bringing him back made good sense).
On that note I recall a bit of criticism coming the skipper's way over his handling of Rashid in the other games. I think the way he finished the job shows one of the reasons why they are tending to use him "later " in the innings on this tour ; though I'd suggest it is all still a little experimental. Certainly I feel that Rashid , like many of his type , is most likely to be deadly when bowling to late order bats in a pressure situation. It surely showed Morgan's ice cold nerve that he entrusted his wrist spinner with the ante-penultimate over rather than recalling the (economical) Plunkett who had two overs up his sleeve...worked a treat

Two great innings : Gayle and Buttler - who I guess was nailed on for PotM. But , apart from Rashid , I do think Wood might have had a decent shout for the honour after his 4/60 among all the carnage . Think without his efforts West Indies would have won a remarkable victory...

One game to go , weather permitting. Hope they play Curran ; let Woakes rest up for the home summer. And maybe give Moeen a rest ?

[Mad for Chelsea]

Re Moeen, until this series he's been doing generally OK with the ball. In the SL series he picked up 4/150 or so across the games at an economy rate of around 5. In the India home series last summer he did decently in the 2 games England won (picking up about 1/90 in 20 overs) but got some tap in the first one which England lost (although England as a unit were poor that day). Prior to that he had an excellent series against Australia. Issue in this series has been flat pitches with no turn, short boundaries, and WI's power hitting game which generally suits them well against his type of bowling. Moeen doesn't really have a great deal of variety or guile, so in these conditions it's hard for him to have an impact. I don't think he's bowled "badly" per se, he hasn't been serving up a steady diet of long hops and full tosses certainly (cough cough Bishoo), but equally he hasn't been able to find a way to combat WI's aggression, and at times hasn't really looked to have been trying (e.g. try firing a few wide of Gayle's off stump and make him drag it from there).

The bigger concern might be his batting. Since the home series against the WI a couple of years ago where he tonked them all over the park, his highest score in 20 innings is 46 (against Scotland), followed by a 37 and a 33. Interestingly, those three efforts were all in losing causes, which might suggest that his batting simply hasn't been required, and he's just been coming in for a quick cameo, but it's still a bit of a worry IMO. In the same time he hasn't score many in Tests either. Now I'm not suggesting that England should drop him. He does balance out the side nicely (and they really don't have any replacements who could do the same job), but they would like him to get some form back before the WC, particularly with the bat. Even a quick cameo of say 35 off 20 would be useful at this stage.

[Mad for Chelsea]

Re Morgan's use of Rashid. I think it's quite clear that Morgan values having Rashid as an option at the death (the others being the four seamers). The theory behind it is that it's harder to hit spin 360, so the extra man out gives you more control. Added to that, there's a decent chance that in the last ten the batsmen will be lower middle-order or tail-enders, and that's where Rashid's box of tricks can be used to full effect. It's a sound theory, made the more so by the fact that England don't have particularly great death-bowling seamers, and you can see why Morgan likes it. In general, with six proper bowling options, Morgan prefers to have several choices to go to at the death, and goes with what he feels is working best on that day. It means plenty of times bowlers won't bowl out their full quota (Woakes has done so both times he's played in this series, Wood 2 out of 3, others no more than once each). Thus at times, when Morgan feels the seamers are working, Rashid will only bowl 6-8 overs. At others, Morgan may feel there's more value in bowling Rashid straight through, but I'm fairly certain this is something he's rarely done over the last couple of years.

All that said, I thought Morgan was guilty of delaying his introduction too long in the first ODI, and I suspect despite what he said afterwards he'd agree (see earlier use in subsequent ODIs). I also felt he could have given him one more over in his spell in the second, but that's more debatable. The fact he didn't go to him at the death was IMO reasonable, as the seamers did a pretty good job (Hetmeyer played well, but worth noting he picked Rashid easily in the Test, so not sure how well Rashid would have done against him there).

TLDR: Morgan still trusts Rashid as one of his go-to men, but wants to have him as an option at the death. Sometimes he won't use him there, so Rashid won't bowl his full quota.

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

The boundary size issue is a thing, but it should be noted the majority of the sixes yesterday would've been sixes at the MCG or anywhere with long boundaries! I think they brought them in a touch because of some rain in the preceding days, so worries about wet patches on the outer outfield - but yeah Gayle and Buttler weren't just flicking it 60 yards for a six, many going 80, 90 or even 100 metres!

I think England need to rest up Woakes in general - this knee issue has been lingering for a while, and he is a crucial crucial cog to this ODI side (especially at home, where with the new ball he is a weapon with his swing/seam). He also provides that balance with the bat too - the side looks a lot weaker with him on the sidelines imo - probably good news he didn't get an IPL deal!

And agree with MFC on Moeen (interesting to note Nathaniel was less vociferous when he was bowling well during the Test series...)

I also think England's fielding has been a little shabby this series - and might be something worth keeping an eye on. Roy/Hales/Bairstow/Stokes all fly around, but some of the guys like Plunkett/Rashid/Wood/Woakes and even yesterday Root are all pretty stiff in the field and not getting any younger...

I do think Archer is worth a shot in those ODIs against Pakistan pre world cup - from what I've seen in the BBL, he could offer another new ball threat, and also some death bowling too - should be noted, he is an excellent fielder too.

[Gooseberry]

In terms of Morgan in all honesty if he wasnt Captain he probably wouldnt get in the side ahead of Hales/Bairstow/Roy but hes been generally good, has incredible levels of experience, 12 ODI centuries to his names, and has led the team through an unprecedented level of success. Although theres been surprisingly little speculation in the press I would be far from surprised if he didn't retire post world cup, England will be sad to see him go but it would seem a sensible time and they have the players to step in.
Hes certainly hit form at the right time, theres zero chance hes losing his place. from the Aus series onwards hes banged out the runs consistently.


Moeen ... MfC pretty much echoes the feelings I posted above. Im slightly less positive about his returns against Sri lanka and India, notably that he doesnt take wickets which can be an issue for England. Theres been a number of times theyve struggled to break partnerships that have gone on to swing games in those middle overs where he tends to bowl. And overall his career figures are pretty weak in both disciplines (although as noted a decent enough economy rate). But his batting has been poor for an extended period now, you can pretty much discount the 45 he scored against Scotland in a high scoring game. Not terrible just not an indispensable player.
The point I would pick at is that theres no other option; Samit Patel Joe Denly does in theory offer more with the bat even when both at their best and has a good record in domestic limited overs bowling. In many regards hes another potential Moeen who started life as a top order aggressive batsman who could bowl bit. I do find it baffling that hes become a mainstay of the England test top 3 whilst having a very ordinary first class record yet cant get back in the playing side in ODIs despite having come back into selection contention because of his play in the 20 and 50 competitions (well not that baffling when you look at how rubbish the test team is but it still feels wrong). His domestic bowling record pees all over that of Moeen in all formats. the only international cricket hes had in recent years has been T20s, in which he has a strike rat of 1 wicket every 6 balls...like Im aware the sample size is ridiculous but he clearly has something going for him as a bowler in limited overs. Whilst Im the first to urge caution on county stats and well aware that you cant pick on numbers alone I really dont see Moeen as irreplaceable from within the current limited overs squad.
Im not overly hung up on him getting Moeens spot but youd think Denly was nailed in as a reserve for the world cup, so give the guy a game. If Moeen continues to struggle/gets injured its good to have that option off the bench, especially if Stokes needs resting and they cant have 6 bowlers without one being able to bat up the order.

[Gooseberry]

Point on Woakes...they have rested him up for most of the winter, hes barely played. In a recent interview he stated the knee issue wasnt much difference to injuries pretty much all the senior players carry. Something about Broad and Anderson being close to retirement from theirs 3 years ago etc.
Yes his workload needs to be managed, but although he got flayed yesterday Im not aware of any need to rest him again that would outweigh the benefit of him getting some more competitive cricket at the end of a second tour where hes been a bit part.

[Nathaniel Jacobs]

The boundary size issue is a thing, but it should be noted the majority of the sixes yesterday would've been sixes at the MCG or anywhere with long boundaries! I think they brought them in a touch because of some rain in the preceding days, so worries about wet patches on the outer outfield - but yeah Gayle and Buttler weren't just flicking it 60 yards for a six, many going 80, 90 or even 100 metres!

I think England need to rest up Woakes in general - this knee issue has been lingering for a while, and he is a crucial crucial cog to this ODI side (especially at home, where with the new ball he is a weapon with his swing/seam). He also provides that balance with the bat too - the side looks a lot weaker with him on the sidelines imo - probably good news he didn't get an IPL deal!

And agree with MFC on Moeen (interesting to note Nathaniel was less vociferous when he was bowling well during the Test series...)

I also think England's fielding has been a little shabby this series - and might be something worth keeping an eye on. Roy/Hales/Bairstow/Stokes all fly around, but some of the guys like Plunkett/Rashid/Wood/Woakes and even yesterday Root are all pretty stiff in the field and not getting any younger...

I do think Archer is worth a shot in those ODIs against Pakistan pre world cup - from what I've seen in the BBL, he could offer another new ball threat, and also some death bowling too - should be noted, he is an excellent fielder too.

Moeen’s supposedly outstanding efforts in the test series are irrelevant. Windies are pretty mediocre against spin and in previous series again India and Pakistan - Ashwin and Yasir lead them a merry dance. 

Moeen averages 47 in Odis which is pathetic. Period

[Afro]

In Morgan's defence, his stats in ODIs recently are brilliant. He flies under the radar a bit atm, and gets questioned because of past struggles, but at the moment, he is earning his place as much as anyone from batting alone, before you add his captaincy into the equation.

He's hit 7 50+'s in his last 9 innings, and in the other two he was not out for 14 and 31 respectively.

He is averaging 47 since the start of 2018, 69 since the end of last years New Zealand tour and 79 on this tour (108 for this winter, so including the Sri Lanka tour and this one)

[Mad for Chelsea]

Morgan does this TBH. He goes through rough patches, then patches where he scores loads of runs. Anyway, I looked up some stats.

Since the last WC Morgan averages 46 at a SR of 97, which is superb. That rises to 51.81 at 101.65 in England (where the WC is), which is rather excellent. By comparison, Hales in the same time frame averages 40 at a SR of 98 (38 at 108 in England). Roy is 38.5 at 105.5 (40 at 108.6 in England), Bairstow as an opener 52 at 113 (68 at 116 in England!), and Root 60 (!) at 90 (62.7 at 94.5 in England). Meanwhile, Stokes is averaging 47 (that surprised me TBH) at 98 (48.6 at 95 in England), and Buttler 49.6 at 124 (63!! at a rather pedestrian 120 in England).

You look at those stats for the top 6 and it's not exactly surprising that England hold pretty much all the team batting records since the last WC. It's harsh on Hales, who would make the starting XI of any other team in the world IMO, and who has already unfairly largely missed out on one WC, but them's the breaks as they say.

[king_carlos]

On Moeen, I expect England are banking on him bowling well in skiddy early summer conditions where he will have more experience that his counterparts. The pitches won't turn a huge amount but when the ball skids on it can hard to get spinners away - conditions that play to Mo's strengths.

His terrible average likely won't be as much of a concern as his economy rate. He doesn't take bags of wickets in ODIs but his career economy rate is the best of England bowlers who played yesterday. If that starts going up exponentially then he will be struggling for a place.

Stokes is another who statistically has very poor returns in ODIs. His average is over 40 and economy over 6 runs an over. Interestingly he is a bowler that Morgan frequently turns to in pressure moments though.

England's most important bowler they need to deliver for the world cup will be Woakes in my opinion. With 83 ODI appearances and England's regular new ball bowler he is now the leader of that seam attack. If he bowls like he did yesterday then England will struggle in the field.

[Mad for Chelsea]

Morgan does this TBH. He goes through rough patches, then patches where he scores loads of runs. Anyway, I looked up some stats.

Since the last WC Morgan averages 46 at a SR of 97, which is superb. That rises to 51.81 at 101.65 in England (where the WC is), which is rather excellent. By comparison, Hales in the same time frame averages 40 at a SR of 98 (38 at 108 in England). Roy is 38.5 at 105.5 (40 at 108.6 in England), Bairstow as an opener 52 at 113 (68 at 116 in England!), and Root 60 (!) at 90 (62.7 at 94.5 in England). Meanwhile, Stokes is averaging 47 (that surprised me TBH) at 98 (48.6 at 95 in England), and Buttler 49.6 at 124 (63!! at a rather pedestrian 120 in England).

You look at those stats for the top 6 and it's not exactly surprising that England hold pretty much all the team batting records since the last WC. It's harsh on Hales, who would make the starting XI of any other team in the world IMO, and who has already unfairly largely missed out on one WC, but them's the breaks as they say.

For what it's worth, this (very roughly, doing the maths in my head) works out to England's top 6 (those who played yesterday) combined scoring on average 293 off 283 balls.

[VTR]

It's a ridiculous batting unit, especially when you consider some of the dross we've had to put up with over the years. On its day though, it can fail, you are only ever four or five good balls away from the top order being mostly back in the hutch. This is why I have a nagging feeling about the World Cup. England rarely win matches through their bowling. That top order collapse could happen at a key moment, as on average every few games the batting will not quite fire. The great Australian teams could win matches with bat or ball equally

[JDizzle]

England’s team run rate since the last World Cup is 6.27. Australia are second at 5.71. Difference of 0.56. You go down to 5.15 (0.56 off) there are 6 more teams in that spread! That is how dominant England’s batsmen have been. It’s mental really, given where they can from.

[Gooseberry]

If moeens was doing anything with the bat then his remarkably appalling strike rate indeed wouldn't be an really, most sides carry some part time bowling and he does deliver value when sides aren't hitting everything into the stands. The point regarding west Indies batting style and the last ground in particular not suiting him had already been made.
But because England on the whole lack strike bowling, woods rise (yikes) has only countered plummets demise and because he's not batting well he does look like a weak link. He's not even a great fielder. An average of 47 is not good enough if your batting doesn't made it selection as an all rounder and part time bowler. Other spinners do exist, including one who should deliver more with the bat.

Stokes is very much in that Flintoff mould as a player who's reputation outweighs his stats because he has a knack of making crucial contributions when things aren't going well. People remember his magic rather than the periods of mediocrity....the last match being a case in point....failed with the by and was smacked all over in his first spell, came back with the game in the balance and took the crucial wickets. He's the kind of guy you'd want to have your back in a fight ...oh.

[Mad for Chelsea]

On Stokes, as I said above he's averaging 47 with the bat with a SR of 98 since the last WC. Those are great stats. In fact if we look at batsmen at 5-6 during that time period (minimum 500 runs), only three players have a better average: Kedar Jadhav, whose average is boosted by a fair few not outs, but who does have an impressive record; Angelo Matthews, who averages 49 at a SR of just 80 (no centuries either); and of course Jos Buttler.

The only players with a higher strike rate are: again, Buttler, Maxwell (average 29, no centuries), Neesham (average 35, no centuries), Jadhav again, Kevin O'Brien (average 28, no centuries), and David Millar (average 38, SR 101).

The only player with more than his three centuries is again... Buttler (with 4), while Millar also has 3. If you look at centuries per innings, he is surpassed by Buttler, Millar and Jadhav. No player has more fifties than his 13, and no one passes 50 more frequently than him either.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?batting_positionmax1=6;batting_positionmin1=5;batting_positionval1=batting_position;class=2;filter=advanced;orderby=batting_average;qualmin1=500;qualval1=runs;spanmin1=01+May+2015;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting

I could probably pick out some more stats if I really wanted to, but I think those are the important ones.

So if we're looking purely at Stokes the batsmen, the only similar players (in terms of the role played in the side) in the world who's done better since the last WC are Buttler and maybe Jadhav. It's not a question of consistency either, since Stokes gets to 50 more frequently than any other 5-6 batsman.

I sometimes think if anything Stokes is underrated as a batsman, purely because we see him as an all-rounder, and his bowling can indeed be erratic at times. And maybe we also get hung up on comparisons to Freddie, who could be inconsistent with the bat, so somehow think Stokes can be the same, even if it's not true.

So to summarise: Stokes the batsman has since the last WC been as good as anyone else in the world in those middle-order 5-6 spots. Well, anyone except Buttler, but Buttler's a freak. Stokes the bowler is inconsistent, and does tend to go around the park at times, though he can also make telling interventions. He's also of course a wonderful fielder.

One final fun fact: in said period, Stokes has hit more sixes than any other 5-6 batsman. This includes Buttler, who's hit one fewer, and remains true if you look at sixes per innings. In fact, the pair of them are the only ones who average more than one six per innings in that time frame.

[alfie]

If it was I who started the Moeen criticism , I would like to make it clear I wasn't suggesting he be discarded ! I think he will be an important part of the WC squad and , in English conditions , is likely to be rather useful with the ball...and hopefully he will add some runs if and when needed though I have to admit he his batting has been more miss than hit lately...
I would like to see him rested from the last ODI (though I'm not passionate about it) for three reasons . One : he is not doing well with the ball and appears down on confidence so I doubt he will be an asset in the attempt to close out the series . Two : if he is indeed struggling an early flight home to let him clear his head is likely to do him more good than bashing away in unhelpful conditions for one more game , and Three : it won't hurt to give Denly a run out. Injuries happen.

Moeen is a strange case study. On song , he can be dominant with bat or ball : but he doesn't half have some dry spells... I rate his bowling more than many but feel that sometimes he just loses it a bit - and when he does it can take him a while to come back to the groove. His batting is a little more of a concern though it is the Test arena where this is the main worry : most of the time he gets in too late in ODIs to matter all that much.
Agree Woakes in England is a different animal altogether. He and Wood should be two of the bowlers ; and I'm not writing off Plunkett yet. Forty off eight the other day in that run fest was not a bad effort , surely ?

[Duty281]

England in early difficulty in the final ODI. Batting first, Windies put them in, and 18/2 with Bairstow being bowled (surprise!) and Root playing a weak shot.

[Duty281]

England sinking fast, 63/4, all of the top order dismissed.

[VTR]

England having their one in every ten games batting meltdown. This is the kind of thing that cost them the Champions Trophy and could cost the World Cup

[Nathaniel Jacobs]

As soon as there’s a fraction of something in the bowlers favour, the supposedly most feared batsmen ever go all tame. Why can’t they dig in and get a 250-270 score rather than always going for the gung-ho method. Not every pitch is a 350-400 pitch. Someone like Root should be able to adapt but even he didn’t fancy it.

Good old Moeen get him a knighthood. Truly dreadful

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Clearly something needs to be done to stop all these low scores in ODIs. Bring in the boundaries, only one new ball....

[VTR]

This is truly woeful. England need to sort themselves out on pitches that offer anything to the bowlers.

[Duty281]

Diabolical performance from England.

[VTR]

Nathaniel singles out Moeen, when 1-11 were all absolute dog***t

[Sponsored content]