Bloody Weather – The 1st ODI

That bloody South African weather eh. Rubbish. Why would anyone want to live in that God forsaken country? Ahem.

Back on planet earth I think we can forgive the marvellous South African climate one ruined game. But what a shame the weather chose yesterday’s match to ruin. It was coming to the boil rather nicely.

I think England would’ve won in the end – I don’t believe AB de Villiers’ claim that the Proteas were on target – but it wasn’t guaranteed. Quinton de Kock was simply amazing. What an innings. And what a player to watch.

De Kock proved yet again that you don’t need to be built like Geoff Capes to smack boundary after boundary. He’s a special player when he’s on song. He’s extremely graceful and has exquisite timing.

Talking of exquisite timing, England have their own match-winning gem. Jos Buttler’s hundred was another superb knock. Jos is a little bit special. Perhaps the best ODI hitter England have ever had. The greatest accolade I can give him is that his innings didn’t surprise me at all. We all expect him to play like that now.

Although our bowlers suffered a bit yesterday, the game showed yet again how far England have come in one-day cricket in less than a year. Trevor Bayliss was absolutely the right choice as coach. Andrew Strauss did well to prefer him over Jason Gillespie, who has a somewhat disappointing limited overs record up at Yorkshire.

England’s batting line-up is now one of the most dangerous in the world. Jason Roy showed his potential yet again, Joe Root scored useful runs, Eoin Morgan is still a very good limited overs batsman, and even Alex Hales made a half-century. The future is looking bright. It’s incredible to think that James Taylor, who averages 42 in ODIs, couldn’t make the team.

The bowling is a bit of a worry though. We just don’t have those wicket-taking bowlers that win you world cups. Chris Jordan still doesn’t impress me, Reece Topley has promise but is still very much a work in progress, and David Willey will always have his limitations. If only we had a Lasith Malinga up our sleeve.

On the positive side, however, our attack is still young. There’s room for improvement but our bowlers have time on their side. They just need to go an work on their skills. Hang on. Am I “taking the positives” again? I’ll be “looking at the data” next. Somebody stop me.

James Morgan

13 comments

  • Simple answer on the bowling.
    Pick Broad. Bowl him in the middle overs.

    Of course when Finn comes back it will look a lot stronger too

    • Not sure about Broad, Neil. He got carted in the World Cup, and I’d rather he was kept fresh for tests. I agree the attack would be better with Finn. England have obviously decided (and I think there are real benefits to this strategy) to go in with a lot of all rounders, and have almost no tail (Willey and Rashid were 9 and 10 yesterday). This allows them to keep hitting.

  • Yup, Broad and Finn back and Jordan out. Then either Willey or Topley. Son of the Legendary Pete gets my vote.

    Nick Knight will, of course, be distraught at the loss of Topley. Which is not a bad bonus

  • “and even Alex Hales made a half-century” – naughty!

    Brilliant batting all round, everyone came with the right mindset, both Joe Root and Morgan (and Taylor) can anchor an innings whilst the others tee off.

    Why leave Broad out there if he’s not going to play? Clearly good enough to make the team, perhaps Bayliss & co. have a plan and are sticking to it – hoping the younger bowlers come good through experience keep broad back to lead the test team.

  • South Africa weren’t anywhere near “on target”, as the size of the D/L result demonstrates. 150 off 16 overs is tough with 10 wickets; with 5 (and SA’s tail) it wasn’t much more than a 1 in 10 shot.

    As others have suggested, I’d like to see Broad given a couple of games for Jordan, who just looks like cannon fodder most of the time. I still can’t quite believe that Super Over was actually bowled by him!

  • I would prefer to save Broad for test matches. Perhaps have him bowling in the World Cup. It will be great when we have Finn back and what about Wood?

    • I normally agree with your comments but wonder why you think this? I want to see England play their best side and win the World Cup. Broad will just have turned 31 at the next one so should be at his peak. I’m not suggesting he plays every ODI but surely he should be part of a squad and playing the big matches? I think ten or so ODIs a year will just keep him sharp rather than having any negative impact on his fitness or Test form.

      • With you on this. I wanna win the champions trophy and the world cup.
        I believe Broad has the skill to bowl in the middle overs and take wickets (which win games)
        If he has to miss the odd test then so becit.

        • It’s actually the Champions Trophy where he’ll be 31, I mis-read the fixtures. 33 for the next World Cup, which might be pushing it. Still, I’d like him to be playing if he’s willing and able, given the current alternatives.

  • I’ll be honest, I’d actually give Jordan and Topley the whole series unless things go seriously awry. Broad, Finn, Woakes et al are known quantities and I’m happy for them to give these 2 and Willey a run to see how they go. For me, England need to be settling on their preferred squad by the Champions Trophy in 2017 so a bit of experimentation up till then is fine by me.

    Jordan has bowled some tripe for England, but has also bowled some cracking spells, and the T20 super over shows he has some nerve. He hits a long ball and is a spectacular fielder. Don’t get me wrong, jury’s still very much out so am happy for him to be given a run for 10 or 12 ODIs to see what he can produce. Although it still baffles me how such a natural athlete looks so mechanical approaching the crease.

    I would also love to see them give Stokes a go opening the innings. He plays proper cricket strokes, seems to like the hard new ball, and if he bats for 25 overs he’s more than likely to have 3 figures on the board. It would also give England a left / right combo at the top and the extra time to bat might relax him – he looked a bit frantic yesterday and still scored at a cracking rate.

  • Clearly by having bowlers that can bat it gives the top and middle order liberty to go on the attack pretty much throughout, knowing there are a number of “safety nets” below them. Chances are Stokes, Buttler, and Roy etc.’s approach would be more conservative if there were a load of tail enders as there would be a very real possibility of not batting out the overs.

    In my eyes, the entire top seven that played the first ODI have the ability to crank it up to the next level, where possibly only KP did 5/10 years ago (although Buttler and Stokes are probably the standout examples, and with Root, or when he’s not playing, Taylor, probably the most measured). There is strength in numbers with this, and knowing there is depth means players can be that more aggressive. Off the top of my head the only ODI since the WC where there was a total batting collapse was one against Australia – a pretty reasonable trade-off for the number of 350+ innings in that time. The successes seem to be far more regular than the failures, and as time goes by confidence seems to breed confidence. And the fact that there are a number of guys that could reasonably come in should help keep the standard high.

    This approach will (potentially) mean a compromise on the quality of the bowling if there is a focus on lower order batting ability, but given England’s perennial reputation for batting collapses, I think it’s the right approach to focus on making the batting a strength and not a weakness. I think the bowlers that can bat have arguably done a perfectly adequate job (e.g. Willey, Woakes, Ali), and having enough runs on the board makes their job easier and allows them to attack more. They will go for runs, but (except for Jordan who I think has been too costly and doesn’t merit a place in the first 11) I’m completely happy to accept this trade-off. Interestingly Stokes bowled particularly well in the first ODI.

    In terms of bowling changes, Finn would certainly strengthen things and I would be in favour of Broad coming in as he can clearly plunder lower order runs and he’s our best bowler. His WC performance may have been very poor, but that may have been a one-off. His recent form has been so good in tests that I can’t see him being a liability in ODIs.

FOLLOW US ON TWITTER

copywriter copywriting