Mar 26 - Sri Lanka v England (Quarter-Final 4)

Papa_Smurf

International Cricketer
Joined
Nov 13, 2010
Location
Smurf Village
Online Cricket Games Owned
England were always going to struggle without KP, Shahzad, Broad and to an extent Anderson.

But damn, Dilshan and Thranga thrashed them. I thought Trott played a solid innings, but given that the pitch wasn't that slow, he could have pushed the gas a bit.
 

War

Chairman of Selectors
Joined
Feb 10, 2010
Online Cricket Games Owned
Ye no surprises by this result. Especially witj key players injured & Anderson decline in form in ODIs.

ENG after this world cup needs to seriously revamp its ODI set-up. Since unlike the test set-up - the ODI could be in danger of going backwards.
 

aussie1st

Retired Administrator
Joined
Dec 16, 2003
Location
Auckland
I don't get why you guys didn't apply the same theory you did in T20 to the ODI game. If you have a team that can go well in that format then you have a good base for an ODI team.
 

MUFC1987

Panel of Selectors
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Online Cricket Games Owned
Meh, we lost to a pretty decent side, it happens. It was never going to end well for us with all our injuries and the schedule. And that's without mentioning the shoddy selection process. Hopefully we'll see some more senior players moved on from the ODI side now. Young blood will help re-energise us for the future.

I hope Sri Lanka go on to win it though. Sangakkara deserves to lead his side to glory.
 

Kabooka

International Cricketer
Joined
Dec 24, 2008
Location
Delhi
Online Cricket Games Owned
Really shocked by the way England lost the last game. They just allowed the Lankans to walk all over them.

Well at least they have the Ashes :rolleyes
 

StinkyBoHoon

National Board President
Joined
Mar 5, 2009
Location
Glasgow, Scotland
for me england didn't really prepare for this tournament enough. I know the ashes thing is a lame excuse but it is true.

they were never going to outstrip their ambitions when all they did was turn up to see how it went. other teams have been gearing up for the world cup all year.
 

Owzat

International Coach
Joined
Apr 4, 2008
Online Cricket Games Owned
for me england didn't really prepare for this tournament enough. I know the ashes thing is a lame excuse but it is true.

they were never going to outstrip their ambitions when all they did was turn up to see how it went. other teams have been gearing up for the world cup all year.

England fail in so many ways before the tournament, during it and just in ODIs in general. Why players like Tredwell and Shahzad were picked without having been given a reasonable amount of games beforehand is criminal - Tredwell now has FIVE ODIs to his name, Shahzad 11 and Dernbach was called up without any to his name.

England just potter along taking one series at a time, no foreplanning or forethought. They do pick and stick with nothing players like Wright and Yardy, Wright was such a waste of an inclusion as proven yesterday when he was given a chance neither with bat (1no off 3 balls) or ball (0/17 off four overs)

Wright 46 ODIs

701 runs @ 22.61 & 15 wkts @ 57.53
0-5 overs (29 ODIs) : 1 wkt @ 292.00
6-10 overs (17 ODIs) : 14 wkts @ 40.79

Yardy 28 ODIs

326 runs @ 20.38 & 21 wkts @ 51.19

Yardy does at least bowl 4+ overs every time, the biggest problem with Wright is he has no defined role, he's neither included as a batsman or included as a bowler so why include him at all?!?!?!?


What went wrong yesterday? Perhaps England went into the match with their pace of innings already decided. I've said before that finishing with just 4-6 wickets down is often an indicator you've not made best use of your wickets in hand - especially if you've gone in rather light in the bowling department.

10 overs : 32/2
20 overs : 65/2
30 overs : 112/3
40 overs : 173/3
50 overs : 229/6

So in those 10 overs spells England scored 32/2, 33/0, 47/1, 61/0 and 56/3. Should have scored more runs in overs 10-30 with only one wicket down but only adding runs at 4.00 rpo.

Of course England might well have lost anyway as the bowling was not great and too toothless. Strauss, as I predicted, muddled through his fifth bowler allocation more or less with Bopara and Wright bowling 9-1-39-0 which is tidy enough but England needed to bowl Sri Lanka out and while both might have been worth a go, it should have been the main bowlers getting through most of their overs with those two not terribly likely to trouble Sri Lanka.

Was that THE most embarrassing defeat in World Cup history? I'd say yes, even to the point the batsmen were turning runs down to get one of them to a personal goal - England might as well have let the ball trickle to the boundary, it wouldn't have been any less farcical. Had it been the final I would guess there might have been one or two "retired out"s it was that much a walk in the park, although I suppose batsmen in might well have wanted to "hit the winning runs" for what that actually symbolises.



Steps forward? Stop picking players like Yardy and Wright, draw up a long term plan build around a small handful of existing regulars and take a squad forward to build for the next World Cup. Make sure this mostly separate squad has warm up games when playing ODIs during tours, otherwise County Cricket will be their practice arena. Maybe even set them up with separate series in places like Namibia, Holland, Bangladesh, Scotland etc to give those countries experience while giving our own squad experience.

Let's face it, our supposed "best ODI players" got their Rses kicked down under and were fortunate to reach the QFs of the World Cup. Current plans have not been working for the past TWENTY years, time to bring in plan B. Maybe if implimented correctly we can go into the next World Cup with proper ODI specialists who have notched up maybe 40+ caps but ahead of the subsequent World Cup they'll be racing to 100+.

England were always going to struggle without KP, Shahzad, Broad and to an extent Anderson.

Anderson is hit and miss, not sure why others can't see that. His average of 30+ isn't 30+ by accident. Out of those, only Broad has been making a difference, KP has the ability but have a look at his recent stats :

PIETERSEN ODIs (2009-2011) - 26 inns, 601 runs @ 23.11 (50 x2, HS 78 vs Australia)

He hasn't scored a hundred in ODIs since November 2008, his career average has dipped from 60.38 after 33 ODIs to 50.26 after 72 ODIs to 40.99 after 114. I was picking out points at which it was last over 60, 50 and now 40, but you can split it into three parts

ODIs 01-38 : 1382 runs @ 55.28
ODIs 39-76 : 1395 runs @ 43.59
ODIs 77-114 : 871 runs @ 27.22

A clear decline, his early high average in part due to not outs (7) but also three hundreds in his first 11 ODIs helped, he's added just four in his last 103.

But damn, Dilshan and Thranga thrashed them. I thought Trott played a solid innings, but given that the pitch wasn't that slow, he could have pushed the gas a bit.

I think England had in mind how the pitch would play and didn't adapt, once a batsman was in, set, and a platform built they should have accelerated, but by the time they did it was too late. 112/3 after 30 overs was the right number of wickets lost, but about 20-30 runs too few. I think they feared the Sri Lankan bowlers a bit too much as well. It's a shame Bell and Strauss threw their wickets away, England never mentally recovered from 31/2.

Of course you could argue England were lucky in that Morgan was dropped so many times. But the way England bowled wasn't good enough, should have gone with the extra spinner but England called up back-up seamers and only did like for like - by the time Yardy decided to go home I assume it was too late for Rashid to get here in time. But then England's "foreplanning" included how many part-time spinners among their batsmen..................? England don't realise how lucky they were to have Hick when they did, dropped from ODIs way too soon. Who since then has been remotely as effective among their batsmen as an extra spinner? Hell, T20 made an "international cricketer" of Yardy so England make him into an all-rounder, might have been better to try him as what he is (batsman who can bowl) and taken Rashid or Patel in the first place.

I think a big part of England's decline is in attitude, they talk as if losses are "just the way it goes", but with that mentality they are turning up HOPING to win rather than doing everything they can to win games and it reflects in their selections, tactics, batting, bowling, fielding, in everything. Almost as if they think it is luck that decides who are World Cup winners and who are also rans :noway:facepalm:mad
 

sami ullah khan

Panel of Selectors
Joined
Apr 29, 2005
Location
Islamabad
Online Cricket Games Owned
  1. Don Bradman Cricket 14 - PS3
England had it coming and Sri Lanka delivered the thrashing England so richly deserved. In this form, New zealand will not be a problem for Sri Lanka but this wc has been full of surprises, so anything could happen.
 

Kabooka

International Cricketer
Joined
Dec 24, 2008
Location
Delhi
Online Cricket Games Owned
England had it coming and Sri Lanka delivered the thrashing England so richly deserved. In this form, New zealand will not be a problem for Sri Lanka but this wc has been full of surprises, so anything could happen.

C'mon dude, you bet on England. Yes it would have been an herculean task for the english to beat the lankans but it was possible. After all they did beat SA. Common sense says that Lanka walks in the finals but to win they will have to play out of their skin as i find both India and Pakistan better than them.
 

sami ullah khan

Panel of Selectors
Joined
Apr 29, 2005
Location
Islamabad
Online Cricket Games Owned
  1. Don Bradman Cricket 14 - PS3
C'mon dude, you bet on England. Yes it would have been an herculean task for the english to beat the lankans but it was possible. After all they did beat SA. Common sense says that Lanka walks in the finals but to win they will have to play out of their skin as i find both India and Pakistan better than them.

Yes I did bet on England because they had the done the impossible before in the tournament but their luck ran out in this match,
 

Paki007

Panel of Selectors
Joined
Sep 3, 2009
Location
Lahore, Pakistan
their luck ran out in this match,

And their bowler also.i mean you can't give too many legish deliveries when you are defending 230.they failed to put any sort of pressure on Lankans.the start was the key for them and they ruined it.The luck was with them while they were batting.We saw many dropped catches from Lankans which quite rare
 

Lassana Dias

Club Cricketer
Joined
Jan 7, 2011
Location
Sri Lanka
Online Cricket Games Owned
And their bowler also.i mean you can't give too many legish deliveries when you are defending 230.they failed to put any sort of pressure on Lankans.the start was the key for them and they ruined it.The luck was with them while they were batting.We saw many dropped catches from Lankans which quite rare

tell me about it, fielding was just dreadful as I have never seen lankas field this bad. Thank god it didn?t cost us so badly but bowling was real good
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top