England (possible) 1 Andrew Strauss (capt), 2 Matt Prior (wk), 3 Jonathan Trott, 4 Kevin Pietersen, 5 Ian Bell, 6 Eoin Morgan, 7 Paul Collingwood, 8 James Tredwell, 9 Ajmal Shahzad, 10 Chris Tremlett, 11 James Anderson
I really don't see England dumping Yardy any time soon, while some like myself might see his very limited benefits, he bowls tidily and can bat so fits the bits n pieces type the selectors love. I think I've come up with a class definition of "bits n pieces" btw, offers a bit of everything, delivers a lot of nothing
STRAUSS - beginning to wonder about his predictable and ineffective captaincy. While some were banging on about us winning our previous four series, we've now lost five of our last six ODIs. Interestingly Strauss is averaging a whopping 65.90 from his last 11 ODI innings with two hundreds and no score under 19. BUT in his last six innings he has scored three fifties yet not one over 68. He needs to convert more fifties.
PRIOR - bigtime mistake in my opinion, if he is to play then play him down the order where his strength is.
TROTT - someone needs to have words and get him to accelerate more often than he does. I don't doubt he can score quickly, I think he just has his "zone" and perhaps his "zone" takes precedence over what the team needs
PIETERSEN - is he back now? Perhaps needs to reign in his over-confidence come arrogance a bit.
BELL - he can score big runs with big hits and quickly, needs to do it more.
MORGAN - have my doubts about him. Another top order player who isn't much use in bowling, not that I'd select a batsman for his bowling, but Strauss, KP, Bell, Morgan and Trott are all players who are not going to be good enough bowlers (or bowlers full-stop) in an ODI so that is one area we lose out to other (top) sides.
COLLINGWOOD - don't know if animosity towards him is for his Test form or something else. He is a top fielder, good bowling option who can do more than just "do a job" and averages mid 30s in ODIs so as much a "must pick" as we have. Hasn't scored a fifty for eight innings, HS 47 just two knocks ago. His SR isn't what it could be, but he's never been a big hitter - another achilles heel of the batting, too few score quickly enough (SRs in 70s not 80s or 90s)
TREDWELL - really should have played more ODIs before England decide to pick him for a World Cup. Yet to taken a wicket in ODIs, what a master plan England have. Concedes at 5.43 rpo, what an asset! Never a number eight btw, more chance Yardy will play if Tredwell is in line for that role.
SHAHZAD - only seven ODIs, but 13 wickets so looking good. Quite how he'll fit in when Anderson, Broad and Swann are available is hard to tell
TREMLETT - out of the picture for a while, now flavour of the month. Not in the squad for the World Cup so I'd be inclined to plan for that rather than vainly chase a seriously unlikely series win. His 14 wickets in ODI have been quite expensive, he isn't much of a bat for this form of cricket anyway.
ANDERSON - sadly seen as the mainstay of the England attack. Certainly has experience and wickets to his name (189 in 133 ODIs) but blows too hot and cold for my liking with as many 0/54, 0/75, 0/55, 1/66, 1/63 etc as match winning contributions. I would include him, but only because there ain't much better. That said, if it came to it and Shahzad continues his great start to ODIs, and Broad is fit, I might have a straight choice between Shahzad and Anderson - especially if pace is not going to play as big a part as spin.
As for this match specific, that line-up is weak down the order in terms of batting, even with a batsman at seven. Bowling should be ok, but I wouldn't pick Tredwell myself and it lacks a back-up option if Collingwood doesn't click. One reason I was really annoyed when Hick got dumped for good from the ODI side was he could bowl spin, these days our top order simply don't seem to have the same ability - except Collingwood who is not in good batting form. We don't have genuine and good enough all-rounders, we don't seem to have many bowling options in the batting so we're so far behind the opposition - as if where it is played won't count against us enough already. With T20s so prevalent, especially in domestic cricket, you'd think there'd be enough batsmen bowling that someone could make it in ODIs and cut it
Of course the Test side generally don't play enough domestic cricket these days to play much in the way of T20s. I'm sure Kent among others have players who could do as good a job in ODIs as some of our selections
any news about Tait 
