I think this series really highlights why we struggle in tournament cricket, we've got a bloody good side but we aren't ruthless enough.
I don't think its being ruthless, just being a bit more sensible. I'm all for going for it & when Bairstow was out I was happy for Butler to come in ahead of Morgan to up the tempo. But once we had lost 3 quick wickets Stokes & Ali should have taken an over or two to look at the bowling & pick the balls to hit. Not just start swinging from the hip. Root was stood down the other end for 3 or 4 overs & a couple of singles by those coming in at 4,5 & 6 would have got Root back on strike.
I think this series really highlights why we struggle in tournament cricket, we've got a bloody good side but we aren't ruthless enough.
I don't think its being ruthless, just being a bit more sensible. I'm all for going for it & when Bairstow was out I was happy for Butler to come in ahead of Morgan to up the tempo. But once we had lost 3 quick wickets Stokes & Ali should have taken an over or two to look at the bowling & pick the balls to hit. Not just start swinging from the hip. Root was stood down the other end for 3 or 4 overs & a couple of singles by those coming in at 4,5 & 6 would have got Root back on strike.
380 should have been the minimum after 35 overs.
This is pretty much the crux of the issue. A little bit of common sense is needed every now and then. Not to take anything away from Taylor's knock. It was incredible.
335 is still not a bad one day score at all. We just didn't take Taylors wicket.
Don't get the bashing when someone plays an innings like that. We probably should have got to 370/380, but Taylor won the match with one hell of an innings.
335 is still not a bad one day score at all. We just didn't take Taylors wicket.
Don't get the bashing when someone plays an innings like that. We probably should have got to 370/380, but Taylor won the match with one hell of an innings.
The number of times three batsmen get hundreds in the same match says all there is to know - this was a small ground and a very good wicket, once that is, you got a feel for the pace and bounce. This is the Cricinfo commentary for those middle order dismissals:
Buttler - Sodhi's got a wicket off the second ball of his spell again. Drops it short of a length just outside off. It sticks in the pitch as it turns away and Buttler's attempted back foot punch is a a weak chip in the end. So weak that Sodhi requires a forward lunge to get to it.
Morgan - slices a short ball after stepping out at it. Gets too big on him as he brings out the pull. Munro pedals to his left from mid-on and keeps his eyes on it as he stretches to take this quite a way away from his body
Stokes - Sodhi loops one up at middle stump. Stokes gets under it on one knee but his slog sweep doesn't have too much power on it. It's a gentle lob for the fielder who barely has to move
Ali - Five wickets for 13 runs. This is surreal. Ali looks to go over midwicket but he's assuming this one's coming into him. It's a loopy full ball on leg stump and it goes high. Southee runs in from long-off and gets low to snap it up. Keeps his balance as he goes onto the floor 280/6
Woakes - Someone in commentary screeches 'Crazy! Bizzare!' and he isn't wrong. A half-hearted lift on the up from Woakes, to long-on's left. A regulation length ball, hit with no real purpose. Unless the purpose was to get it further than 30 yards, in which case he's succeeded by quite a way. Boult sprints in and to his left to hold on.
We should not be losing 6 wickets for 21 runs - Buttler, Morgan, Stokes and Woakes only faced 12 balls between them before they got out and it is simply no use thinking that we have xyz to come if they are all going to bat the same way. And despite Morgan saying this is the first time this has happened, it isn't - we've been all out before and not used all our overs. Another 10 or so runs from numbers 4-8 would have seen us home and given that we were on target to get 370 plus that should have been well within our capabilities.
agree to a point but scoring 180 off 140 balls is still a top notch effort.
I cannot dispute the fact it was an appalling collapse. But the fact we are now collapsing to 335 all out and moaning shows how far we have come in ODI cricket.
Can't win every match and sometimes have to applaud the opposition rather than finding fault.
I recorded the game and watched it this afternoon. It was a great game. Let's not forget that Moeen dropped a c&b chance for Latham with his first ball, when Latham had scored about 4 or 5. England should have been slightly less gung ho, but the stats show we had won 21/25 previous ODI's, playing this way. The 5th & deciding ODI is on Friday night, 21.30 on Sky (programme starts).
Ross Taylor is in doubt for the decider on Saturday. He aggravated a thigh strain during his 181 and suffered from cramp. He was asked if he wanted to come off when on about 110. They don't want to risk him ahead of the Test matches.
What the heck. Hoping for three points at Peterborough. COYA
Nothing to do with this tour but a name to watch out for is Shaheen Afridi. Not related to THE Afridi and unlike his namesake he is a left arm quickie who played in the recent U19 WC.
Still only 17, Afridi has just finished his spell in the current PPL match with figures of 3.4-1-4-5 including the prize wicket of Shoaib Malik!
I saw Woakes broke a record the other day. Fastest to 1000 runs and 100 wickets in ODI's. Beating Flintoff Botham and Collingwood the only 3 to get there for England.
Stokes will need 43 wickets in his next 7 games to beat him so not likely.
What's even more impressive is that he got 1000 runs batting at 8. He doesn't have that many big scores which means he must be incredibly consistent at getting the 30s and 40s.
He's been smashed around the park in the previous games but obviously has something about him
Definitely a "feast or famine" bowler at the moment (took 6-15 against Ireland U19s recently too) but, when you see some of the so called big names not living up to their name in these T20s, it's refreshing to see an up and coming talent. One could compare him to say someone like our Sam Curran who is two years older than Afridi.
I saw Woakes broke a record the other day. Fastest to 1000 runs and 100 wickets in ODI's. Beating Flintoff Botham and Collingwood the only 3 to get there for England.
Stokes will need 43 wickets in his next 7 games to beat him so not likely.
What's even more impressive is that he got 1000 runs batting at 8. He doesn't have that many big scores which means he must be incredibly consistent at getting the 30s and 40s.
That's impressive. It's not as if he's a strike bowler either, the sort that may go for a few runs but will "buy" wickets
I saw Woakes broke a record the other day. Fastest to 1000 runs and 100 wickets in ODI's. Beating Flintoff Botham and Collingwood the only 3 to get there for England.
Stokes will need 43 wickets in his next 7 games to beat him so not likely.
What's even more impressive is that he got 1000 runs batting at 8. He doesn't have that many big scores which means he must be incredibly consistent at getting the 30s and 40s.
That's impressive. It's not as if he's a strike bowler either, the sort that may go for a few runs but will "buy" wickets
Especially as he has to bowl at the death - he's economy rate for those overs stands up to scrutiny too.
It wasn't that long ago that the selectors were getting a lot of stick for persevering with him but credit to them and him for turning things around. Our one day side has at least half a dozen match winners in it and it's only a touch of complacency or poor match management that can stop us from winning the WC.
I saw Woakes broke a record the other day. Fastest to 1000 runs and 100 wickets in ODI's. Beating Flintoff Botham and Collingwood the only 3 to get there for England.
Stokes will need 43 wickets in his next 7 games to beat him so not likely.
What's even more impressive is that he got 1000 runs batting at 8. He doesn't have that many big scores which means he must be incredibly consistent at getting the 30s and 40s.
That's impressive. It's not as if he's a strike bowler either, the sort that may go for a few runs but will "buy" wickets
Especially as he has to bowl at the death - he's economy rate for those overs stands up to scrutiny too.
It wasn't that long ago that the selectors were getting a lot of stick for persevering with him but credit to them and him for turning things around. Our one day side has at least half a dozen match winners in it and it's only a touch of complacency or poor match management that can stop us from winning the WC.
Or the other five or six teams that have players talented enough to beat us ffs
If we don't win it won't necessarily be our own fault. The sheer arrogance of that! It's this mentality that I hate above all in England fans of any sport
Like, imagine we set India 340 to win in the final and Kohli hunts it down with an unbeaten, chanceless 150. Who do we blame? Our useless batsmen for not scoring 700? Our useless bowlers for not ripping out the world's best short-form player? Or maybe we give greatness the credit it's due?
Our defeat the other night did involve a batting collapse, but it also involved a truly rare innings from Taylor. Applaud it when it happens.
I saw Woakes broke a record the other day. Fastest to 1000 runs and 100 wickets in ODI's. Beating Flintoff Botham and Collingwood the only 3 to get there for England.
Stokes will need 43 wickets in his next 7 games to beat him so not likely.
What's even more impressive is that he got 1000 runs batting at 8. He doesn't have that many big scores which means he must be incredibly consistent at getting the 30s and 40s.
That's impressive. It's not as if he's a strike bowler either, the sort that may go for a few runs but will "buy" wickets
Especially as he has to bowl at the death - he's economy rate for those overs stands up to scrutiny too.
It wasn't that long ago that the selectors were getting a lot of stick for persevering with him but credit to them and him for turning things around. Our one day side has at least half a dozen match winners in it and it's only a touch of complacency or poor match management that can stop us from winning the WC.
Or the other five or six teams that have players talented enough to beat us ffs
If we don't win it won't necessarily be our own fault. The sheer arrogance of that! It's this mentality that I hate above all in England fans of any sport
Jesus Leuth you do take things literally don't you! Perhaps I should have said literary in your case. Anyway, of course anything can happen. A man might even land on the moon!
Like, imagine we set India 340 to win in the final and Kohli hunts it down with an unbeaten, chanceless 150. Who do we blame? Our useless batsmen for not scoring 700? Our useless bowlers for not ripping out the world's best short-form player? Or maybe we give greatness the credit it's due?
Our defeat the other night did involve a batting collapse, but it also involved a truly rare innings from Taylor. Applaud it when it happens.
And please don't ever accuse me of not applauding a "rare" innings - take a look at what I said about Williamson's knock last week which, in my opinion, technically on a much more difficult track to bat on was a better innings than Taylor's.
I saw Woakes broke a record the other day. Fastest to 1000 runs and 100 wickets in ODI's. Beating Flintoff Botham and Collingwood the only 3 to get there for England.
Stokes will need 43 wickets in his next 7 games to beat him so not likely.
What's even more impressive is that he got 1000 runs batting at 8. He doesn't have that many big scores which means he must be incredibly consistent at getting the 30s and 40s.
That's impressive. It's not as if he's a strike bowler either, the sort that may go for a few runs but will "buy" wickets
Especially as he has to bowl at the death - he's economy rate for those overs stands up to scrutiny too.
It wasn't that long ago that the selectors were getting a lot of stick for persevering with him but credit to them and him for turning things around. Our one day side has at least half a dozen match winners in it and it's only a touch of complacency or poor match management that can stop us from winning the WC.
Or the other five or six teams that have players talented enough to beat us ffs
If we don't win it won't necessarily be our own fault. The sheer arrogance of that! It's this mentality that I hate above all in England fans of any sport
absolutely, we are a very good side but we are not exactly the only side in the world with match winners.
Exactly what I was trying to say the other day with Addick Addict. Ross Taylor scores 180 not out and it's all about our own failings.
We are certainly a strong contender for the World Cup though.
I saw Woakes broke a record the other day. Fastest to 1000 runs and 100 wickets in ODI's. Beating Flintoff Botham and Collingwood the only 3 to get there for England.
Stokes will need 43 wickets in his next 7 games to beat him so not likely.
What's even more impressive is that he got 1000 runs batting at 8. He doesn't have that many big scores which means he must be incredibly consistent at getting the 30s and 40s.
That's impressive. It's not as if he's a strike bowler either, the sort that may go for a few runs but will "buy" wickets
Especially as he has to bowl at the death - he's economy rate for those overs stands up to scrutiny too.
It wasn't that long ago that the selectors were getting a lot of stick for persevering with him but credit to them and him for turning things around. Our one day side has at least half a dozen match winners in it and it's only a touch of complacency or poor match management that can stop us from winning the WC.
Or the other five or six teams that have players talented enough to beat us ffs
If we don't win it won't necessarily be our own fault. The sheer arrogance of that! It's this mentality that I hate above all in England fans of any sport
absolutely, we are a very good side but we are not exactly the only side in the world with match winners.
Exactly what I was trying to say the other day with Addick Addict. Ross Taylor scores 180 not out and it's all about our own failings.
We are certainly a strong contender for the World Cup though.
OK - for you and Leuth three very simple questions which only require straight answers:
(1) In the position we were in, should we have scored at least another 20 runs?
(2) Why didn't we get those 20 or so runs?
(3) Would we have won had we got those 20 or so runs?
2 - we played some reckless shots and didn't take enough wickets
3 - Nobody knows the answer to that question
But you are still missing the point. You are saying we should win the WC because he have match winners and then ignoring Taylors match winning knock?
3. I think we do - you can only score 20 off 3 balls if you bowl a succession of no balls. And I trust us not to do that!
I'm not ignoring Taylor's innings - far from it. I am saying that we should have got a lot more runs than we did and to put Taylor's innings in context, two of our batsmen got hundreds too evidencing the fact that it was a very good batting wicket with short boundaries. Which is why I haven't blamed our bowling for the defeat but have said that the five or six batsmen that were reckless cost us the match.
In terms of match winners, how many teams have a line up of batsmen who are capable of getting big scores all the way down to Woakes? But that is only meaningful if those batsmen think about the match situation and we have had a couple of instances recently where we haven't got the total we should have done.
As I say I got stick for suggesting that Williamson should have got MOM last week. This time I've got it wrong because I haven't lauded Taylor's innings for being the best ever seen. Can't win but I'm more than happy to read and learn from those on here.
Comments
Finished with a six.
Taylor man of the match. 181 from 147 balls.
380 should have been the minimum after 35 overs.
Don't get the bashing when someone plays an innings like that. We probably should have got to 370/380, but Taylor won the match with one hell of an innings.
Buttler - Sodhi's got a wicket off the second ball of his spell again. Drops it short of a length just outside off. It sticks in the pitch as it turns away and Buttler's attempted back foot punch is a a weak chip in the end. So weak that Sodhi requires a forward lunge to get to it.
Morgan - slices a short ball after stepping out at it. Gets too big on him as he brings out the pull. Munro pedals to his left from mid-on and keeps his eyes on it as he stretches to take this quite a way away from his body
Stokes - Sodhi loops one up at middle stump. Stokes gets under it on one knee but his slog sweep doesn't have too much power on it. It's a gentle lob for the fielder who barely has to move
Ali - Five wickets for 13 runs. This is surreal. Ali looks to go over midwicket but he's assuming this one's coming into him. It's a loopy full ball on leg stump and it goes high. Southee runs in from long-off and gets low to snap it up. Keeps his balance as he goes onto the floor 280/6
Woakes - Someone in commentary screeches 'Crazy! Bizzare!' and he isn't wrong. A half-hearted lift on the up from Woakes, to long-on's left. A regulation length ball, hit with no real purpose. Unless the purpose was to get it further than 30 yards, in which case he's succeeded by quite a way. Boult sprints in and to his left to hold on.
We should not be losing 6 wickets for 21 runs - Buttler, Morgan, Stokes and Woakes only faced 12 balls between them before they got out and it is simply no use thinking that we have xyz to come if they are all going to bat the same way. And despite Morgan saying this is the first time this has happened, it isn't - we've been all out before and not used all our overs. Another 10 or so runs from numbers 4-8 would have seen us home and given that we were on target to get 370 plus that should have been well within our capabilities.
I cannot dispute the fact it was an appalling collapse. But the fact we are now collapsing to 335 all out and moaning shows how far we have come in ODI cricket.
Can't win every match and sometimes have to applaud the opposition rather than finding fault.
Let's not forget that Moeen dropped a c&b chance for Latham with his first ball, when Latham had scored about 4 or 5.
England should have been slightly less gung ho, but the stats show we had won 21/25 previous ODI's, playing this way.
The 5th & deciding ODI is on Friday night, 21.30 on Sky (programme starts).
What the heck. Hoping for three points at Peterborough. COYA
Still only 17, Afridi has just finished his spell in the current PPL match with figures of 3.4-1-4-5 including the prize wicket of Shoaib Malik!
Stokes will need 43 wickets in his next 7 games to beat him so not likely.
What's even more impressive is that he got 1000 runs batting at 8. He doesn't have that many big scores which means he must be incredibly consistent at getting the 30s and 40s.
It wasn't that long ago that the selectors were getting a lot of stick for persevering with him but credit to them and him for turning things around. Our one day side has at least half a dozen match winners in it and it's only a touch of complacency or poor match management that can stop us from winning the WC.
Excellent cricketer.
If we don't win it won't necessarily be our own fault. The sheer arrogance of that! It's this mentality that I hate above all in England fans of any sport
Our defeat the other night did involve a batting collapse, but it also involved a truly rare innings from Taylor. Applaud it when it happens.
Exactly what I was trying to say the other day with Addick Addict. Ross Taylor scores 180 not out and it's all about our own failings.
We are certainly a strong contender for the World Cup though.
(1) In the position we were in, should we have scored at least another 20 runs?
(2) Why didn't we get those 20 or so runs?
(3) Would we have won had we got those 20 or so runs?
2 - we played some reckless shots and didn't take enough wickets
3 - Nobody knows the answer to that question
But you are still missing the point. You are saying we should win the WC because he have match winners and then ignoring Taylors match winning knock?
I'm not ignoring Taylor's innings - far from it. I am saying that we should have got a lot more runs than we did and to put Taylor's innings in context, two of our batsmen got hundreds too evidencing the fact that it was a very good batting wicket with short boundaries. Which is why I haven't blamed our bowling for the defeat but have said that the five or six batsmen that were reckless cost us the match.
In terms of match winners, how many teams have a line up of batsmen who are capable of getting big scores all the way down to Woakes? But that is only meaningful if those batsmen think about the match situation and we have had a couple of instances recently where we haven't got the total we should have done.
As I say I got stick for suggesting that Williamson should have got MOM last week. This time I've got it wrong because I haven't lauded Taylor's innings for being the best ever seen. Can't win but I'm more than happy to read and learn from those on here.