Cricket Order After CWC 2007 - Part 1, England
As the World Cup 2007 approaches the business end, a lot of the teams will have already started examining their current state and started looking to the future and what needs to be done to improve their chances at future World Cups - or put it more bluntly, how will they compete with teams like Australia and Sri Lanka. Just like India in 2003, Sri Lanka find themselves as the second best team (and probably even better than Australia if the conditions favor them) in the current world cup, it is now upto Sri Lanka to prove that they are better than Australia when it matters the most.
Coming back to the future for most of the teams, India has already laid down a plan on what needs to be done in order for them to move up the pecking order. In my previous posts I have written extensively about what needs to be done and some of the decisions that the BCCI has taken, so in this post, I will concentrate on other teams that have been plagued with a host of problems and what they need to do in order to improve their games to be more competetive in world cricket. Cricket, unlike soccer, can ill afford to have weak teams in its set up. Soccer has plenty of teams to choose from, so even if a few of the traditionally stronger teams rebuild for a period of time, there are other teams that can fill in. Cricket simply cannot afford that luxury. Traditionally there have only been eight or nine teams that could be considered strong in terms of interest, talent and money available to further the sport in their respective countries. Such teams, that were traditionally strong, but are now weak, will continue to undermine the popularity of the sport even in the nations in which they are played, and will ultimately harm the growth of the sport in general.
In this post, we will examine the issues that are plauging the English team and what they can do to become more competetive in One Day Internationals.
England, inspite of having some of the best facilities available to them (both in terms of infrastructure and resources), have the worst possible ODI team in all of world cricket, and the bigger problem is that, they have been bad in ODI for a long time now. They are even worse than India and Pakistan at the current WC. India and Pakistan were both eliminated from the group stages not because they were bad teams, but more because they came undone against quality opponents on a day when both teams were off color. England on the other hand, have tried to loose all their games, and successfully managed to do so against Australia, New Zealand and Sri Lanka. In their wins so far, they have been very unconvincing and were mighty close to losing against Bangladesh and Ireland.
England, to my mind, has the nucleus for what can become a very good ODI team, and as such don't need to make a whole lot of changes to either their team composition or the processes that they currently follow. By winning the CB trophy down under, they proved that they have the players who can form a very stable and a solid ODI team.
As with any team that is plagued with problems, the first thing to examine within a team is its composition, the captain and the coach as well as the administrative staff of ECB. Fortunately with England, the only things that have to be tweaked to make them a better team are the team composition and a change to their coaching staff. As far the team composition is concerned, England don't have the right people in the top three and that has been reflected in all their performances so far. By selecting Joyce and Vaughan in the top three, they have selected two men who have no clue what to do in ODIs in that position. Joyce, to my mind is not exactly an opening batsman and he cannot tear into the opposing opening bowlers. Vaughan is an opening batsman, however, he is an opening batsman in the classical mould, and while such batsmen may have a place in some other ODI teams, this England side does not need a player like Vaughan. To my mind, he is not even selected for the right reasons. A player should play in the team not because he is a good captain, but because he is a better player. Vaughan is not a good ODI player, period. When he opens the batting, he cannot hit unorthodox shots and cannot even rotate the strike by picking up the singles. Opposing captains can choose to set pretty orthodox fields and hope to get him out playing orthodox cricketing shots. If he does not get out, then they at least know that he won't score quickly. Either way, he becomes a liability for the team and this is proven by his current average in ODIs which has hovered around the 26-27 run mark for a long time. The top three (if they select Joyce, Bell and Vaughan) have just one century amongst themseleves. That is ridiculous for an international team. At a time when most teams are looking to press the advantage in the Powerplays by scoring quickly and scoring big, England don't have the players to capitalize during the Powerplays. They don't even have the right people at the right positions. For example, Kevin Pieterson, has to bat higher up the order and face as many overs as he possibly can. Based on the above analyses, England should be making the following changes to their batting order and their team composition.
Vaughan should be dropped from the ODI team. Instead of Vaughan, Marcus Trescothick should be played in the team. Trescothick still has a lot of cricket in him and I think he will easily be part of CWC 2011. With regards to who should be made the next captain, there are only two candidates: Ian Bell and Andrew Flintoff. After the adventures of Andrew Flintoff during the current WC, it will be very difficult for the ECB to make him the next captain, that implies that Ian Bell should be made the next captain of the team.The following should be the batting order as well as the team composition for England: Marcus Trescothick, Ian Bell, Kevin Pieterson, Andrew Flintoff, Paul Colingwood (those two are interchangeable depending on the English position in the respective match), Paul Nixon (maybe after the WC, they will have to re-think Paul Nixon's position, simply because they will have to look to the future and Nixon is not getting younger by the day, even though he is a very good wicketkeeper batsman), Ravi Bopara, Saj Mahmood, James Anderson, Monty Panesar, Simon Jones (if he ever becomes fully fit). To my mind, there will be no position for either Ed Joyce, Andrew Strauss or Michael Vaughan in their future ODI teams.
The other change that England have to make is in their coaching department. I think Duncan Fletcher's shelf life is over and he should be replaced with someone who is more aggressive in his approach to playing the game. Fletcher has achived a whole lot during his England tenure, but now is the time for him to seek greener pastures elsewhere. England definitely need a different thinker and a different approach to playing ODI cricket. To that effect, there will be plenty of coaches to choose from after the current WC. Greg Chappell has resigned. John Bucanan has already indicated that he will relinquish his position as the Australian coach, although it is very difficult to envision him being the English coach. Dave Whatmore and Tom Moody are also coming to the end of their contracts with Bangladesh and Sri Lanka respectively. Either of them can be a worthwhile replacement for the English team. I am sure though that the ECB must have short listed a bunch of candidates from the county league and/or from the National cricket academy. Unlike India and Pakistan, they have a good process that they can tap into to find a suitable replacement for Duncan Fletcher.
As I mentioned before, it is very important that traditional powerhouses of the game regain some of their original strength, it is imperative for cricket's survival through the next few decades, or at least until the time when associates become real powerhouses in the sport.
In the next post I will examine the perils of West Indian cricket - a view from the outsides so to speak and see what changes, either forced or elective that should be made for them to regain some of their old glory.
Dhaval Brahmbhatt
Coming back to the future for most of the teams, India has already laid down a plan on what needs to be done in order for them to move up the pecking order. In my previous posts I have written extensively about what needs to be done and some of the decisions that the BCCI has taken, so in this post, I will concentrate on other teams that have been plagued with a host of problems and what they need to do in order to improve their games to be more competetive in world cricket. Cricket, unlike soccer, can ill afford to have weak teams in its set up. Soccer has plenty of teams to choose from, so even if a few of the traditionally stronger teams rebuild for a period of time, there are other teams that can fill in. Cricket simply cannot afford that luxury. Traditionally there have only been eight or nine teams that could be considered strong in terms of interest, talent and money available to further the sport in their respective countries. Such teams, that were traditionally strong, but are now weak, will continue to undermine the popularity of the sport even in the nations in which they are played, and will ultimately harm the growth of the sport in general.
In this post, we will examine the issues that are plauging the English team and what they can do to become more competetive in One Day Internationals.
England, inspite of having some of the best facilities available to them (both in terms of infrastructure and resources), have the worst possible ODI team in all of world cricket, and the bigger problem is that, they have been bad in ODI for a long time now. They are even worse than India and Pakistan at the current WC. India and Pakistan were both eliminated from the group stages not because they were bad teams, but more because they came undone against quality opponents on a day when both teams were off color. England on the other hand, have tried to loose all their games, and successfully managed to do so against Australia, New Zealand and Sri Lanka. In their wins so far, they have been very unconvincing and were mighty close to losing against Bangladesh and Ireland.
England, to my mind, has the nucleus for what can become a very good ODI team, and as such don't need to make a whole lot of changes to either their team composition or the processes that they currently follow. By winning the CB trophy down under, they proved that they have the players who can form a very stable and a solid ODI team.
As with any team that is plagued with problems, the first thing to examine within a team is its composition, the captain and the coach as well as the administrative staff of ECB. Fortunately with England, the only things that have to be tweaked to make them a better team are the team composition and a change to their coaching staff. As far the team composition is concerned, England don't have the right people in the top three and that has been reflected in all their performances so far. By selecting Joyce and Vaughan in the top three, they have selected two men who have no clue what to do in ODIs in that position. Joyce, to my mind is not exactly an opening batsman and he cannot tear into the opposing opening bowlers. Vaughan is an opening batsman, however, he is an opening batsman in the classical mould, and while such batsmen may have a place in some other ODI teams, this England side does not need a player like Vaughan. To my mind, he is not even selected for the right reasons. A player should play in the team not because he is a good captain, but because he is a better player. Vaughan is not a good ODI player, period. When he opens the batting, he cannot hit unorthodox shots and cannot even rotate the strike by picking up the singles. Opposing captains can choose to set pretty orthodox fields and hope to get him out playing orthodox cricketing shots. If he does not get out, then they at least know that he won't score quickly. Either way, he becomes a liability for the team and this is proven by his current average in ODIs which has hovered around the 26-27 run mark for a long time. The top three (if they select Joyce, Bell and Vaughan) have just one century amongst themseleves. That is ridiculous for an international team. At a time when most teams are looking to press the advantage in the Powerplays by scoring quickly and scoring big, England don't have the players to capitalize during the Powerplays. They don't even have the right people at the right positions. For example, Kevin Pieterson, has to bat higher up the order and face as many overs as he possibly can. Based on the above analyses, England should be making the following changes to their batting order and their team composition.
Vaughan should be dropped from the ODI team. Instead of Vaughan, Marcus Trescothick should be played in the team. Trescothick still has a lot of cricket in him and I think he will easily be part of CWC 2011. With regards to who should be made the next captain, there are only two candidates: Ian Bell and Andrew Flintoff. After the adventures of Andrew Flintoff during the current WC, it will be very difficult for the ECB to make him the next captain, that implies that Ian Bell should be made the next captain of the team.The following should be the batting order as well as the team composition for England: Marcus Trescothick, Ian Bell, Kevin Pieterson, Andrew Flintoff, Paul Colingwood (those two are interchangeable depending on the English position in the respective match), Paul Nixon (maybe after the WC, they will have to re-think Paul Nixon's position, simply because they will have to look to the future and Nixon is not getting younger by the day, even though he is a very good wicketkeeper batsman), Ravi Bopara, Saj Mahmood, James Anderson, Monty Panesar, Simon Jones (if he ever becomes fully fit). To my mind, there will be no position for either Ed Joyce, Andrew Strauss or Michael Vaughan in their future ODI teams.
The other change that England have to make is in their coaching department. I think Duncan Fletcher's shelf life is over and he should be replaced with someone who is more aggressive in his approach to playing the game. Fletcher has achived a whole lot during his England tenure, but now is the time for him to seek greener pastures elsewhere. England definitely need a different thinker and a different approach to playing ODI cricket. To that effect, there will be plenty of coaches to choose from after the current WC. Greg Chappell has resigned. John Bucanan has already indicated that he will relinquish his position as the Australian coach, although it is very difficult to envision him being the English coach. Dave Whatmore and Tom Moody are also coming to the end of their contracts with Bangladesh and Sri Lanka respectively. Either of them can be a worthwhile replacement for the English team. I am sure though that the ECB must have short listed a bunch of candidates from the county league and/or from the National cricket academy. Unlike India and Pakistan, they have a good process that they can tap into to find a suitable replacement for Duncan Fletcher.
As I mentioned before, it is very important that traditional powerhouses of the game regain some of their original strength, it is imperative for cricket's survival through the next few decades, or at least until the time when associates become real powerhouses in the sport.
In the next post I will examine the perils of West Indian cricket - a view from the outsides so to speak and see what changes, either forced or elective that should be made for them to regain some of their old glory.
Dhaval Brahmbhatt
posted by dhaval brahmbhatt at 4/14/2007 08:40:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home