´óÏó´«Ã½

On the keeping front think the dropping of Davies was badly handled and he has kept his council well considering. No wonder his confidence has been knocked and Kiesweter has stolen a march.

On the T20 squad WHY OH WHY is Luke Wright Still there? Could've picked Davies as cover for a batsman & keeper. Shocking.....

Have to agree with the above poster. Cannot understand, for the life of me, what Luke Wright has done to continue meriting a place in the squad. Bit-part cricketer who does decently on the county stage but isn't good enough in any department of the game to play on the international stage.

Similarly, Kieswetter's sudden jump ahead of Davies seems bizarre. Davies by far the best young gloveman in the country. It's all very well banging on about Kieswetter, Bairstow blah blah blah, but everyone knows neither has a good as keeping technique and frankly in T20 and 1 dayers one small error by a keeper can be key in breaking (or not as the case may be) big partnerships that influence the game inordinately. It's hardly as if Davies is a mug with the bat - he's consistently high-scoring domestically and deserves a substantial go in the international set up.

1 final thing - only one front line spinner against India and Sri Lanka? Can see them making mincemeat of Patel. Rashid may get get tonked now and again but he's not in the top 3 of domestic MVP ratings for nothing. Surely another who deserves a chance. How many times have we seen teams we only 1 main spinner win T20s consistently? Hardly ever. Some are bowling 3 regularly as the best way to restrict teams.

Quite how Geoff Miller is still playing a selector role is beyond me.

Whilst we have to applaud the England Selection and Management team for what they have achieved in the test arena, we continue to stumble along in the 50 over stuff. We were worse than poor during the winter, and although the schedule was quite frankly ridiculous, out approach and decision making left much to be desired. We now have 4 years to get ready and I would have expected to see more changes on the batting front. I would have replaced Pieterson with Hildreth for a start, we really need to see what he can do on the international stage, and Pieterson didn;t exactly demonstrate that he was fighting for the cause when he returned home. Morgan should bat at at least one place higher at five, and I can't see why Strauss has been talked into giving the captaincy up. And why oh why do we contine to pick Luke Wright !! I would also prefer Davies to Kieswetter, that boy can play

On the bowling front, do we not think that Tremlett can be effective in the one day format, I certainly do.

i suspect we are in for more of the same, I hope not !!

I dont see Samit doing well. Sad but I think just like other talented asian cricketers the so called 'experts' would soon start questioning his 'abilities' at this level....he will follow Shahzad...and the rest..

What are you suggesting Gav? That's there's racism in the selection process and/or media?

If Patel is good enough, fit enough and performs well, people will support his inclusion.

As for the other "talented asian cricketers" - Shahzad is out of form, Rashid isn't ready (this is the opinion of both England and Yorkshire), Shah isn't good enough and Bopara is in both squads (despite being out of form and not being good enough anyway). Who else is there?

IlCucchiaio wrote: "Cannot understand, for the life of me, what Luke Wright has done to continue meriting a place in the squad."

He's a decent T20 cricketer and we don't have many all-rounder options. He's a brilliant fielder, will bat selflessly and is a handy bowler. In time, Ben Stokes (currently injured) will probably replace him but for the time being they will stick with Wright.

He's not good enough of ODIs though, so I'm glad he's been left out of that squad.

IlCucchiaio wrote: "Similarly, Kieswetter's sudden jump ahead of Davies seems bizarre."

Kieswetter has made a brilliant start to the season in all forms and also had an excellent winter with the Lions.

IlCucchiaio wrote: "How many times have we seen teams we only 1 main spinner win T20s consistently? Hardly ever. Some are bowling 3 regularly as the best way to restrict teams."

I seem to remember the winners of the last World Twenty20 winning with just one front-line spinner...

#4 Gav, why don't you see Samit doing well? Give the bloke a fair chance!

So which batsman is going to miss out then? With Cook, Trott, Pietersen, Bell and Morgan untrustworthy for any meaningful overs between them, can they all play in the same ODI team?

Possibly, but surely the best formula includes a batsman who can bowl at 6, an all-rounder at 7 and a bowler who can bat at 8? Out of the current squad Bopara, Patel and Woakes appear to fit the bill.

The selectors have made a rod for their own backs by making Cook captain: he has to play every game. So back to the question, who will miss out?

Despite their spectacular recent Test statistics, you can't play Cook, Trott and Bell in the same one-day side as they just don't have the firepower in this form of the game. Cook is obviously in there as captain, which is a good thing for the future of England's Test side at least, so it has to be a choice between the other two, and I think Trott has found his role as anchorman as long as there are attacking players at the other end. Bell on the other hand never seems to take control of a one-day innings and it would have been a brave but correct decision to leave him out in favour of trying out a young batsman. But they can't bring themselves to drop an "establishment" player who is in such impressive form in the longer game.

There's one or two positives in there but not enough fresh faces, particularly in the batting where we really need to try something new, rather than just hoping either KP or Morgan comes off in terms of playing the game-changing innings while others just nudge it about at SR of 70 or 80.

Cook and Trott should not be playing one-day cricket. They should be wrapped in cotton wool and only allowed to play Test and first-class matches. The success of the Test team is paramount.

2. only one front line spinner against India and Sri Lanka?
..............................................................

Could you explain the logic of playing more spinners against teams better at playing spin? Especially given both these teams have shown a weakness to the short ball. There's a reason India and Sri Lanka are peppered as soon as they leave their sanctuary's in the sub-continent.

Maybe Kieswetter was included because he can open the batting? We've quite noticably struggled to find a stable opening partnership of late, so the selectors may have been thinking that him and Cook at the top of the order is worth a go. Otherwise a bit harsh on Davies. And with Kieswetter opening you can have someone like Bopara (Batsman who can bowl) at seven, giving you a nice long line-up of genuine batsmen.

Bairstow is looking like a good prospect with the bat but he doesn't keep regularly for Yorkshire (Brophy is behind the stumps most of the time he's playing, leaving Bairstow languishing in the deep). A season or two more experience behind the stumps for him and we might be seeng the emergence of a very good wicket keeper-batsman.

On the subject of Yorkshire boys, Shazad has been quite poor this year and probably shouldn't be in the squad on merit. Rashid has been excellent, opening the T20 bowling and chipping in with a few runs to boot. But then who would you drop if you included him?

I completely agree with #9 in the sense that an ODI line up that includes Cook, Trott and Bell would never win a World Cup. They are all fine players and are currently not in doubt in the test arena but they are just not aggressive enough for the shorter format. As a Warwickshire fan (and a big fan of both players) I would chose Bell over Trott in this format any day as obviously Cook will play. I realise that the selectors want to give Cook international captaincy experience however I just don't see him as a one day opening batsman - I'd be happier with Strauss there.

Kieswetter has had a good start to the summer as far as I've noticed so I'm pleased to see him get the nod - Prior has had many chances in ODI's, he is safe as houses in tests but has failed too often in the shorter format - maybe too mcuh was expected.

Just wanted to say full-marks to Strauss for the Somerset idea and credit to Somerset for making it happen. It shows that Strauss is not going to go into denial about the perceived problem against left-armers. Interestingly, he'll benefit from time with his old partner Tresco. Didn't Tresco have a similar for a while?

Nothing to do with ODI squad. Sorry.

@14.

Should've read:

didn't Tresco have a problem with left-arm seamers? It seems to me that all left-handed batsmen would have a problem just on the angle.

Dear nffc
To suggest that Englands best all round batsman, who scores all around the wicket, and who can score at the pace required should not be in the team is beyond comprehension. Perhaps you haven't watched Bell bat in the past 12 months. He scores at test match pace when its required, or faster than a run a ball when targets need to be set. You must have been hibernating

As Cook has to play, Trott must be dropped and Bell or Pietersen moved to three. You cannot drop Bell on current form. Big issue is getting bowlers that can slap it about a bit and score some runs down the order. Bresnan will be greatly missed in this regard. A very underrated player.

@ FiveForOne

Please inform me exactly when Bell has scored at faster than a run a ball. I assume you didn't watch the World Cup? Not disputing he should be in the team but only with bigger hitting, faster scoring batsmen around him (Hildreth, Hales, Stokes etc)

@ R-Brooker

By that logic, every right handed batsman should struggle against right handed bowling......

To nffc

I watched Bell score at more than a run a ball in Adelaide, 2nd innings at Lords and during the latter stages of his innings at Brisbane and Southampton.
We could always opt for Bopara to score his 5 runs very quickly I suppose

Of the games you mention he only scored at over a run a ball for the entire innings in one game. He should be doing this in almost every ODI. Bell has an ODI strike rate of 75. I'm not disputing his class and good form and I would keep in in the ODI side but stop placing unrealistic hopes on him. Tests nowadays are very very different to ODI's......

@matt-h88

Shahzad took all ten wickets today (?)
Which squad is Ravi 'playing' in?' I'm amazed the run Broad is getting....

@matt-h88

I would add Solanki, ramprakash to the list. Any coach would tell you the role confidence plays in a player's development....talking up good performance and ignoring under-performance is key to nurturing a talent...asian players in england team face the opposite..but thats my personal view...

Shahzad took 1-27 today, a decent return. I'm not saying I agree with his exclusion - he's a better one-day bowler than Finn and if Bopara is included despite his form, why not Shahzad? - but I can see the reasoning behind his exclusion.

Hopefully Ravi won't be 'playing' in either squad - nothing to do with race, he's had over 80 internationals to show that he's good enough and he's only shown himself to be a nearly-man. And that's 80 internationals - so he's had plenty of confidence put in him and the selectors always focus on his few good innings.

Solanki? Averaged a meagre 27 in over 50 ODI games. Showed promise with a couple of centuries but made too many low scores. He had his chances, plenty of them, so why should we have persevered further with him if he wasn't good enough.

Ramprakash was given lots of opportunities. He played over 50 Test matches and in return only scored two centuries at an average of 27. Even taking into account the bowling of the 90s and the fact that he was messed around by the selectors, that is extremely poor. He's more comparable with Stuart Broad, who has 1 century and averages nearly 27 from 37 Tests, than other Test batsmen who played over 50 times.

Speaking of Broad, had Bresnan not been injured and if Onions had more matches under his belt, he may well have been dropped for or during the Sri Lanka series because he was undercooked going into the series and it showed. But what is this "run" that you speak of? Three Test matches? Last summer he took plenty of wickets (helpful conditions and poor opponents yes, but he still took wickets) and only played 2 Tests in Australia where he bowled well for little reward, so until this series his Test match form was fine. Someone like Onions may well have been a better option for this series, but my point remains that 3 games is hardly a "run".

England will pick who they think are the best players for the job and for the team. Stop looking to point the finger at others - if they are not good enough, not fit enough, not mentally strong enough etc, they are unlikely to be picked.

As it is, England have selected Patel (not fit enough, although he has finally worked on this and shown enough improvement) and Bopara (very talented and therefore should be good enough, but doesn't back this up). Rashid continues to be very much in their thoughts, but they got excited too soon by him and, in consultation with Yorkshire, aren't going to take him away from Yorkshire to carry drinks (though they did miss a trick in not playing him in Bangladesh last year).

I dont disagree with stats, and probably agree with your logic too..but having worked with talent and especially asians...I'm convinced there's more to it. but then you could be right!

sorry I meant to say Saj mahmood not Shahzad took 10 wickets..

it would be interesting if samit scored a century and took five-for,and the decided to start eating again!

Trott dropped for Bell???? Ridiculous. Trott averages 55 to Bells's 35, he's scored 3 centuries to Bell's one and, believe it or not, his strike rate is 6 better than Bell's. He was also one of the top scorers in the world cup and has been our most consistent one day batsman for some time now. Bell has played 97 matches and for whatever reason, maybe because he's been moved up and down the order, maybe because he's unsure of his role, he has disappointed. He might be better this time around, but how can you justify dropping someone who has proven themselves for someone who has a relatively poor record?

Our main problem is that we have been hamstrung by the selection of Cook as captain. Kieswetter will often be first wicket down, because he will be more aggressive. which means Cook and Trott will be batting together, probably during the powerplays. And this is all so Cook can be groomed as the next Test captain. Hope it's worth it.

To me it seems England are in a position of Strength when it comes to batting. Yes we are now lumbered with Cook at the top of the order, and yes maybe Cook, Trott and Bell all score runs at one pace. But if we're going to have KP, Kieswetter and Morgan in the team then surely we need the insurance of three less aggressive Batsmen at the top of the their game to be on the safe side if the three more aggressive batsmen fall for nothing that is always a possibility. A team cannot have a batting line up completely made up of aggressive batsmen it wouldn't be stable enough as one week they could score over 300 runs then the next be out for about a 100.

And to those who are calling for Trott to be dropped, how can anyone really call for Trott to be dropped when he is currently the only English Batsmen in the Top Ten Batsmen in ODIs Currently. Seems a little bit silly.

Also to those who have been saying Bell is unable to score quickly enough can I point you in the direction of the tied match against India in the last world cup. While Strauss led the team he was assisted by Bell who scored 69 of 71 balls.

Would it be (a) wrong (b) madness or (c) plainly against the rules to select two players that are batsmen/wicket keepers? As if you could you could change who you wanted behind the stumps to suit (within reason) the player you've got in front of the stumps and if you can do so then you can allow for the tiredness that comes about from playing keeper in the shorter format of the game where you know you need to take every chance rather than 1-in-4 chances.

England have the pool from players to choose from to groom and fashion a powerful one-day squad capable of beating anyone.

The ICC is meeting in Hong Kong shortly to discuss changes to the game, including ODIs...some are interesting...like removing bowlers over restrictions.

May they (ICC) encourage, not discourage, this great game around the world.

Expansion; not contraction ... keep 2015 in mind!

And may England rise to the top to once again lead the charge to spread the great game she invented centuries ago!