Monday, 19 March 2007

In search of wickets

Having watched England's first two matches in the World Cup I cannot see them progressing any further than the super 8s unless they can take more wickets in the middle overs of a match.

They have plenty of options for the opening overs - incumbents Anderson and Plunkett or the introduction of Lewis and/or Mahmood - and at the death Flintoff and Anderson are very good.

Panesar provides top quality spin and will take wickets in the middle overs, but he has no support. Dalrymple has successfully proved the suspicion that he is simply not good enough at this level, with either bat or ball. His ineffective spin is leaving Vaughan with a serious headache and Bopara, who showed promise yesterday, should surely take Dalrymple's place.

The question is still where are those wickets coming from when the opposition are established and the ball is getting old and soft. Surely, a gamble is called for? Though he is profligate and wayward, Mahmood has an excellent slower ball and should be selected purely as a strike bowler, either with new or old ball. He may not bowl his full ten overs, but he would give Vaughan a vital option when other bowlers are struggling to take wickets.

With Collingwood, Pietersen and even Vaughan himself to make up a few overs, surely England can accommodate a potential match-winner such as Mahmood?

With this in mind my team for the next match would be:

Vaughan
Joyce
Pietersen
Collingwood
Flintoff
Bopara
Nixon
Plunkett
Mahmood
Anderson
Panesar

Bell is omitted to make way for the extra bowler because he has scored few runs and frankly England need to bowl sides out or restrict them if they are going anywhere in this tournament. It's a risk, yes, but Plunkett is good enough for number eight in the shorter game, especially as Mahmood is certainly capable enough to bat at number nine.

3 comments:

Richard Lake said...

Sorry to disagree, Nick, but there are far too many bowlers there. While I accept you basic premise, that we need to take wickets, ou main problem has been scoring enough runs.

For the next game, Flintoff clearly comes back into the team, but at the expense of Plunkett. The team thus reads

Joyce
Vaughan
Bell
Pietersen
Collingwood
Bopara
Flintoff
Dalrymple
Nixon
Panesar
Anderson

and given the slowness of the pitches, it's not unreasonable to expect Dalrymple, Collingwood and Bopara to bowl 20 overs between them.

Chrispy said...

Right I'm going to plonk myself in between the two of you!

Wielding my axe I would chop Ed Joyce. Dropped twice yesterday and of course during the only other two innings he has made a 50 and 100 in, I really am starting to wonder. His 66 off 105 balls yesterday was rediculously slow and England had gone into paralysis mid-innings until Colli and Bopara started working the ball around, something Joyce was obviously struggling with. Strauss isn't the greatest option given recent form, but what else have we got? We miss Tresco still.

We can't drop Plunkett, he has taken wickets and scored good runs. He has only gone at 5 an over too, not abyssmal. Between him and Dalrymple I'd have Plunkett, he's a better bowler and as effective a batsman late on which is the only time you want to see number 9 out there!

Vaughan (c)
Strauss/Joyce
Pietersen (Need to speed it up at top somehow)
Bell
Collingwood
Bopara
Flintoff (not consistant enough for 6)
Nixon (wk)
Plunkett
Panesar
Anderson

Anderson and Plunkett are good wicket takers up front. Flintoff and Panesar always pose a threat. Bopara, KP, Colli and even Vaughan are more than capable of bowling the other ten and still provide a threat.

Nick Gammons said...

I agree that the team I selected was top heavy on bowlers, but England's major problem is putting pressure on the opposition by taking wickets. Bell is not scoring enough and is a poor number three. Pietersen needs to be in there dominating the innings for as long as possible. I'm not bothered whether Strauss or Joyce plays, but England will go nowhere in this World Cup without more bowling firepower. Collingwood, Bopara and Flintoff are good enough for the middle order and Nixon and Plunkett are scoring well later on.

Plunkett and Mahmood offer wicket-taking ability, though both can be expensive. Dalrymple must go - his overall record is poor and he has played badly so far. Anderson, Flintoff and Panesar are class bowlers and Bopara and Collingwood offer good medium pace support.

As I said before it is a risky strategy, but England need to attack if they are to win. The top order should be scoring the big hundreds, not relying on the middle order to bail them out.