England v Australia 2010 June 25, 2010

Bullish Collingwood basks in England dominance

Cricinfo staff
69

Confidence is surging through the veins of England's cricketers both on and off the field as they sit with a 2-0 series lead over Australia. Paul Collingwood, who became his country's leading one-day runscorer during the victory at Cardiff, called for the team to "go hard" before this series started and had no qualms about spelling out where the balance of power now lay.

"We're confident every time we go out and play Australia. It's not arrogance. We are now confident we can beat anyone in one-day cricket on any given day," he said. "If you look at Australia's record over the last year or so they still have that air of invincibility, because they haven't lost many games. But we are the better side at the moment."

The side that Collingwood debuted in during the 2001 season lost all six matches in the NatWest Series against Australia and Pakistan - just one many limited-overs debacles - but this current unit are a far cry from the callow one-day teams that England have often fielded. They have now stitched together a seven-game winning streak which is their longest since 1997-98 and are on the verge of gaining revenge for last summer's 6-1 hammering against Australia which followed the Ashes.

Collingwood's new-found aggression with the bat matches England's 'no fear' approach to the one-day game which began at last year's Champions Trophy, continued through South Africa and culminated in winning the World Twenty20 in West Indies last month.

"After they hammered us last year we all thought we had to do something about it. We are a much better team now," said Collingwood. "But we want to be the best one-day side in the world and we want to win the World Cup next year - and as we stand, we are a long way down in the rankings."

Collingwood's ascent to become England's leading one-day runscorer after surpassing Alec Stewart during his 48 on Thursday is yet to fully sink in for him. He now holds England's runs and caps record having overtaken Stewart's appearance mark last year, something few would have imagined when he barely made an impression during his debut series.

"It was a huge surprise to me when they announced it on the tannoy - and I think there were quite a few Australians out there who were even more surprised than me," said Collingwood. "It put a smile on my face. To know you have scored more runs in one-day cricket than any other Englishman is a lovely feeling."

Collingwood's innings, which formed an important stand alongside Eoin Morgan as England chased down 240, was his first significant score of the season after he sat out the Bangladesh Test series as part of the squad rotation policy following the World Twenty20. He made a scratchy 11 in the opening game at The Rose Bowl and was beginning to fret over the need to make a contribution.

"I've felt a bit rusty so far this summer," he said. "I went into the match at Cardiff thinking 'I need to start playing well again, I need a bit of confidence'.

"Then they announced I'd broken Stewie's record and I thought to myself 'why do you worry so much?' Alec Stewart was a great player, and sometimes you have to pinch yourself to believe that you're playing for England - let alone overtaking someone like him.

"It's all a bit surreal at times. I was thinking 'surely not me?' I knew I had overtaken Stewie's number of appearances - but his runs? Are you kidding me?"

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • dummy4fb on June 27, 2010, 17:42 GMT

    Snowsnake. Since when has NEW SOUTH WALES been in the UK??? That's interesting. Poor Aussies - no wonder they keep losing matches - they have to travel the length of the globe to go to school. There's a reason there's a New on the beginning of that.

  • SnowSnake on June 27, 2010, 17:28 GMT

    I am writing this after England won the series 3-0. I think rather than saying "England can beat anyone." Colly should say "Anyone can beat Australia." If England's batting is bad then Australia's is worse. If England's balling is good then Australia is better. The teams were closely matched than anyone would care to admit. While England is winning, it is not dominating. This means that the world does not have a dominating ODI team, but 10 dominated teams.

  • SnowSnake on June 27, 2010, 16:47 GMT

    @YorkshirePudding. Fair enough. However, the word UK was introduced in 1801 (may be United States played a role here). In 1707 it was know as only Kingdom of Great Britain. As a result, it is fair to say US got freedom from England (1776) and India got freedom from UK (1947). My major mistake in my previous post was to say new South Wales as a part of UK when I should have said Wales, since NSW is in Australia.

  • CrinIndiaFan on June 27, 2010, 16:00 GMT

    wanderer1 --> if India is winning only on flat pitches ... wondering why Australia / England / South Africa loose on the same flat pitches playing India ... oh I know why ... cause they can't even play on flat pitches .. lol

  • YorkshirePudding on June 27, 2010, 14:15 GMT

    SnowSnake, I hvae to correct you on one thing, the UK is not copying the US in regards to seperate laws, in fact Scotalnd had its own legal system when the crown united in the early 17th century, and even after the act of union in 1707, Scotland had its own legal process, and laws, though there were a number of simularities there are still differences for example in Scottish law there are three possible verdicts Guilty, Not Guilty and Not Proven, in english law there are only two verdicts, Guilty and not Guilty. Scottish Property Law is also different to english law. By comparisson the US wasnt an indepentant nation until 1776, some 70 years later, and as far as im aware there were only 16 states anyway, all east coast, so im not sure where you get the fact that the UK is copying the US.

  • dummy4fb on June 27, 2010, 8:43 GMT

    For Colly to claim such things, first England should play better teams. Forget the numbers, I agree that England do not play a lot of ODIs. Also leave where Morgan, KP, Keiswetter are from. But all the past year, you have played only South Africa, Bangladesh and a half strenght Australian team (except when there is a lot of politics and chaos within ACB, please don expect Clint McKay to touch the new ball). I know you are a better team with the inclusion of some new players. But, you haven't even faced Australia's fastest crop of pace bowlers. You haven't faced subcontinent's toughest spin battery. Even in the Ashes, a lot (frankly a lot) of decisions did not go in Aussie's favour both in 2005 and in 2009. Just because they are maintaining decency, does not mean that the world did not notice all of this. We did not care because Ashes means nothing for us. Better say things like "we can beat Bangladesh anywhere, anytime". You have every right to say that and only that, as of now.

  • dummy4fb on June 27, 2010, 4:08 GMT

    Andrew Simonds was born in Sheffeild.

  • zxaar on June 26, 2010, 22:36 GMT

    @landl47 "England play far fewer ODIs than other countries. Collingwood has played in 179 ODIs, whereas, for example, Jayasuriya has played in 444 and Tendulkar in 442." -------------- what you are saying is correct but examples are wrong. For example both jayasurya and sachin has played ver 20 years of international cricket where as colly has not. So you should compare odi/year not the total. I think the difference in odis played by england and other teams is not so much. It is there as you say but it is not large. Further if england does not play odis then they should be playing more tests, i can hardly see any Englishman at top of tests run scoring list.

  • domgriffiths on June 26, 2010, 21:25 GMT

    @Bilal Yousuf - don't be so surprised that there is no England player with over 5000 runs. They don't play 73 ODIs every year.

  • bobmartin on June 26, 2010, 20:20 GMT

    I don't think the Aussies should be giving too much voice to this 'born overseas' player nonsense. After all, they now have, of all things, a Welsh born lady as Prime Minister. To put things on a more serious level, are all the whingers about foreign born players in the England team really serious when they suggest that players should only be allowed to represent the country they were born in. That would suggest that even though these people are British citizens and have British passports, they don't have the same rights as other British citizens simply due to an accident of birth in that they were born overseas. Wouldn't that be a violation of their human and citizen's rights.

  • No featured comments at the moment.