England v Australia, 3rd NatWest ODI, Edgbaston

England experiment continues

The Preview by Alan Gardner

September 10, 2013

Comments: 67 | Text size: A | A

Match Facts

September 11, Edgbaston
Start time 2pm (1300 GMT)

Shane Watson celebrates dismissing Kevin Pietersen, England v Australia, 2nd NatWest ODI, Old Trafford, September 8, 2013
Australia produced an accomplished all-round performance to take a 1-0 lead in the series at Old Trafford © Getty Images
Related Links

The Big Picture

They say you learn more from your mistakes than your successes and, if so, there should be a fair amount of wisdom to be gleaned from the scribbles in Ashley Giles' notebook after the weekend. Eoin Morgan, England's stand-in captain, won the toss and Steven Finn bowled a wicket maiden but little went right from then on, as Australia took a 1-0 lead in the series and Michael Clarke collected twin laurels, with his first ODI hundred against England and his first victory on tour.

England have rolled out a half-and-half squad for these fixtures, so it should not be a surprise if the product is a little half-baked. The likes of Michael Carberry and Ben Stokes deserve a few goes in the kitchen to properly evaluate whether they can handle the heat and, while there were obvious deficiencies in the performance at Old Trafford, a couple of the ingredients came off well - Boyd Rankin has seamlessly transferred the promise of his Ireland career to England colours and Jos Buttler was able to showcase his exotic skills over a longer innings.

While England fiddle, Australia have capitalised, the confidence that slowly coalesced around the second half of their Ashes campaign becoming firmer by the game. Despite a disappointing Champions Trophy, one-day cricket is probably Australia's strongest suit and they are focused on fine-tuning their best XI. That the explosive opening partnership of Shaun Marsh and Aaron Finch was quickly defused, and Fawad Ahmed struggled to influence the game, only suggests that they can perform better still.

Form guide

(Most recent first)
England LWLWW
Australia WWLLW

Watch out for...

Mitchell Johnson has described how alien it felt to watch the summer's Ashes skirmishes from his couch in Australia and knows that a fire-breathing performance in the one-day series can help get him back into Test contention. With Mitchell Starc the latest of Australia's cadre of young pacemen to pull up lame, the chances of a return to Mitch 1.0 during the return series have increased. Johnson may not have some of the natty upgrades of the new generation but, despite the clanking action and occasional processing glitches, operating speeds of 90mph never go out of fashion.

Morgan and Giles have argued against suggestions that the selection was wrong at Old Trafford but the make-up of England's attack will be under extra scrutiny. Their strategy in the 18 months leading up to the Champions Trophy was to play five genuine bowlers, with the possibility of a Ravi Bopara or Joe Root providing a few overs, but an experimental squad for this series has led to them tinkering with the formula, playing Durham allrounder Stokes as the third seamer and No. 8 batsman. On the evidence of the bowling displays against Ireland and Australia, it hasn't worked.

Team news

England seem firm in their convictions about the balance of the side but they do have other options. Jamie Overton is the bolter that most England watchers want to see but that would lengthen the tail; perhaps the most appealing compromise would be to give Root a rest and bring in the Sussex quick Chris Jordan, who is also a capable batsman, for a first senior cap.

England (possible) 1 Michael Carberry, 2 Kevin Pietersen, 3 Jonathan Trott, 4 Eoin Morgan (capt), 5 Ravi Bopara, 6 Jos Buttler (wk), 7 Ben Stokes, 8 Chris Jordan, 9 James Tredwell, 10 Boyd Rankin, 11 Steven Finn

After a tumultuous couple of months, we are now beginning to see Darren Lehmann's Australia masterplan come together. This is the first squad Lehmann has picked himself and George Bailey has praised the atmosphere in the group. Winning helps and a settled side could stay unchanged for a third outing.

Australia (possible) 1 Aaron Finch, 2 Shaun Marsh, 3 Shane Watson, 4 Michael Clarke (capt), 5 George Bailey, 6 Adam Voges, 7 Matthew Wade (wk), 8 James Faulkner, 9 Mitchell Johnson, 10 Clint McKay, 11 Fawad Ahmed

Pitch and conditions

It was at Edgbaston during the Champions Trophy that England's summer of turners began. India's spinners found the pitches to be a home from home during their triumphant campaign and despite the arrival of some autumnal weather, a slow, dry surface conducive to spin seems likely. A forecast for rain in the evening won't be to anyone's liking, however.

Stats and trivia

  • As well as a wet no result against New Zealand during the Champions Trophy, Australia suffered a washout and an abandonment on their previous two visits to Birmingham in 2012 and 2005.
  • England's win over Australia at Edgbaston at the 2004 Champions Trophy ended a run of 14 consecutive ODI defeats dating back to 1999.
  • Australia's one-day record of nine wins and four defeats in 2013 (win percentage of 69.23%) is second only to India's.
  • George Bailey is 30 runs short of 1000 in ODIs.


"When you've got inexperience, you're going to have to suffer some pain occasionally to get some gain."
Ashley Giles defends England's selection policy

"We've played some good cricket for the last couple of months, and it's our time now to really put our foot on the throat and win these last few games."
James Faulkner is keen that Australia ram home their advantage in the series

Alan Gardner is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo. He tweets here

RSS Feeds: Alan Gardner

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by JG2704 on (September 11, 2013, 21:03 GMT)

@ Biggus on (September 11, 2013, 9:44 GMT) Was Keppler like an Ed Joyce in that after he played for his adopted country , he went back to play for his country of birth? Or have I got that wrong?

@ trav29 on (September 11, 2013, 13:28 GMT) Ed Joyce seemed to hop from Eng to Ireland and back again quite quickly. I wonder if Boyd and whoever else could do similar if he/they felt like switching back?

Posted by JG2704 on (September 11, 2013, 18:36 GMT)

@Int.Curator on (September 11, 2013, 7:22 GMT) Curious that you omit the fact that England actually won the test series 3-0 and while they were thrashed in the 1st T20 they won the 2nd comfortably enough. So the scoreline reads that Eng won the test series 3-0 , the T20 series was drawn 1-1 and Australia are 1-0 up in the ODI series with 2 to play. Not quite as bad as you make it sound

Posted by shane-oh on (September 11, 2013, 14:32 GMT)

@trav29 - very true, there is absolutely no logic or equality in that situation, in fact that is truly bizarre. I suppose that would alleviate the problem to an extent, although it wouldn't solve the initial problem of players leaving at all.

Again, no issue with players playing for adopted nations. But I think the unique relationship between England and Ireland that you have described creates a situation which, long term, is untenable.

Posted by salazar555 on (September 11, 2013, 13:49 GMT)

I'm not impressed at all by the selection of Carberry, he looks out of his depth, 3 games and 3 poor performances. It's not like he is even young and has the time to come good, the guy is 33 at the end of the month. I thought it was a bad selection given his age and nothing I have seen has changed my mind.

Posted by salazar555 on (September 11, 2013, 13:34 GMT)

Stokes is a good bowler, he can bowl between 85-90 mph. There's nothing wrong with the ballance of the side, they just need to play better

Posted by trav29 on (September 11, 2013, 13:28 GMT)

@shane-oh for me it has to be made easier for guys like rankin to go back to Ireland should he fail within the England setup. it makes no sense that as long as he has satisfied the qualifying conditions, and can do that whilst still playing for Ireland, that he can switch to England with no mandatory gap following his last Ireland appearance but if he was to go back to Ireland, as ed joyce did, he then has to wait 4 years

a lot of the usual suspects on here who criticise the situation don't really understand the dynamics involved between Ireland and England and that the majority of the Ireland players play in county cricket and without county cricket Ireland would be nowhere near having players of the required standard for test cricket in the first place

in addition the nationality issues become a bit muddy with situations like rankin not even being irish but qualifying to play for Ireland due to the same eligibility rules that allow him to now play for england

Posted by salazar555 on (September 11, 2013, 13:28 GMT)

Carberry should have been on his toes, get moving when someone shouts yes, he just stood there watching Pietersen run down the pitch, the bowler had time to run pick it up and take the ball to the stumps

Posted by shane-oh on (September 11, 2013, 12:45 GMT)

@trav29 - that's a fair point, but I feel it's a necessary evil. It's a vicious cycle really - it seems likely Ireland will be the next test team, but this will only be delayed by the departure of players who want to play test cricket. I believe an 'in between' tier would help as it would send a message that this team were in the ICC plan to take the step up. You're right though, perhaps this would only work if the ICC intervened by way of arranging more games for these teams and perhaps propping them up financially to some extent so that these players could also earn a decent amount without abandoning the country of their birth. Not an easy question, but I do feel something has to change.

Posted by electric_loco_WAP4 on (September 11, 2013, 12:32 GMT)

With Mitch Johnson in this form and watching him doing all sorts at 95 mph in game 1 ,it won't be a surprise if we have an early finish today - that's if Aus don't have a chance to bat 1st . It will be another emphatic win for this young 2nd string Aus side and put them 1/2 way to their desired scoreline, 4-0

Posted by SirViv1973 on (September 11, 2013, 12:25 GMT)

@Marcus Clarke, Although Overton is an exciting prospect do you really think he is going to come in to this team & provide anymore control than Finn?

Posted by Harlequin. on (September 11, 2013, 12:24 GMT)

@Marcus Clarke - no I vote keeping Finn in. He has spent a bit of time recently sorting out his action/run-up and he definitely needs to be going to Australia so a bit more international cricket will be good for him. Also, his big problem in test cricket is his economy rate, and what better place to practice that than in ODI's?!

Posted by SirViv1973 on (September 11, 2013, 12:22 GMT)

@babycricketwriter, You are completly wrong. Ravi's played 8 ODI's since June & has scored 248@62.00, so he clearly is making runs! his bowling has been useful too 9@27.3 and he's doing a very decent job as the 5th seamer. The logical choice would be Jordan in for Stokes.

Posted by   on (September 11, 2013, 12:01 GMT)

How about dropping Steve Finn?

I am wholly unimpressed with him so far this series, he is just too expensive. Sure he'll give you some wickets but in the short form of the game the cost is too high.

Either keep Jo Root and drop Finn for Chris Jordan or Overton, or if you want to really experiment rest Root and play both quicks Jordan and Overton. Please drop Finn.

Posted by Harlequin. on (September 11, 2013, 11:45 GMT)

@babycricketer - Bopara had a pretty good champions trophy, which was the last time England played ODI's. His bowling has been excellent recently as well. It would appear that after years of searching, England has finally found a use for his talent. We do need to bring in another bowler, and although he could probably do with finding a bit of form before the next Ashes, I would rest Trott and have Root at 3. If Trott got injured, then we are pretty stuck without a back-up (perhaps Bell) and Root would seem like a pretty good candidate, this would be a good chance to try him out.

Are we still debating this whole overseas-born playing for England?! Didn't that get boring years ago?

Posted by   on (September 11, 2013, 11:13 GMT)

yes we lost the first t20 heavily but the series result was still 1-1 and that is what matters , you don't get extra points for margin of victory in bi-lateral series ...

Posted by brusselslion on (September 11, 2013, 10:49 GMT)

@jonesy2: "...its just that australias allrounders can actually bat and bowl."

Best get them in the Test team then, don't you think?

Posted by babycricketer on (September 11, 2013, 10:48 GMT)

I think England's order should be this: 1) J Root 2) M Carberry 3) J Trott 4) K Pietersen 5) E Morgan (c) 6) J Buttler 7) B Stokes 8) C Jordan 9) J Tredwell 10) B Rankin 11) S Finn I think if there is somobody in the team that needs to be dropped for Chris Jordan it's definitely Ravi Bopara. He's not making any runs!!! He's in the team for his batting. Joe Root bowls better than him anyways. I think Joe Root should open the batting as it suits him more. As for Australia, they should stay with the same team but they might have to get an allrounder in the number 6 position to replace Adam Voges. He isn't batting badly but I think Watson can't bowl 10 overs. If Voges want's his place in the team he must bowl. Michael Clarke has to bowl as well.

Posted by 158notout on (September 11, 2013, 10:38 GMT)

I find it amusing that so many people dismiss England as an ODI team despite their very impressive recent record. Their only real problem has been India in India and on the last tour they improved their performance there also. The two series losses against Australia have come after Ashes wins and therefore England can be forgiven for taking their foot off the gas having won the ultimate prize in cricket. They reached the final of the last international tournament and have had a pretty good record home and away since the 2007 WC, excluding those series mentioned above and a couple of series losses to NZ. I think the fact that England feel comfortable resting key players for this series and trying out different options with little regard for the series result shows how England and Australia are in vastly different stages of development currently. England have the chance to do it now, in order to reap benefits at the next WC.

Posted by jmcilhinney on (September 11, 2013, 10:26 GMT)

@dinosaurus on (September 11, 2013, 10:01 GMT), I don't think that anyone is having a go at Fawad. It's all about the double standard of some fans who are happy to criticise England for playing overseas-born players but don't say a word about Australia doing so, even though the ECB recently increased the qualification period to make it more difficult for such players to play for England while CA lobbied the Australian government to change the law of the land in order to get Fawad into the team sooner. It's not just Australian fans either, because there are plenty from elsewhere who criticise England the same but haven't said a word about Australia. Some may claim that it's the number of such players England selects but the comments were the same back when it was just KP. Anyone who really believes that Strauss and Prior aren't English would have to say the same of Khawaja not being Australian.

Posted by R_U_4_REAL_NICK on (September 11, 2013, 10:10 GMT)

"Their [England's] strategy in the 18 months leading up to the Champions Trophy was to play five genuine bowlers..." - at the time I said that was too much, and then strangely last game they dropped down to only three genuine bowlers - and still seem intent on ignoring the most obvious choice of four specialist bowlers and allowing the part-timers to fill in the rest. Ashley Giles' notebook lacks maths and decent strategies/tactics, whilst Morgan's captaincy is questionable at best. I think the gulf between tests and ODI's is growing again for England; Australia on the other hand are looking strong and settled in ODI's.

Posted by o-bomb on (September 11, 2013, 10:02 GMT)

We played 5 bowlers in ODIs for the first half of this summer. For most of those games it worked and we looked like a good team. Why have we seemingly abandoned that now?

Posted by dinosaurus on (September 11, 2013, 10:01 GMT)

I think people should understand that Fawad Ahmed did not move to Australia to further his cricket or any other career. He came to improve his chances of staying alive! There actually is a historic parallel to the Ireland-England business though. There have been players (mainly in the 1930s - including the great Clarrie Grimett) who moved from New Zealand to Australia to play Test cricket. NZ didn't play Tests at the time.

Posted by trav29 on (September 11, 2013, 9:56 GMT)

@shane-oh the problem with that approach is if you said to players like morgan and rankin if you represent Ireland in associate cricket then you forego any chance of ever playing for England then I bet they would think twice about ever playing for Ireland in the first place so how exactly would that help Ireland ?

morgan is on record as indicating as young as 13 that playing test cricket was his aim knowing that would mean playing for England

Posted by trav29 on (September 11, 2013, 9:52 GMT)

@int.curator still selective amnesia on your part , you remember the games England loses then dismiss the games we win. if the best criticism you can come up with of the test series is that despite winning 3-0 we only won one test convincingly it is really scraping the bottom of the barrel

yes we lost the first t20 heavily but the series result was still 1-1 and that is what matters , you don't get extra points for margin of victory in bi-lateral series ...

Posted by Biggus on (September 11, 2013, 9:44 GMT)

I suppose you had to expect the English would give us a hard time about Ahmed since many of my fellow countrymen have been unwise enough to bait them in that respect, but it's been going in for a while for us too. Kepler Wessels was one that springs to mind. Clarrie Grimmett was born a Kiwi. Most of the first 'Aus" XI that played the MCC in 1877 were English born. It's never been a big deal to me. Tony Greig was England captain when I was younger and I didn't think it strange. Fawad's an Aussie now as far as I'm concerned and all that matters is whether he's good enough, but all the over the top media hoo haa must make him feel a little nervous. He wouldn't be human if it didn't. He was pretty wayward in control of length the other night and that will have to improve if he's not to be carted around regularly. From what I've seen he looks better on Oz pitches where there's a bit more bounce and zip. Lyon's still my bet for the Ashes and I think he's earned it thus far.

Posted by shane-oh on (September 11, 2013, 9:16 GMT)

@Martin Crowther- I continue to be intrigued by English fans who write Trott off. This is a guy who averages over 51 at a strike rate of 77 in ODIs. Even if that is slightly slow by modern standards, it's hardly terrible - and fits with the English strategy of building a foundation etc perfectly. More to the point, since the start of this year (when the murmuring seems to have increased to a clamour), his numbers are 64 @ 87! Surely, no-one can complain about his contribution? I find it quite strange, as a neutral.

RE the Irish playing for England debate - as has already been pointed out, Australian fans really should keep quiet about that, given the fact they are willing to alter their laws to enable foreigners to play for them. That said, while I don't mind people choosing who to play for when they have options, the Ireland/England situation is making a mockery of the rules. I think a 3rd tier of nations would solve this. i.e. if you play for Ireland, that's it.

Posted by   on (September 11, 2013, 8:46 GMT)

Which team will Score more in the first 15 overs??

Posted by dabhand on (September 11, 2013, 8:45 GMT)

@Dylanyoung - it doesn't matter, what counts is how many are qualified - ALL OF THEM - England just like other countries can only play those who qualify and as has been seen very recently in another country, great efforts can be made to ensure qualification.

Posted by   on (September 11, 2013, 8:40 GMT)

Ppl which team will score more runs in the first 15 overs England or Australia??

Posted by Int.Curator on (September 11, 2013, 8:37 GMT)

@ trav29 on (September 11, 2013, 7:47 GMT)

Australia thrashed England in one of the T20s.

Played below par on the other occasion (no thrashing).

Thrashed england in the only 50 over.

Unfortunately the manner in which England claimed the Ashes will keep materialising in history books and folk law as the flawed DRS series that was cut short by rain, hampered by negative cricket and played by the strongest english team that never was. Unfortunate for the team given their immense talent.

But saying that Australia played the most entertaining cricket and continue to fill small ovals where ever they play.

Posted by milepost on (September 11, 2013, 8:32 GMT)

I think if you are the citizen of a country you can enjoy all the rights that all citizens do. I have no problem with people representing their country, birthplace is irrelevant. I think the real issue is how the boards groom and take players from other nations. If I was Irish, I'd be a little miffed at constantly losing talent to the England and Wales cricket board because I think they should be playing test match cricket. Prior and Strauss weren't born in England but don't tell me they aren't English through and through. KP might be the exception to all of this because he desperately wanted to play for South Africa. However, he's a British Citizen now and fair play to him. I think cricket fans are happy we get to see him play at the highest level.

Posted by jackiethepen on (September 11, 2013, 8:04 GMT)

Brutalanalyst doesn't seem very strong on tactics if he thinks this is a better ODI 11 than the one that beat Australia 4-0 in 2012 and 1-0 in the Champions Trophy. He wanted KP to come out slogging from the start? Perhaps he didn't notice that the Aussies played cautiously as well against the two new white balls. If you lose KP cheaply then that is a foolish price to pay. KP has only ever opened 9 times for England so is not that comfortable against the new ball. It is an experiment. He usually prefers to bat at 4. I would say 3 is the highest he should bat to get the best out of him if you want him to take advantage of a platform. I think England are really looking at Carberry because they might need another good batsman to beef up our Test batting order. If Carbs bats responsibly then he might have a chance.

Posted by   on (September 11, 2013, 8:00 GMT)

How many England-born players are actually in the English cricket team?

Posted by trav29 on (September 11, 2013, 7:47 GMT)

@int.curator so a 1-1 tie in the t20s is a thrashing is it ?

and whether England only won one test convincingly is immaterial given the result was 3-0 ...

Posted by Dadders on (September 11, 2013, 7:35 GMT)

Continues to amuse me when Aussie fans continue to comment on non-England born players being capped by England......meanwhile CA lobbeyed government in Australia for Fawad to be granted permanent residency, and then for a tweak to Federal legislation that would allow his citizenship to be expedited. They even changed their kit for him toi make him happy so he would play for them!

People in glass houses.......

Posted by Int.Curator on (September 11, 2013, 7:22 GMT)

Englands best team.

Who is selected for England will not make any difference to the result if Australia continue to play medium - well.

England has been thrashed in T20 and 50 over and only won one Test convincingly.

I think Australia could raise the bar slightly more. In which England could surpass, only with the fortune and luck continued from the Ashes.

Posted by   on (September 11, 2013, 7:00 GMT)

very good looking aussie team if warner comes in the place of voges that will be a leathel addition. taking fawad in will be the gamble if he starts hitting the right areas too many problems to england for sure . two good sides .. good entertainment ,, england should play with the fiull side cook and bell also includes that would be the clash of titans ... all the best ..............

Posted by BRUTALANALYST on (September 11, 2013, 6:54 GMT)

Will be exciting to see Jordan play hope he has a great debut. I'd rather see Trott rested than Root for common sense and selfish entertainment reasons (providing he doesn't get clean bowled again) he's much more enjoyable to watch. Looking forward to the game I wish people would stop talking about England's selection now talk about beating a dead horse . .

Posted by Biggus on (September 11, 2013, 6:53 GMT)

@Ozcricketwriter:-No game against 'The Old Enemy' is meaningless. Every point we score against the England side before the return Ashes can only be good for a team that's still got a lot of work to do. Our guys will give it everything, just as you'd expect.

Posted by jonesy2 on (September 11, 2013, 6:44 GMT)

well I just looked at this west indian fellow chris jordans profile. goes at 5.5 runs an over in county cricket. England have some very very serious issues, first one is, they have no players to pick from. I knew they lacked a lot of talent but I didn't know it was this bad in terms of just zero depth whatsoever. good times ahead if youre not an England supporter

Posted by jonesy2 on (September 11, 2013, 6:32 GMT)

the ironic thing is that Australia played an allrounder at 8 aswell, its just that australias allrounders can actually bat and bowl

Posted by ThinkingCricket on (September 11, 2013, 6:28 GMT)

XtrafalgarX, you'd be surprised; Alistair Cook is MUCH more effective than you think. England's default strategy of 3 anchormen followed by a number of batsmen who excel at slogging in pressure free situations is remarkably effective, and Cook is essential to that approach.

Posted by prannsshu on (September 11, 2013, 6:25 GMT)

wonder why people commenting on bopara.. whats wrong with you guyzz.. agree he failed with the bat.. yet made it with 2 big wickets and economy below 6.. why you English guyz hate bopara that much... he is performing...

Posted by BRUTALANALYST on (September 11, 2013, 6:12 GMT)

Seriously this for me is the most exciting England ODI 11 in a long time, the first game was lost at toss and following tactics then Kp playing out maiden from Mckays dibly dobly pretty much set the tone when England really needed to come out blazing with 300 to chase but it didn't happen. I believe they can still win the series with this side if they can put that first game behind them.

Posted by   on (September 11, 2013, 6:01 GMT)

Landl47 makes a couple of good points particularly in identifying Australia's weakness in top flight batting. If anything they probably bowled as well as England in the test series and certainly better in this first ODI played. In any cricket, but the one day game in particular, if one allows the opposition to get an unreachable score it doesn't matter how many batsmen there are in the side it remains unreachable against good bowling. Bowlers win cricket matches, even those weighted so heavily in the batsmen's favour. I'm not opposed to rotation or blooding new talent but at this level bit's and pieces players do not fare well and in that I include the 1 in 7 Buttler as we all know who the best keeper/batsman is in England.

Posted by humdrum on (September 11, 2013, 5:46 GMT)

@xtrafalgarx: Bang on. England are hardly likely to set the Thames on fire if Cook is part of the side. He is simply too slow and lacks the dash required.England doesn't have horses for courses, unlike other top teams,who regularly blood players in the shorter formats,and,after due filtration,promote them.Eng are way too conservative and there will soon be a time when too many retirements take place around the same time and there are too few guys with experience around.

Posted by RednWhiteArmy on (September 11, 2013, 5:22 GMT)

Englands 3rd XI v Australia. Not exactly box office stuff.

Posted by Sunil_Batra on (September 11, 2013, 5:11 GMT)

England's batting attack is not as weak as its bowling attack, Swann, Anderson, Broad, Bresnan all missing who were their best 4 bowlers in the test series and my fear is that runs against their second string attack will give us false confidence for the home ashes.

Posted by din7 on (September 11, 2013, 4:45 GMT)

I dont understand whats eng second 11 is! Are eng 1st 11 world champions? they couldn't even win CT despite havin great chance.. their batting is still the same..its just their bowling has weaken with no anderson, broad...tredwell is their first choice spinner in ODIs because ha's performed better than swan in odis.. and bell wont find place in this battin line up with KP replacin him..also rankin has performed as well as broad would have..so the difference really is cook(battin and captaincy), anderson and their isnt much difference with him gettin older dont expect him to play in all odis..so their really isnt much difference..so eng fans stop giving excuses eng 1st11 wont perform better.....For aus this is their best 11 for odis with warner replacin marsh...well can some1 explain how marsh gets place in this side..he's all over..dont ever slect him again..plz

Posted by xtrafalgarx on (September 11, 2013, 3:54 GMT)

The problem for England is that, this team is HARDLY second string to be honest. Cook wouldn't add much to the One day team, so I would have thought : Bell, Pietersen, Trott, Root, Morgan, Bopara is their best one day top 6. That's only one person missing from this current top 6 this series.

As for the bowlers, Anderson, Broad, Swann, Bresnan are all very good, but the thing is, these are the same bowlers you look to use in not only one dayers, but tests and T20's. That's a lack of depth for me, in fact, barring Jos Butler, Bopara and Morgan, all the rest of your one day players are the same as the tests, compared to Australia only Clarke and Watson are in the first choice test side. Fast forward a couple of years, a couple of your players will be feeling the pinch and will have to move on, Giles is doing a good job and blooding these guys now.

Posted by   on (September 11, 2013, 3:13 GMT)

What I found pleasing, and has been overlooked, is it wasn't just the second stringers who underperformed. Steven Finn, who I hear endlessly about for his supposedly vicious pace and swing and has played as first pick test bowler in even the recent Ashes, was hit all round the park. Joe Root looked as feeble as he did in the tests, unable to even capitalize on being given a life early. Jonathon Trott troubled Johnson even less than he did the scorers. All the England stalwarts are vulnerable and I'm still yet to be impressed by England's 'incredible depth' that I was hearing about endlessly before the Ashes.

Posted by MinusZero on (September 11, 2013, 3:08 GMT)

If the selectors were realistic, that would realise that if Mitchell Johnson or anyone performs against a half strength England team, it should have no bearing on the test side. ODI and Tests are very different beasts.

Posted by   on (September 10, 2013, 23:57 GMT)

How on earth do Irish players qualify to play for ENGLAND? Australia should look at recruiting Brendan mccullum. Can some one explain this to me?

Posted by Mindmeld on (September 10, 2013, 23:38 GMT)

Rotating players is problematic. We saw this with Australia last season. Every time Aust made big changes without reason they got thrashed. Rotation just destroys team harmony. Aust thrashed SL in the tests last year then massacred them by about 200 runs in the first ODI. Then the Inveratity brains trust decided to change 50% of the team and SL won, and the entire momentum of the summer changed. SL won 4 of the next five short format games. Dumberer and dumbererer.

Good luck to Eng here. They'll need it.

AUS were just damn unlucky in the CT. Never had a chance after just one loss, thanks to rain and other teams winning shortened games.

I think Aust would be better with Hughes or Warner, and minus Voges - unless the pitch and weather provide difficult batting conditions. Marsh is also dodgy at this level. Not sure what he has done to deserve a place in the team. Hughes' record is way better.

Posted by Ozcricketwriter on (September 10, 2013, 22:27 GMT)

Well done Australia on beating an England Second XI to record your first international win for the tour, in a match that nobody watched. While it would be statistically exciting to see Australia win two in a row, and it may help with momentum, I think all but the most ardent cricket fan knows that this is a meaningless ODI.

Posted by JG2704 on (September 10, 2013, 20:52 GMT)

@drpramit on (September 10, 2013, 19:25 GMT) 1 - Have you actually seen Prior's ODI/T20 record for England? 2- When is the next WC? - Surely it's better to look at future players now. Swann and KP would obviously be shoe ins in any Eng side but both are getting on and the latter is so injury prone these days - in fact both are

Posted by JG2704 on (September 10, 2013, 20:51 GMT)

So Jamie Overton is back in the squad then? It was extremely kind of England to release him for the YB40 semi final - a competition where he had been usually going for 9rpo - but I think Somerset would have preferred him to be available for the key relegation dogfight game vs Surrey. Maybe they can turn his head like they have Jos and start looking at finding him another county (for if/when Somerset go down) citing that it will help him play for England , like Jos was told similar re keeping wicket. Still at least they have a record of backing Somerset players when out of form - like Nick and Craig

Posted by drpramit on (September 10, 2013, 19:25 GMT)

Problem with eng is that they are too happy in celebrating ashes victory that they hardly care about odi . Yes test match is the true cricket , no doubt , but winning a World cup & that too in aus is the best thing one can think about. they should keep on concentrating upon cook root trott kp bell morgan prior this is the best 7 for them & best 4 bowlers are broad anderson swann & bresnan/finn. play with best 11 instead of bopara n all

Posted by Cpt.Meanster on (September 10, 2013, 17:59 GMT)

If England persist with their experiments, they will continue to lose. Of course their fans will shrug off the losses cause they won the Ashes. But when the World Cup arrives, all these losses will play heavily on England's mind. My suggestion is England should always play their best XI and then test youngsters once the series is won. It's exactly what India's champion ODI side is doing. They look to win the series with their best team and then experiment with the bench. Having said that, England will look to come back into this series and they have a few players still who can win games for them in this squad.

Posted by andrew27994 on (September 10, 2013, 16:41 GMT)

A lot of interesting arguments were made about which format of cricket is the best. In my opinion, Test cricket would be the best format. The only problem I have with Tests is when the matches are played on roads thereby resulting in draws. As long as we have a result in 4/5 days I won't complain. ODIs are also pretty good to watch but the new rules implemented are creating too many complications in that format as pointed out by MS Dhoni before the Champions Trophy. As far as T20s are concerned, I feel that the format always advantages the team chasing and the results are highly influenced by the pitches. There is little competition between bat and ball.

Posted by ScottStevo on (September 10, 2013, 16:30 GMT)

I don't know why people keep harping on about a disappointing champions trophy. We lost the first game and due to the second one being washed out and a bizarre game within the group, it left us with a 3rd game nigh on impossible of qualifying from. If England wish to rest players and try out some other options, that's their prerogative, not an excuse. Aus did the same thing a year or so ago and disastrously lost 4-0. Didn't hear anyone saying we'd only lost because of our experimentation - and rightly so, nobody would've cared either. Also, after 1 win, it's a bold statement claiming we've seen Lehmann's masterplan! Let's see the squad he's involved in selecting for the return series...

Posted by   on (September 10, 2013, 15:38 GMT)

In ODI cricket we rely too much on Cook,Bell,Pietersen and Trott. England and South Africa A Trotts problem is he scores too slow and when he tries to up the run rate he gets out because its not his natural game. Nick Knight who was terrible in test cricket (played all around his front pad and poking and prodding outside the off stump) was great at ODI cricket as his 40 average with the bat showed. Even though his average is good Trott is a test match specialist as his limited scoring areas and low strike rate puts too much pressure on the rest of the batsmen coming in. His partners have to score quciker earlier than they should because Trott gets bogged down when the opposition captain sets a defensive leg side field to him. Pietersen has the talent the shots etc but his ego gets to him and gets out. Bopara who england need him to score against a good team gets out tamely. Then we are in the mire when Butler has to bat for more than 10 overs.

Posted by   on (September 10, 2013, 15:29 GMT)

England were a bowler or 2 short in the recent ODI against Australia. Relying on Bopara's dibbly dobblys, Root and Stokes to cover 20 overs without a pasting was too much. More so in ODIs we need to play 5 outright bowlers if we cant find an all-rounder as its the only way we can restrict teams down to low scores. Pietersen at the top of the order doesnt settle well as the middle order looks vunerable to collapse. When Bresnan is fit and everybody has come back from their rest period the ODI team should be...

Cook Bell Pietersen Root Morgan/Ballance Foster (wkt) Bresnan Broad Swann Finn Anderson

The last time we played the 5 bowlers mentioned above in an ODI it was against the west Indies in 2012 and we won the match. The Batting may look a batsman light but the batsmen have to do the job. There's no reason that the unit cant bat out 50 overs when you have Bresnan broad and swann who can all bat. Bopara has shown when it really matters he fails with the bat which he's needed for.

Posted by vrn59 on (September 10, 2013, 15:21 GMT)

I like this Australian ODI team. Even if they lose tomorrow in Birmingham, these players must be backed for the World Cup. My AUS ODI XI: Finch, Marsh, Watson, Clarke (C), Bailey, Voges (pity he can't bat higher), Wade (wk), Faulkner, Johnson, McKay, Ahmed / Doherty, 12th man: Warner.

My AUS Test XI: Warner, Rogers, Watson, Clarke (C), Smith, Hughes, Haddin (wk), Johnson, Harris, Siddle, Lyon, 12th man: Faulkner.

My AUS T20 XI: Warner, Finch, Marsh, Watson, Bailey (C), Wade (wk), Faulkner, Johnson, Starc, McKay, Ahmed, 12th man: Coulter-Nile.

Posted by 2.14istherunrate on (September 10, 2013, 15:19 GMT)

Given that the full ODI side lost the last 2 post Ashes series 6-1 there is a vague air of absurdity in putting greater expectations on this experimental XI though I suspect they will win a game or two. Why would one not want to see a few of the future players given a chance. I suspect though that Morgan would like a genuine 3rd seamer at his disposal. That Tredwell was the most expensive bowler says nothing about the seamers. Maybe Onions or another control bowler should have been present, but the suggested above with Jordan will do me. Dropping Root? Who else? Bopara? No. Trott? No. Carberry? Well, why is he there if not in the XI. Hopefully we will do better by batting first. but let us enjoy the process of blooding new players in these games.

Posted by YorkerStump on (September 10, 2013, 15:04 GMT)

Rankin has done pretty well so far and I hope England stick with him in the ODI formats. We do need however, some serious bowlers that can bowl hostile spells. Finn I don't mind keeping, though he hasn't been himself lately. Hopefully he can get back into the zone and rediscover his mojo. Chris Jordan would be awesome to try out but he needs to make a serious mark because most of the debutantes as of late, have not made much of an impression.

England should have one thing on their mind and that is to be ruthless. They need to be tactical in the field and wreak havoc on the opposition with their bowling, followed by demolishing their bowlers. Stand and deliver England...stand and deliver.

Comments have now been closed for this article

Email Feedback Print
Alan GardnerClose
Tour Results
England v Australia at Southampton - Sep 16, 2013
Australia won by 49 runs
England v Australia at Cardiff - Sep 14, 2013
England won by 3 wickets (with 3 balls remaining)
England v Australia at Birmingham - Sep 11, 2013
No result
England v Australia at Manchester - Sep 8, 2013
Australia won by 88 runs
England v Australia at Leeds - Sep 6, 2013
Match abandoned without a ball bowled
More results »
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days