whats Shane Warne talking about

Ifnengland can get there 4 best bowlers on the pitch then good luck to anyone scoring 300 plus.

 

Re: what you talking about Willis

Classic googly from Hemsworth, asks a question about batsmen which turns out to be a bowling question.....top class spin

 

Unfortunately for you, you're wrong.

Runs per 100 balls

Cook: 78.26
Bell: 74.96
Trott: 76.14

As a comparison:

Gayle: 84.06
Dhoni: 88.27
Kholi: 85.87

Gayle opens the batting and despite his reputation as the biggest hitter in world cricket only scores 6 runs more than Trott over the course of 100 balls. Dhoni and Kholi, both knows for this big hitting in the middle order, where you'd expect them to accelerate more, score not considerably more. Go look at others and you'll find all three are more than a match for other batsmen in the same position in the top 3. If one of Trott, Cook or Bell bats for 40 overs and they have people playing around them, then we'll most likely set a decent total.

The early stages of ODI's are still very much about building a platform for the middle order. They aren't expected to score at a particularly fast rate and all 3 of those English batsmen do more than enough. Trott does that averaging 52.00(!!), only a handful of players do that in world cricket. You might argue Bell and Cook's averages aren't high enough, both just under 40, but then Gayle has roughly the same average. Trott at all levels of the game scores heavily. I'd take those runs over someone who scores a fraction quicker but doesn't get anywhere near his batting average.

England's problem is the middle order where they've typically floundered after a solid start, or collapse after a poor one. Buttler showed a glimpse of how it should be done the other week against NZ, but the problem is they are all too inconsistent. But he did show that you only need a good 5-10 overs at the end and you can easily take a good total to a very good one. The longer you hit out, the more likely you are to lose wickets. Keep wickets in hand and play the last 10 overs like a 20/20 game. Sound tactics in my opinion.

 

Only a handful of players who get close to scoring at a run a ball and only one opening batsman who does it, Sehwag.

India have played knocking on 800 ODI games and only 70 or so times scored over 300. A majority of them were on flat subcontinent wickets, so although 300 is a reachable total, it's still a good score to defend on most pitches.

 

Well said Watcher of the skies.

I'm not sure were its come from that you have to score 300 plus in 50 over cricket.

 

There's been over 3,300 ODI games and only 46 times has a team batting first and scored over 300 lost the game. Only 4 of those happened on English soil.

Stats dont lie.

 

It's good.
I've already said in this thread. England should be thinking they can defend 270/280.

 

Ireland scored over 300 to beat England in last world Cup with their best side, the game has changed 2 power plays 2 new balls smaller boundaries and heavier bats . On most occasions 300 would be a winning score but 260 would not. Just for interest what is Hamish Amlas strike rate? I saw Sri Lanka score 270 in less than 40 overs to beat England a few years ago when Jayasuira and Dilshaan regularly scored at more than a run a ball and Chris Gayle can belt the new ball when in the mood.

 

You don't, especially on English wickets. Today England got a decent platform and wobbled a bit in the middle order, but Bopara's 46 from 37 balls (and a useful 19* from Bresnan) was the difference.

 

Any of these games in ENGLAND.

Also England aren't the same team as 2011. Things have changed. We'll see on Tuesday but Dilshaan will be lucky to tee off against the English team now.

Also in 2011 and the same against Sri Lanka, England got stuck by ok at best spinners. Hopefully they have learnt. Ali Cook who's learnt a lot about one day cricket in recent years didn't play then.

 

All true, but you're talking about relatively rare exceptions to the rule.. Dilshan's strike rate: 86.00 at an average of 36.00 over 200 innings.

Amla has an excellent record. SR of 91.35 at an average of 56.00.

 

Yes Sri Lanka scored 270 plus in 39 0vers at Headingley . the oval and Trent Bridge as well as Soutampton are high scoring grounds kiwis scored 360 last Sunday including 132 in last 10 overs with Anderson Swann and Bresnan bowling . India have scored over 300 twice in last week . Cook Bell and Trott are decent test match players but you need boundary hitters early on with fielding restrictions. The biggest concern for England is Eoin Morgans poor form . England have a chance but Indias middle order is awesome.

 

Wrong

Sent from my helicopter

 

Due to rule changes those stats will start to crumble and you will see much higher totals. As weve seen in the past few weeks since they came in.

Thanks for showing that the stats for sr proved me right though, twas nice to show that they are all far below the rest of the world. The difference between winning and losing can be around 20 runs for various reasons so cheers for that.

 

I reckon ar phil should be a pundit on Sky instead of Warne.

 

am going to have a guess at crocodile dundee, do i win ?

 

to catch naughty criminals like the joker and the riddler

 

Just put cricket on and i see Sri lanka are scoring at around 3.3 a over from 16/17 overs.

300 pffffffffffft haha

 

Most sensible post in this thread, especially compared with drivel a lot of people have come out with. Arguing for argument's sake and making themselves look silly.

The Aussie bowling attack is much better than their batting which is awful, especially with Clarke out. As long as we didn't lose early wickets and risk being bowled out for a very low score, we were always going to be in with a great chance of winning this game. The top three set the foundations and even with Morgan and Buttler not managing to have the desired impact, the score was still far too high for the Aussies. England proved they got their tactics spot on.

It may not work every game but I don't expect England to play like that every game. It just shows that Giles and the England selectors know a little bit more about their team that Warne does. I find all these posts targeting Hemsworth for claiming that Warne was wrong pretty ironic, when they themselves were rubbishing Giles and England's tactics. I hold Giles' opinion, who works with the team day in, day out, in higher regard than Warne's, and so it proved to be correct to do so.

 

They do play like that every game though, thats the point. Ill hold my hands up when england do something in the one day game.