Watching the opening one-day international the other day I had the feeling that I had seen all of this before.
Not the tourists getting a good hammering (hopefully that should prevent any comments to that end, fingers crossed) but the way they went about their business, and primarily with the approach of the respective top orders.
In the 50-over format I’m not sure that there is a great deal between the two sides, but I’m talking about from the top three down.
At the risk of simplifying the argument, England are employing a tactic that, especially in the southern hemisphere, is outdated and if a first World Cup success is really their ultimate aim, will put a real downer on their chances.
The Swann household first had satellite television in 1992 with the dish being installed in time for the start of the World Cup on Australian and New Zealand soil.
Giving the highlights shows a wide berth, the Swann brothers routinely spent half the night on the couch watching the carnival unfold and I can still recall, with some clarity, players such as Mark Greatbatch, Brian Lara, Jonty Rhodes, Wasim Akram and Neil Fairbrother to name a few, strutting their stuff.
But even though that was only two decades in the past, the 50-over format nowadays is another game entirely with the batting side of things taking on a far more aggressive manner.
No longer do players seek to emulate the likes of Geoff Marsh or Andrew Hudson by batting through the innings, hoping to make a century or fractionally more while those at the other end made the most of the platform created.
The principle of doubling whatever has been posted by the 30th over may ring true to some degree, but it is the way sides choose to get there which has altered dramatically.
And this is where England are living in the past.
For the 2007 World Cup in the Caribbean, the English opted to revert to this style after a few failed attempts at a more aggressive mindset and it just didn’t work.
With no Marcus Trescothick, the one player who could marry a decent technique with the ability to score quickly, out of the equation, circumspection was preferred to adventure with the outcome being all too predictable.
Skip forward almost seven years to the encounter at the MCG the other day and it was clear to see that not a great deal has changed.
Alastair Cook and Ian Bell are fine players, albeit in no kind of form, however, the chances of them supplying consistently explosive starts are very slim.
Add to the mix Joe Root, again a good batsman in his own right, but a mirror of the aforementioned pair and issues are being formed where they needn’t be.
This trio aren’t beyond providing a base for a strong total and given enough opportunity such instances will present themselves, yet it isn’t too difficult to come to the conclusion that England are, for want of a better description, pissing into the wind.
Cricket, especially in this format, has moved on and England need to move with the times, they only have to look at the top three fielded by Australia to see what one-day cricket in 2014 is all about.
Powerful, aggressive boundary hitting is the modus operandi of the better sides and while perfect emulation is often tricky to apply, a few pointers can at least be taken.
David Warner, whose batting I’m grudgingly admiring more and more, and Aaron Finch are, in a nutshell, the template for an opening partnership.
Force versus guile if you like and any law of averages would suggest, if the individual players are good enough, that the former will better the latter.
Fifty-over cricket, with the change in rules, provides a 10-over powerplay at the start of an innings and, with wickets in hand, the equivalent for the final 15 overs.
To clog us forty per-cent of these is either stubborn or foolhardy and if England want to make their mark then this attitude has to fall by the wayside.
A case can be made in England when two new balls, in early season at least, necessitate some degree of caution, but everywhere else demands pro-action as opposed to reaction.
To stick is to to invite stagnation and should the status quo persist, the World Cup in a year’s time won’t be where England rule the roost.
Mits
Guest
Agree, can't see what England have to lose by playing Wright, Hales, Lumb, Kieswetter. The upside if one finds form and confidence is massive compared to the potential downside of losing the current series which in the big scheme of English cricket looking forward, is worthless. The selectors must have an approach with one eye firmly on the World Cup and playing these guys who although have been tried and haven't succeeded in the past, nevertheless have the potential to become great players. Similar to Andrew Symonds in 2003; had Australia not persisted with someone who was an obvious talent, we would not have had one of the world''s best ODI players for the preceding 5 years
Brian
Guest
Bell's out of form but if he is on song I assume the plan is Bell opening with KP at 3. I reckon they should give Lumb a go in ODI
The Bush
Roar Guru
The ODI format changed forever thanks to Sri Lanka in the Tri Series prior to the '96 World Cup and then at the '96 World Cup. The approach now has to be an aggressive attack in the first 10 overs (it used to be 15 under those fielding restrictions), followed by a run-a-ball approach from 11 to 35 and then ending with a big hit out with the fielding restrictions again. England's top 3 simply aren't capable of delivering this platform. It's quite simply really and the fact that international coaches don't realise this is amazing.
DJW
Guest
Broad is being rested for the first two ODI's but normally would be in the team. I can't see why England picked Root in the odi side. Does he usually score quickly? 3 from 23 really put England in a hole. If Peterson come's in for Bell and when Broad comes back England already look stronger. I wonder if guys like Wright, Hales or Kieswetter are in the picture or seen as 20-20 specialists? Australia will be stronger with Johnson back today. Interesting to see if they play Pattinson as well. Would very very tough to drop Mckay. Cmon Aussies
mickywoolyams
Guest
I couldn't believe England's selection for the first ODI. After all the talk about it being a new squad, they win the toss and the top 3 are Cook, Bell and Root - three players who lost all form in the test matches. The play of these guys (apart form Bell who was ok) really set the ODI team off on the same path as the test team. Most of the fresh players looked in pretty good touch, and there are a few others smacking it around in the BBL. I also wondered why Broad is not in the ODI team. It must be his foot, becasue he would definitely imporve the attack.
Dizzy Tangles
Guest
KP should open the batting for England in short formats. He's the only really destructive batsmen they have
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
The ideal top 3 is batsmen who can hit boundaries and then be good enough to knock the ball around and run hard once the field goes out, while still finding the boundary when possible. Effectively, if you don't have the ability to clear the boundary with a number of different shots there isn't a lot of room for you in a 50-over team at all (despite the fact that there are a number of such players even playing T20 cricket in the BBL, most playing for the Thunder). You certainly can't afford Joe Root coming out and scoring 3 from 23 balls and things like that unless he then follows that up with 50 off his next 20 balls smashing it all over the place, and he really doesn't appear to be that type of player. Send Cook and Root home, give them a holiday. They are broken batsmen at the moment and just need to get away from cricket for a while. Then replace them with some guys currently playing in the BBL.
TheTruth
Guest
Agree, these days with the rules as they are I would say that two of your top three batsmen need to be power hitters. Their ability to take the game away from the opposition in the first 10-15 overs is priceless. Same in the six and seven position for finishing a game off. I think Root has been messed around too much in the batting order and now has no idea as to his role. Would be in England's best interests to send him home and recuperate. Maybe look at bringing Stokes up to 3, if he feels he is up to it and getting Luke Wright (who has he annoyed at ECB?) in to partner Cook, with Bell at 4and slot Ballance,Bopara and Morgan down one spot each. Another issue is their bowling attack, for mine it is way too 'samey' being filled with RH medium-medium fast. They need to unearth something different whether it be a LH'er or a flat out fast bowler. Plus the bloody big gap left by a world class spinner. Quite frankly, if I were the ECB, I would be contacing GS to see if his elbow/arm(?) was up for the 50 over game and give him a more fitting swannsong (sorry could not help myself)