England are coming back to the field in ODIs, with patchy results since their 2019 World Cup triumph, including four losses in their past five matches.
Since the World Cup, England have lost a home series to Australia, drew a series with South Africa, dropped a match to Ireland, and are now 0-1 down in India after their batting fell apart on Tuesday.
England were 0-135, chasing 318, before they lost 5-41 as India’s bowlers strangled their middle order and won them the match.
The English side will only just hold on to their number one ranking if they lose the final two matches of their current series, moving to 120 ranking points ahead of India (119) and New Zealand (118).
England were the world’s best team in the four years between the 2015 World Cup and the 2019 version, marginally ahead of India.
Perhaps partly due to a lack of ODI cricket – they’ve played just 10 matches in the last 20 months – England don’t look the same side.
(Photo by Alex Davidson/Getty Images)
Australia proved England are far from unstoppable in this format by beating them 2-1 in the UK six months ago. In that series, Australia looked buried at 5-73 chasing 303 in the decider. But Glenn Maxwell (108) and Alex Carey (106) shocked England with an incredible stand of 212 from just 30 overs.
Australia have, to an extent, turned the tables on England in 50-over cricket, having beaten them in four of their last six matches, including a World Cup warm-up game. England, of course, won by far the most important of these encounters – the World Cup semi-final when they thrashed the Aussies.
But it is clear the once-yawning gulf between England and Australia in one day cricket has closed considerably. India, meanwhile, could soon steal England’s mantle as the world’s best ODI team. They have been hot on England’s tail over the past five years.
The difference now, though, is England haven’t unearthed any new ODI stars in recent times, aside from Archer who debuted nearly two years ago. Otherwise, the key members of the English team are all veterans – Eoin Morgan, Joe Root, Jason Roy, Jonny Bairstow, Ben Stokes, Jos Buttler, Adil Rashid and Chris Woakes.
Conversely, India have a production line of precocious talents. Barely a series goes past, in any of the three formats, that India don’t seem to unearth another young player of rare ability.
Combined with their bevvy of proven ODI stars – Virat Kohli, Rohit Sharma, Shikhar Dhawan, Hardik Pandya, Jasprit Bumrah, Mohammed Shami, Ravindra Jadeja, Kuldeep Yadav, Bhuvneshwar Kumar – this places India in a commanding position. Particularly given the next one day World Cup will be held in India in 2023.
India’s bowling stocks, in particular, have become remarkably impressive. They now boast a battery of fine quicks as well as extraordinarily deep spin reserves. Yadav, Jadeja, Yuzvendra Chahal, Washington Sundar and the rarely-used Ravi Ashwin give India five fine spin options in ODIs.
By comparison, England’s bowling depth is poor. These are the career ODI bowling averages of England’s six-man attack they fielded against India – Moeen Ali (51), Sam Curran (43), Tom Curran (40), Ben Stokes (40), Mark Wood (39) and Adil Rashid (32).
While Rashid’s numbers don’t do him justice – he’s become a high-quality ODI spinner – the rest of that group are rank ordinary ODI bowlers.
In a very short space of time, England have become heavily dependent on Jofra Archer in white ball cricket.
That physical burden is already weighing on Archer, who was rested from this ODI series and may also miss the upcoming Indian Premier League due to an injury of his bowling elbow that’s been hampering him for 18 months.
Without Archer, the England ODI attack badly lacks penetration. Fellow express quick Mark Wood is meant to be the alternative strike weapon. But six years into his ODI career he looks no closer to achieving that goal, with a career strike rate of 42.
That pales in comparison to the strike rates of Aussie quicks Mitchell Starc (27), Pat Cummins (33), Josh Hazlewood (33) and even Kane Richardson (33).
To remain the undisputed number one ODI side, England badly need to unearth a second quality spinner to support Rashid and at least one or two more good quicks. If they don’t, India look likely to end England’s era of ODI pre-eminence.
deepoz
Roar Rookie
England will remain one of the teams to beat on the subcontinent. Their performance in just concluded ODI series in India was terrific. I reckon in Rashid they have a match winner. Mark Wood with his pace was quite impressive. With Archer, Curren and Stokes they have a decent balance. Their batting at the tip is explosive. Need a couple more finishes like stokes. I think the wickets we saw in Pune and Ahmedabad in the white ball series are like what we will see in the world cup also ; they definitely bounced more than I have seen before in India. Spinners will need to be very accurate and hope they blown in the first half. It will help to have a good pace attack. England definitely will have a chance if their batters don't lose form by that time..
raz
Guest
India was missing jadeja,bumrah and shami and not pllaying sky is a deliberate handicap ,players missing is never an excuse.
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
But if my model was followed, there's no reason they couldn't be included in their stats.
Gonzo99
Roar Rookie
I'd say that any runs and wickets in super overs shouldn't be on official ODI records. I don't really have any logic behind that, to be honest. Just doesn't feel like they should since the super over is just a mechanism to decide a tie, even though they'd be very important runs.
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
You can't score the most runs if you don't keep wickets suitably in hand.
Micko
Roar Rookie
Well that's not fair. The premise of limited overs cricket is about scoring the most runs, not how many wickets in hand, at the end of the allotted period of overs. How the runs are achieved (except the farcical boundary countback at WC2019 :sick: :sick: :sick: :thumbdown: ), or how many wickets a side lost to achieve those runs is irrelevant.
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
Then there is the matter of stats: does a batsman who is dismissed twice, or dismissed once and then makes runs, does that go on his official ODI record?
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
But it should be an extension of the game in extenuating circumstances.
Micko
Roar Rookie
The super over is a tie breaker to resolve the match, so you have all players available. What happened in the game is irrelevant as the game was tied. It's NOT a continuation of the game, but a tie breaker to settle the result.
Gonzo99
Roar Rookie
Yeah, ODI’s are one innings, but I think of the super over as an extra mini game, so I’ve no problem with putting in your best two batsmen if they were out in the main innings. If a bowler has bowled all of his allotted ten overs, should he not be allowed to bowl the super over? I reckon you put in your best 2 bats and your best bowler. The question for that final is what would happen in the 2nd super over (that should have happened)? I’d say that anyone who bowled or batted the first is not allowed to bat or bowl in subsequent super overs. Regardless of whether they were out or not in the first one.
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
Limited overs cricket is one innings. Nobody should get to bat twice, nor bowl more than a normal allotment of overs. A super over, should be an extension of the innings, not a new innings. Yes, in the original maximum overs they spread their wickets how they see fit, but in the event of a tie, with one team 6 down, the other 9, it is more than reasonable to assume that the team 6 down would last longer than the team 9 down, irrespective of how many overs their maximum overs gets extended by. This is the only real sane way of handling the super over. Also, it should only be invoked in semi-finals and finals, or in deciding matches in bi-lateral series. On the other hand, if a game is tied with one team 7 down, the other 9, and the team 9 down gets a hattrick in the super over without addition and then that last pair not out in the original innings get a single, or a bowler who hasn’t finished his 10 bowls a wide, then so be it. That’s a well deserved win.
Neil Back
Roar Rookie
Oh dear.
Micko
Roar Rookie
I think just continue the super overs? The super over concept is fantastic. The idea at stopping at one if tied, then having some arbitrary measure (like most boundaries) to declare a winner is just silly.
Gonzo99
Roar Rookie
I hadn't seen that. What'll happen next time? Another super over?
Micko
Roar Rookie
Exactly! Baffling they stop after one super over and declare the tournament winner on some arbitrary measure like ” most boundaries scored”. Thankfully they’ve removed that provision now. :thumbup:
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
But they did not win world cup.
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
Nationality of recognising an English win in 2019 world cup has no rationality.
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
I don’t say no to that either – to a certain degree.
Neil Back
Roar Rookie
Rationality needs no nationality. Prejudice always does.
Gonzo99
Roar Rookie
I don't buy your theory about wickets in hand. You get ten wickets and 50 overs to score the most runs. You use your wickets how you see fit. My question now is the same as it was on the day - After the first "super over" was tied, why don't we just have another one? And keep going till there's not a tie. You know, until someone has won ...