England world cup squad

HeroHurley

Goalkeeper
Right decisions made. Archer was always going to be involved and Willey showed nothing yesterday in the big chance to impress.
 

hudson88

Striker
Completely disagree with Willeys omission like. He offers us something completely different.

Was always going to be incredibly harsh on whoever missed out
 

SAFC 83

Midfield
Completely disagree with Willeys omission like. He offers us something completely different.

Was always going to be incredibly harsh on whoever missed out
I'd have agreed with this a year or so ago but I feel he's not getting the swing he used to at the start of the innings and isn't quite as effective anymore.

In the end I feel it will have been a decision between him Wood and Plunkett and unfortunately Willey would be the one I would leave out. As you say though a really difficult choice and harsh as hell on Willey whose been an important part of this team for years now.
 

hudson88

Striker
I'd have agreed with this a year or so ago but I feel he's not getting the swing he used to at the start of the innings and isn't quite as effective anymore.

In the end I feel it will have been a decision between him Wood and Plunkett and unfortunately Willey would be the one I would leave out. As you say though a really difficult choice and harsh as hell on Willey whose been an important part of this team for years now.
Would have been Curran for me, which again would have been harsh
 
I think leaving Willey out is the wrong call, personally, but it is a very hard call to make. I'm not sure Archer deserves to be picked over him on the strength of 22 overs in international cricket, but equally I'm not sure leaving him out would have been correct either. I think I'd have probably taken a chance on the two spinners staying fit and in form and picked Willey instead of Dawson.
 
I think leaving Willey out is the wrong call, personally, but it is a very hard call to make. I'm not sure Archer deserves to be picked over him on the strength of 22 overs in international cricket, but equally I'm not sure leaving him out would have been correct either. I think I'd have probably taken a chance on the two spinners staying fit and in form and picked Willey instead of Dawson.
Agree with this. Very harsh on Willey who's performed well over the last couple of years and gives us variety as a left-armer. Dawson has effectively been picked in case of an injury to either spin option rather than on him being one of the best 15, and whilst I can see the merits of having cover, I'd have risked Ali and Rashid staying fit, with Root as a part-time third spinning option because even without one of the spinners, we'd be likely to have 6 bowlers anyway.

Roy
Bairstow
Root
Morgan
Stokes
Buttler
Ali
Woakes
Curran
Plunkett
Wood/Archer

This would be the starting XI for arguments sake if Rashid was injured, still no definite need for Dawson IMO. Would have preferred to have kept Willey in the side in case we rocked up one morning and it was going to swing early on.
 
Agree with this. Very harsh on Willey who's performed well over the last couple of years and gives us variety as a left-armer. Dawson has effectively been picked in case of an injury to either spin option rather than on him being one of the best 15, and whilst I can see the merits of having cover, I'd have risked Ali and Rashid staying fit, with Root as a part-time third spinning option because even without one of the spinners, we'd be likely to have 6 bowlers anyway.

Roy
Bairstow
Root
Morgan
Stokes
Buttler
Ali
Woakes
Curran
Plunkett
Wood/Archer

This would be the starting XI for arguments sake if Rashid was injured, still no definite need for Dawson IMO. Would have preferred to have kept Willey in the side in case we rocked up one morning and it was going to swing early on.
Agreed on all points. Root as the third spin option would have been fine by me, and I don't see the need for Dawson, particularly when his inclusion has denied Willey a place.

If nothing else, then for the sake of squad harmony - although I see that is being downplayed by the selectors;- they do seem a very well knit group who appear to have accepted Archer, so maybe it isn't an issue - with the fine margins involved in elite sport, I think it is an important factor and I'd have made sure Willey was in.

In fact none of the squad who have contributed so well to us becoming the best side in the world deserve to miss out in my view.


I'm not keen on the hype around Archer to be honest.

As Nasser said this morning, they determined after the last WC that if they were to become successful and win a tournament, going forward they needed pace, a mystery/wrist spin option and a left arm seamer.

That has been the blueprint and it's worked very well, yet at the last minute they've discarded the left arm variation for another right arm quick, a relatively inexperienced one at that, albeit he does look promising.
 
Agreed on all points. Root as the third spin option would have been fine by me, and I don't see the need for Dawson, particularly when his inclusion has denied Willey a place.

If nothing else, then for the sake of squad harmony - although I see that is being downplayed by the selectors;- they do seem a very well knit group who appear to have accepted Archer, so maybe it isn't an issue - with the fine margins involved in elite sport, I think it is an important factor and I'd have made sure Willey was in.

In fact none of the squad who have contributed so well to us becoming the best side in the world deserve to miss out in my view.


I'm not keen on the hype around Archer to be honest.

As Nasser said this morning, they determined after the last WC that if they were to become successful and win a tournament, going forward they needed pace, a mystery/wrist spin option and a left arm seamer.

That has been the blueprint and it's worked very well, yet at the last minute they've discarded the left arm variation for another right arm quick, a relatively inexperienced one at that, albeit he does look promising.
I'm been a little uncomfortable with the Archer hype too tbh. He's got plenty of potential no doubt, but it's gone a bit OTT in the media based on a few overs. I don't think he's bowled a full 10 yet has he? It's been made out like he was a must pick for this tournament but I'm not sure he's going to make the impact people think he will.
 
I'm been a little uncomfortable with the Archer hype too tbh. He's got plenty of potential no doubt, but it's gone a bit OTT in the media based on a few overs. I don't think he's bowled a full 10 yet has he? It's been made out like he was a must pick for this tournament but I'm not sure he's going to make the impact people think he will.
Yeah, spot on. He might blow batsmen away and be just what we need to win the thing but I think it’s equally, if not more likely he won’t live up the hype.

Paddy Power has him at 18/1 to be man of the tournament which I can’t decide if it says everything, or is actually value!

It feels to me like the media are setting expectations unrealistically high as they usually do with our national sides around tournaments, and as usual we’ll gloriously fail to meet them, yet all the while there is something about this side and their achievements which is so far from the usual that if makes me feel that this time may just be different.

I can’t wait anyway.

No arguments. Willy blows hot and cold with the ball and has done nothing with the bat. Denly is just not very good.
Harsh to say he’s done nothing with the bat, he’s made some valuable contributions over the last couple of years.
 

Top