India's Way vs England's Method - Which is more effective in ODIs?

[jnaveen1980]

ENGLAND'S WAY

Post 2015 world cup, England decided , best way to win the world cup is load the side with batsmen who show positive intent and keep going after bowling until the last man is out. Most probably inspired by NZ/Australia approach in 2015 world cup. Kinda worked for them so far (except in CT2017) They managed to steam roll under-strength Aussies and few other teams. They were convinced that is the most fool-proof way to win the world cup. They are still sticking to it. Stokes was even doubling it up by supporting England's new way.

INDIA'S WAY

Post 2017 CT final where they suffered two defeats where on both occasions Indian team was unable to control the play during middle overs. There was no body they could turn to take wickets. Kohli decided wristies are the way to go. He added them to the squad. Later on Shami carried his test form into ODI. Gradually India was building a powerful bowling unit albeit at the expense of long tail


Which WAY is the fool proof way?

 

[Bhaijaan]

Go Pakistan’s way to win the cup.

Play like cornered tigers

 

[Ram Shekhar]

Both wrong. The best method lies somewhere in between..... Australia & New Zealand...

 

[Hasan123]

Always back specialist bowlers over bits and pieces cricketers. India bowlers are doing the job and ensuring that they having to score a massive score which makes up for their non batting. Someone like Moen Ali who isn't good enough to bat in the top 6 or good enough for 10 overs is useless for England. They should replace him with a specialist.

Anyday I'll pick specialists over a all rounder who doesn't make the team on batting or bowling merit.

 

[Itachi]

Indias way. England's way has a big vulnerability.

Once the steam is off, this team becomes average. There's no plan B. this setup doesn't allow a plan B. You will hit hard and harder. Even if damage is negligible, you will push harder hoping it will work. Once it doesn't, you will lose the plot.

 

[Ami]

Pakistan's Way...hope and a prayer.

 

[Technics 1210]

ENGLAND'S WAY

Post 2015 world cup, England decided , best way to win the world cup is load the side with batsmen who show positive intent and keep going after bowling until the last man is out. Most probably inspired by NZ/Australia approach in 2015 world cup. Kinda worked for them so far (except in CT2017) They managed to steam roll under-strength Aussies and few other teams. They were convinced that is the most fool-proof way to win the world cup. They are still sticking to it. Stokes was even doubling it up by supporting England's new way.

INDIA'S WAY

Post 2017 CT final where they suffered two defeats where on both occasions Indian team was unable to control the play during middle overs. There was no body they could turn to take wickets. Kohli decided wristies are the way to go. He added them to the squad. Later on Shami carried his test form into ODI. Gradually India was building a powerful bowling unit albeit at the expense of long tail


Which WAY is the fool proof way?

There is no fool proof way. Tournaments require more than statistics, past performance records, rankings - they require a mindset.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Both wrong. The best method lies somewhere in between..... Australia & New Zealand...

Not NZ. Two crappy openers. Atleast one of them doesn't belong there. using a pinch hitter there. Australia played with 4 bowlers and maxie for a few matches. They were still working on their combination. Their wins were due to mistakes of the opposition. Hafeez threw his wicket away. Russell threw it away.

 

[Ram Shekhar]

Batsmen win you matches... bowlers win you tournaments.... England's method clearly got it wrong. However, you need decent batsmen to put runs on the board, which India currently lack.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

India's way with focus on a proper middle order would be the best approach.

Both Indian and English approach are stupid.

Too dependent on situation, luck, conditions in a knockout.

Our 2011 WC team could adapt which is why they won 3 knockouts.

This team can win too but if someone reduces them to 3 down by 15 overs (top 3 gone), they will crumble.

 

[jnaveen1980]

There is no fool proof way. Tournaments require more than statistics, past performance records, rankings - they require a mindset.

Not long ago India had a gun batting unit even better than this England unit. Tendulkar, Sehwag, Gambir, Kohli, Dhoni, Yuvraj, Raina. We always had issues getting break throughs sometimes. But even they didn't have this policy of continuously attacking the bowling like England does. It is way too risky. Bad bowling can be fixed in the same match. Not bad batting. One mistake you are out.

 

[jnaveen1980]

India's way with focus on a proper middle order would be the best approach.

Both Indian and English approach are stupid.

Too dependent on situation, luck, conditions in a knockout.

Our 2011 WC team could adapt which is why they won 3 knockouts.

This team can win too but if someone reduces them to 3 down by 15 overs (top 3 gone), they will crumble.

IT is true. Right now one of the top 3 continuously click and ensure the top 7 bat atleast 45 overs.

 

[LongtimeLurk3r]

Neither is fool proof. Eng's way is obviously better in batting shoot outs whereas India's better on average.

Fool proof would be the Aussies of 1998-2008. Batsmen, bowlers, superlative fielding with a ruthless mentatility to win.

That said, there shouldn't be a fool proof way IMO. Where's the charm in sport then?

 

[QalandarFan]

Any way is better than England's one dimensional plan which only works on roads.

 

[aqeelPK]

5 batsmen + 1 AR + wk batsman + 4 attacking bowlers + aggressive captain + mental strength has been the recipe to win WC over the years. India's bowling is perfect but their batting is way too thin. There is nothing after top 3 (which includes lokesh). Get them to even 100/3 & they will struggle to reach 220 against decent bowling attacks. England do not have a single reliable bowler (jofra is overrated) & their batting is one dimensional, cover that dimension & they are done n dusted.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Go Pakistan’s way to win the cup.

Play like cornered tigers

Only Pakistan can channel that extremity of good and bad

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

CricViz stats show that England over the last 4 years has struggled on slow-wickets. And chances are their batting will struggle at Edgbaston which is probably the slowest wicket in this tournament, especially if its a used pitch. India is a side that's much more adaptable to varying conditions; they have two world-class spinners, arguably the best pacer in the tournament, who along with Shami or Bhuvneshwar can wreck mayhem absolute mayhem. And ofcourse they have a very good Top 3, even with Rahul in-place of Dhawan. The weakness lies in a fragile middle-order, even the finishing is good with Pandya at the back end. But India are such a good side that even with an underperforming middle-order they can come out on-top.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

Both approaches have flaws. India on a flat track will get outgunned by lineups that bat deep and have the ability to score rapidly. England struggle on slow pitches or seaming pitches with their approach. I believe Australia has the best approach which is a healthy synthesis of both. India are very conservative in PP1 regardless of pitch conditions and England are too aggressive.

 

[MenInG]

Australia’s assistant coach Ricky Ponting believes that England’s out-and-out aggressive approach to one-day international cricket has probably not been suitable for a stage such as the World Cup.

“In the last few weeks, they haven’t played the way they would have wanted to,” Ponting told cricket.com.au, after England’s 64-run loss to Australia at Lord’s. “They haven’t made these 400-plus scores they have been talking about all the time. The scores have generally been a little bit lower in this World Cup, Justin [Langer] and I spoke about it earlier.

After winning four of their first five games at the ICC Men's Cricket World Cup 2019, England stumbled to two consecutive losses while batting second. Despite boasting the tournament’s two highest totals (397 and 386), Eoin Morgan’s side has failed while chasing on three occasions, and on two of them, the target has been under 300.

“The tournament plays a lot differently from a regulation five-ODI series, where England have come out and hit some huge scores in the last two to three years," Ponting said. "Was that game style going to stand up under pressure? We will have to wait and see in the next few games.

“They need to improve. They have a couple of big games to come, against India and New Zealand, they might have to play better than today to win those games.”

On Tuesday, 25 June, England’s batting was undone by Jason Behrendorff and Mitchell Starc. The latter accounted for three of the top five batsmen, as the fast bowling duo's new-ball burst reduced England to 53-4 inside 14 overs.

Ponting, a three-time World Cup winner, said that England will have to tinker their batting strategy based on the conditions on offer, and the opposition they are up against.

“Different conditions, different attacks - to come out and try and go really hard at Mitchell Starc upfront with the new ball is not an easy thing to do," he said. "Joe Root has been as good as anyone in the tournament, but Starc got one right through him early. That’s up to them to work out. We have a game plan that will stand for us under pressure.”

https://www.icc-cricket.com/news/1257491

 

[barah_admi]

India's Dates Batting Strategy

India for far too long have coasted on results in bilaterals and a media machine hell bent on cretaing every new addition into a quiffed, bearded superstar, yet their batting has had a poor approach, especially in the first ten overs. This line up of Sharma, Dhawan, Kohli, Dhoni and Pandya has been talked about as the second most destructive after England, and yet have rarely shown that level of destruction in the last couple of years. For anyone who is a keen follower of the sport, the signs of slowness could be seen in 2018 but reared their ugly head in this world cup against South Africa.

It is important to note that India were chasing a small total, against a side that was lacking in confidence but if you look at the first ten overs, they consisted of just 34 runs, at the loss of a wicket. Kohli scored only 18 yet took 34 balls to do it. Rahul a much vaunted star in waiting barely got a SR above 60 and although Dhoni was not much better, Sharma managed to guide the chase and up the run rate.

The situation improved drastically against Australia and may have papered over the cracks but that came on the flattest pitch of the tournament. Credit to Sharma for yet another century and a similarly improved performance against Pakistan seemed to keep the ball rolling but the problems were still there. The first ten overs were not monstrous like England and there were too many dot balls.

In the following matches, they would go at a run rate of 4.1, 4.7 and 2.8. It is alarming that the 4.1 came against Afghanistan, in a low, slow scoring match. In a chase of 338, when India needed it the most, the team did not accelerate until aftert he 20th over, and yet still stayed well behind the curve. For a supposed modern side, with supposedly some of the fittest batsmen on the planet, why is Sharma the only one capable of acceleration.

Kohli has done his best but is yet to put in a match winning performance, or even effectively hit consistent boundaries. It has been a disappointing tournament for a batsman who is supposed to be the most dynamic around. Then there is the persistent issue of Dhoni. Is he a deserved addition to a side that needs lower order acceleration and not rotation of strike?

It is difficult for any side to chase 300+, but with the ability India have, why is their method so wrong ?

 

[saeed5646]

Indian way in asian pitches

England way outside asia