England Sets World Record?

Question

England have set a world record ny naming an unchanged team for 6 consecutive test matches. My Q is, do you think they could have done better?

Answer 1

Having won the test series against New Zeland 2-0, I feel England selectors played safe by sticking to the same team

Answer 2

Yes! There are lots of young guys playing well and they should make changes rather than keeping the same old players.

Answer 3

Ah, school hols & I can answer some questions, maybe even ask a few. Well having seen the team perform in all its different formats I don't think it makes much difference either way.England are sure to come good again, but I think they are no match for South Africa.

Answer 4

I think they could have perhaps looked at changing the middle order dynamic a little bit. It's very weak with Collingwood, Bell and Ambrose continually under-performing with the bat (and gloves in Ambrose's case) and all are very susceptible to strong bowling attacks at the moment. And if those players don't perform well in the first Test, I think the England management will have to start looking elsewhere. Perhaps giving Shah a sustained run or even Bopara (or even looking further afield). And the bowling attack lacks a little pace (with Sidebottom, Anderson and Broad averaging in the mid to low 80mph range) and it sometimes lacks consistency.

On the other hand, England have done a good thing by showing faith in the team. It's wrong to continually chop and change teams without giving players the opportunity to reestablish themselves (but then again how many opportunities should you afford players who continually under perform?) and it's too soon to bring back Jones and Flintoff (though there is Hoggard who is performing well for Yorkshire). And Sidebottom, Anderson and Broad do seem to work well together and it would be unfair to drop Broad for Flintoff (for example) because for a young bowler he's doing a really good, solid job.

Answer 5

I think its too early for Flintoff and Jones, so keeping the unchanged team is correct this time.

Answer 6

I'm a bit confused. Do you think they could have done better? Do you mean better than what they've got? Or done better with the team they have?

To answer both those questions I have just posed to your question: Yes and yes.

This is patently not England's best line-up. I'm all for continuity, but Flintoff is fit, raring to go, and is back in from, with bat and ball. So he should be in the side. I don't think Australia will leave Ponting out once he is fit again, no matter how well the team is performing.

And I think the current unchanged side have been under performing and are sluggish and stale. They need a new face or two to brighten the side up.

Answer 7

What a good world record to set..Lmao

I am pretty sure they would love a different sort of record,but hey any record is better than none...

If this team is working for them,why change it?..

If i remember rightly this is the same team that fell into difficulties with NZ,but hey if it works for them then good on em..

We have had a few matches with an UN-changed team and it didn't do us any harm..

Answer 8

yes,they could have better team than this like picking up all-

rounder like Flintoff etc.

Answer 9

its funny world record allright

he he he

Answer 10

Is it really a world record. I see, this is very surprising. I will also  be surprised if you do get my question #4 correct before others do!

Answer 11

Yes I think that there are better players but the circumstances that the few better players are only coming back from injury now they went with the best players that was available and the players performed against NZ so they are sticking with their winning formula but will bring back players like Flintoff as soon as the next test or if this current team performs they would be no reason to change it but a few players in the middle order will have to start performing to hold their place

Answer 12

Yea they could've done much better. Sarah is right, they needed to change thier middle order as it continues to underperform