ICC ODI World Cup 2011

Alpherah · 6 Apr 2011 at 09:53

Briton said:
TBF there's already two South Africans in the team.

Briton · 6 Apr 2011 at 09:58

Alpherah said:

Although thinking about it...shouldn't be a problem as there's three in the 'England' team.

TheCenturion · 6 Apr 2011 at 10:45

Alpherah said:
Trott has to be in there, no way you can leave him out!

Have you seen the team? When you have tendulkar, dilshan, sangakkara etc in a team, Trott just isn't in the same league

Weebull · 6 Apr 2011 at 11:39

I was going to argue for Trott, but since he's a 3, and that's Sangakkara's spot, it's a hard case to make.

That said, Murali has clearly been picked on reputation there, and I'm not sure if Steyn was one of the best bowlers in the tournament.

Yas786 · 6 Apr 2011 at 11:52

Weebull said:
I was going to argue for Trott, but since he's a 3, and that's Sangakkara's spot, it's a hard case to make.

That said, Murali has clearly been picked on reputation there, and I'm not sure if Steyn was one of the best bowlers in the tournament.

Steyn was a disappointment...the best bowlers in the WC were Khan of India and Afridi for Pakistan...both ended up joint top wicket takers and rightly deserve their place in the WC team of the tournament.

Alpherah · 6 Apr 2011 at 22:38

TheCenturion said:
Have you seen the team? When you have tendulkar, dilshan, sangakkara etc in a team, Trott just isn't in the same league

His stats for the past 12 months would argue otherwise.

Dilshan
Innings: 11
Runs: 541
Max:144
Average:54.10
S/R:89.86

Trott
Innings:14
Runs: 797
Max:137
Average:61.30
S/R:81.24

Tendulkar
Innings:11
Runs: 513
Max:120
Average:46.63
S/R:88.60

I will concede on Sangakkara though, he's had an immense year.

TheCenturion · 6 Apr 2011 at 22:52

Alpherah said:
His stats for the past 12 months would argue otherwise.

Not really imo. It's based on performances this tournament. His average this tournament might have been up there with the others, but his strike rate was too low imo. No century for him either

EDIT: Just seen your edit. His strike rate isnt' too shabby, but still too low for the sub continent.

Alpherah · 6 Apr 2011 at 22:56

TheCenturion said:
Not really imo. It's based on performances this tournament. His average this tournament might have been up there with the others, but his strike rate was too low imo. No century for him either

EDIT: Just seen your edit. His strike rate isnt' too shabby, but still too low for the sub continent.

Those are the stats for the entire year. He was brilliant considering he spent the entire WC rebuilding an innings for the English .. cough .. Empire team.

I realise its the team of the tourney, just assumed your comment "Trott just isn't in the same league" implies more then just the WC

TheCenturion · 6 Apr 2011 at 23:22

Alpherah said:
Those are the stats for the entire year. He was brilliant considering he spent the entire WC rebuilding an innings for the English .. cough .. Empire team.

I realise its the team of the tourney, just assumed your comment "Trott just isn't in the same league" implies more then just the WC

I do accept that Trott is a quality player. Hell if I was making a world 11, he'd be in there! But, when I say that he isn't in the same league, his average is, his strike rate isn't. But... I'm talking mainly about experience. Tendulkar has been playing for 10 times as long as Trott, Sanga and Dilshan 5 times. That's why he's not one of the greats (yet!)