Trott's fault

More criticism for Jonathan Trott in the light of his 69 off 105 balls against Ireland in the one-dayer at Clontarf, a strike rate of 66.

And yet... Strike rates aren't everything and Trott top-scored in the innings, eventually seventh man out as England made 201/8 in a rain-affected innings. And the fact it was rain-affected it probably says it all. Rain or shine, Trott has the ability to judge a pitch and play every single ball on it's merits - he averages over 50 in ODIs precisely for this reason - unlike his colleagues who keep getting out to pre-meditated shots that the situation simply doesn't warrant.

Anyone expecting Trott to go berserk and send fireworks shooting into the sky clearly hasn't seen the lad's approach. But he is someone around whom an innings can be built and when he does go to 80, 90, 100, the strike rate is pretty close to a run a ball. And, frankly, if half the other England batsmen had as much determination to keep their wicket intact, the side would be far higher up the rankings already.

The old adage says that you can't score runs whilst sat in the pavilion and it's only survived so long because it's true. 69 runs at 66 is a hell of a lot better than 14 from 26 balls (Kieswetter, the supposedly explosive one) or even 13 from 12 (Samit Patel), particularly on a tricky pitch in tricky conditions against a pretty decent attack.

The one thing about Trott is that Alistair Cook's approach in ODIs is just about the same. With Cook a guaranteed starter as captain, is there room for both? Possibly not, but there is value in a Trott if only because you know that whatever his approach to an innings is, it's probably the right one. Watch and learn.

Utterly without a clue

Three ODIs down and three England defeats. Not only that, but three miserable defeats, all of which came about in pretty much identical circumstances. There's no plan, there's no strategy and whoever makes the tactical decisions in a clueless idiot, especially regarding powerplays.

After the second game of this seven (seven!!) match series, the batting powerplay was left until England were eight wickets down and the batting colossus that is Ryan Sidebottom strode out to the crease. This happened again in match three. The reason given by Andrew Strauss was that "you can lose wickets in those overs". Where, oh where, does one begin?

It may not have come to Strauss's notice, but England have proved a bit too fecking adept at losing wickets in any over, powerplay or not. When they come, as they do all to reliably, the wickets are given away to one of the worst Australian sides in living memory and yet are more than able to outclass this shambles of an England side. Matt Prior's dismissal in game two, slapping a reverse sweep straight to backward point, was a very Matt Prior way to get out while the travails of Owais Shah would be finny if they weren't real. He's amazing at turning easy twos and threes into singles, looks a candidate for a run out at all times and then when he trod on his wicket.... Dear me. Any yet he, like most of the batters (as discussed previously), seems exempt from being dropped.

This series has gone, that much is clear, so why not chuck the lot of them out and start trying to bring something together ahead of the Champions Trophy which isn't that far away? Probably a bit too radical, but England are going nowhere in ODIs at the moment and it seems the only thing that will stop the slide is the scrapping of the 50-over format.A