Posts
Loading ...andrew-strauss
« Previous EntriesThe lure of money
By Will 2 months ago, 3 Comments »
We return to England after six weeks of toil, and not much has changed. We have reversed a decline in Test cricket, but realise that sterner ones wait in the form of the touring South Africans later in the season. Also, all the talk is now returning to the IPL, and its influence on the game’s future. I can’t believe for one moment that there aren’t going to be changes to the game. Money talks too loudly, but exactly what they are and when they will come is for others to decide. For the England players, we have just had a timely reminder of what money can’t buy, playing and winning for your country.
Dean Headley on the ECB’s attitude towards the IPL:
3 Comments »“If the ECB ignore these opportunities for players, it could have catastrophic results in terms of losing a star player or several star players,” Headley told The Sunday Telegraph.
“Even if we don’t see an exodus we might have a lot of disgruntled England players and that’s not healthy. Where would that leave our game? It might only take a few brave players to start the ball rolling. We need all parties concerned to come together and reach an agreement that keeps everyone happy.”
Strauss not out 114
By Jonathan Liew 2 months ago, 8 Comments »
Well, it’s tea. Andrew Strauss is 114 not out. It’s yet another infuriating twist in the tale.
It’s infuriating, not because I didn’t want him to score runs, but because it delays still further the day when I finally make up my mind about him. I really was beginning to formulate a definite opinion of him: a nice-looking player but too limited in his range of strokeplay, prone to playing away from his body, iffy against spin, etc etc. Then he goes and scores a hundred. Fair enough, it was chancey, the attack was county standard at best, the pitch is a belter and Bell’s hundred was better. But it is a hundred, and one that matters. Vaughan and Collingwood can’t buy one of those at the moment. And, at the age of 31, it seems he’s finally discovered the straight drive.
So since I can’t muster an opinion of my own, I reckon I might be swayable by somebody else’s. Do leave yours below…
8 Comments »‘A ridiculously crowded international schedule’
By Will last year, mid-October, 5 Comments »
Andrew Strauss has blamed his loss of form, luck and his Test place partly on the ‘ridiculously crowded international schedule’. He does not strike me as someone who gives up easily, or who minces his words, and his column at Sunday Telegraph makes for depressing reading.
Without any sort of window in the last 18 months – in a ridiculously crowded international schedule – to take stock, make technical changes and refresh the mind, turning it around has been extremely difficult.
It isn’t that I have been completely out of form, unable to contend with the rigours of Test cricket, but rather that I have been caught in a limbo, where every decent innings seemed to be followed by a low score. Without nailing a couple of really substantial contributions to silence the doubters, the pressure has grown.
When will the ICC realise that they are running a sport that is eroding from within? Cricket is doomed if they continue to run talented players - their most prized commodity, surely? - into the ground, beyond repair. Strauss is the latest victim of the crammed schedule. Who will be next?
5 Comments »England name squad for Sri Lanka tour
By Jonathan Liew last year, mid-October, 1 Comment »
England have named their squad for the tour of Sri Lanka, and it’s pretty much as predicted:
Vaughan, Cook, Bell, Pietersen, Collingwood, Shah, Bopara, Mustard, Prior, Broad, Hoggard, Anderson, Sidebottom, Swann, Panesar.
Some initial thoughts:
1) It’s pretty harsh on Chris Tremlett, who hasn’t really put a foot wrong yet for England. Unless – gasp! – they’re punishing him unfairly for his indifferent one-day form.
2) If the selectors were going to drop Strauss they should have replaced him with another opener, rather than naming three number sixes and promoting Vaughan, who doesn’t even want to open.
3) If both of Harmison’s practice games get rained off, where does that leave him?
4) Either Broad or Swann has to bat at number eight. Which means that, cruelly, one of Anderson or Sidebottom has to sit out. Or both, if Harmison waltzes back into the team. In other words, all three pacemen from the India series could be left out in favour of someone who wasn’t even good enough to make the side at the time. Hmmm.
5) The fact that Mustard has been named in the full squad, rather than placed on standby in Chennai, is hardly a resounding vote of confidence in Prior. Is Mustard, in fact, the reserve opening batsman?
What are everyone else’s thoughts?
1 Comment »Recall for Ramps?
By Jonathan Liew last year, mid-October, 2 Comments »
There’s an interesting claim by Mike Selvey in this morning’s Guardian: apparently Mark Ramprakash is on the verge of an England recall.
There is a strong rumour doing the rounds that when the England squad to contest the Test series against Sri Lanka is announced tomorrow week, the name of Andrew Strauss will be missing and in its place will be that of Mark Ramprakash. It would, were it to happen, be another stunner in a sporting autumn that already has had more turn-ups than a Savile Row clearance sale.
Only last month, with a strict brief to ensure that selections should anticipate playing a full part in England cricket over the next year, Strauss, already jettisoned from the one-day plans, was awarded a central contract by the chairman of selectors, David Graveney, and the England coach, Peter Moores. Given that in the past year three contracted players in particular - Marcus Trescothick, Ashley Giles and Simon Jones - played little or no cricket for England while receiving sizeable salaries, there would be no shortage of flak heading their way if such an exercise in generosity were to be repeated.
It’s a fascinating suggestion, although personally I don’t think the England selectors will pick him. It’s just not worth their while. If he succeeds, there’ll be the inevitable question of why he wasn’t picked earlier (his excellent Ashes record should have been a factor last year). And the very first time he fails, the critics will come creeping out of the woodwork, accusing England of ‘taking a backwards step’ and ‘holding back’ some promising young batsman or other. And though Ramprakash himself seems less mentally fragile than before, a low score in his first knock might see all those bad memories come flooding back.
If he is picked, it would at least provide us with a definitive verdict on county cricket. If the most prolific county cricketer of his generation couldn’t translate that form into Test success, it might be time to start asking the ECB some probing questions.
2 Comments »Strauss off Key?
By Ian last year, mid-August, 23 Comments »
Sorry about the contrived headline, but it is fairly self-explanatory. Has Andrew Strauss failed to deliver for too long? It’s been forever since he last scored a Test hundred, while his one good knock this summer was gifted by Dinesh Karthik’s appalling drop. All the other batsmen have scored tons, while he has struggled to convert, despite getting a few starts.
There’s no doubting his class, but is it time to try someone else? Robert Key would jump at the chance, as would Ravi Bopara. Or does Andrew Flintoff bat six when he returns, with Ian Bell going to three? Perhaps Strauss should get yet another chance, given he has managed to get to 30 regularly and is possibly one big score from finding top form.
For what it’s worth, I’d go with Rob Key.
23 Comments »All change?
By Emma last year, mid-July, 1 Comment »
Earlier today, England named their 30-man provisional squad for the ICC World Twenty20. For once, it seems, the selectors have paid some attention to the nature of the format.
There are several interesting inclusions. The sight of Trescothick’s name, for one, will bring some relief to many, although there must be huge doubts over his progression to the final 15. Similarly, there are finally places for those players who have played the most Twenty20 domestically, and have proven themselves capable. After the series of washouts this year, it would have been hard to pick those necessarily most in form, but David Graveney et al seem to have elected for those players that have deployed themselves well over the past couple of seasons. Sir Viv Richard’s call for Darren Maddy, now captain of Warwickshire, has been answered, although there is no place for Nayan Doshi or Samit Patel. Among other ’specialists’ included are new Essex captain, Mark Pettini, Surrey’s one-year contracted Chris Schofield and the man of the moon ball, Jeremy Snape.
Is it all for show? There are significant figures gone from the World Cup squad: Strauss, Vaughan, Joyce, Mahmood and Dalrymple all miss out. However, there is no real sign that England intend to keep these welcome additions in their final 15. The entire one-day squad that faced the West Indies have been included, although it must be admitted that one incumbant, Stuart Broad, was the most economical seamer in last year’s domestic competition. It can only be hoped that in slimming down the squad in August, the selectors do not show this initial attempt to be a pointless exercise in media quelling.
1 Comment »Strauss dropped as Collingwood picks up captaincy
By Emma last year, at the end of June, 6 Comments »
The one-day squad has just been announced, and features a couple of surprising new faces:
1. Paul Collingwood (Durham) (Captain)
2. James Anderson (Lancashire)
3. Ian Bell (Warwickshire)
4. Stuart Broad (Leicestershire)
5. Alastair Cook (Essex)
6. Dimitri Mascarenhas (Hampshire)
7. Monty Panesar (Northamptonshire)
8. Kevin Pietersen (Hampshire)
9. Liam Plunkett (Durham)
10. Matt Prior (Sussex)
11. Owais Shah (Middlesex)
12. Ryan Sidebottom (Nottinghamshire)
13. Jonathan Trott (Warwickshire)
14. Michael Yardy (Sussex)
Andrew McGlashan over at cricinfo predicted the potential place for Dimitri Mascarenhas, but what no one will have expected was the selection of Trott. A positive upper-order bat, he has followed Pietersen’s route from South Africa to English qualification, however his present season form ranges from successive ducks to unbeaten centuries. Both of these players are added to England’s Performance Squad, as is Ryan Sidebottom after his impressive performance since Headingley.
Cook’s recall, whilst predicted, poses questions - with no place for Loye, is there really any member of this squad who can force the pace at the beginning of the innings? Who, indeed, is likely to open? The only opener to have survived the World Cup is Bell, who is more naturally a number 3. If Cook make the final XI, he will almost certainly take his place at the top of the order, but is there an opening for Prior to repeat his attempt as a pinch-hitter?
As always, leave your thoughts below.
6 Comments »Overshadowing The Ego
By Will last year, at the end of May, 2 Comments »
© Getty ImagesKevin Pietersen whacked his fastest Test hundred today and yet was overshadowed by someone who was once described by Ian Chappell [1] as the most unlikely of Test batsman. More of an accountant - a bookish, slightly nerdy character. It was Michael Vaughan, then storming Australia during his epic series.
And at last today, he returned. The old cover-drive was there, complete with swashbuckling follow-through. It was a slick innings against some of the most inept, friendly bowling imaginable, on a friendly Headingley pitch under clear skies. The conditions and situation were tailor-made for him and he took full advantage. Even his favoured pull stroke was there…though he timed one of them rather too well, falling straight down Morton’s throat.
It just reminded me of what an audacious, brilliantly talented batsman he once was, but also what he could still be capable of. He said before this Test that he felt as though he was making his debut today and, that being the case, let’s hope he’ll be just as successful as England’s other recent debutants - Alastair Cook and Matt Prior to name two. If the knees survive - and let’s be honest, if they don’t, it’ll probably end his career in a hurry - there’s no reason why he can’t dominate bowling like he did four years ago.
Meanwhile Andrew Strauss, the Middlesex legend, is under a wee bit of pressure. Needs big runs, quickly.
[1] I think it was Chappell.
2 Comments »Nicholas goes into bat for Strauss
By Scott last year, mid-April, 4 Comments »
Mark Nicholas has come out in favour of giving the English captaincy to Andrew Strauss. Before the Ashes series, and how long ago did that seem, there was a clear choice to make for the English selectors- Strauss or Flintoff. They chose the latter and everything went downhill for England from there. This didn’t entirely surprise me- my spies in England had already told me that Flintoff was no great shakes as a leader. But for Strauss, leading this newly minnowed side is going to be a different proposition then the England of late 2006.
If there is to be a change of captain, Strauss does seem the logical candidate. But without a change of coach, it is a job half done.
4 Comments »Video of Shane Warne’s 700th Test wicket
By Will 2 years ago, at the end of December, 9 Comments »
Here’s the video of Warne’s marvellous milestone
It’s not the best, so if you see any on Youtube or Google - post a comment with the link and I’ll update it. Here’s a great photo courtesy of Yahoo! News:
Don’t hang Duncan
By Scott 2 years ago, at the start of December, 27 Comments »
Reading through the comments on yesterday’s post, I’m getting a distinct sense that Duncan Fletcher is going to be made the scapegoat for England’s defeat at Adelaide, unless England can turn around the series.
That would be grossly unfair to Duncan. England’s batsmen got themselves into this hole. It wasn’t Duncan Fletcher that came out and pushed, prodded and poked for half an hour while Warne got his rythm and line- it was Andrew Strauss and Ian Bell.
Strauss, for a former England captain, is particularly deserving of censure since he should know better. He certainly should not have had to be told that he needed to get a move on, and if he did need to be told, then it is the captain that had to tell him to get a move on.
England’s whole approach smacked of poor preparation. They had batted well enough last night, and presumed that was enough. However, batting for a draw requires a subtle change of mental approach, requiring new goals to be set without sacrificing that sense of positive play that keeps the opponents off balance.
Australia went into day five with the goal of bowling England out during the day- not to win the Test, just to let England know that they weren’t to be dominated so easily. England do not seem to have entered day 5 with a specific goal in mind.
And that’s the captain’s fault, not Fletcher’s. It must be something in England that Flintoff is too big a hero to be held to account for this defeat, but it seems pretty obvious to me that it is Flintoff, and his players, who has stuffed up.
Edit- That’s not to say that Fletcher hasn’t made some shocking decisions on this tour. However, at the start of this morning, England had what chessplayers would call a ‘book draw’ and they blew it. That wasn’t Fletcher’s fault.
27 Comments »Now that’s Test cricket!
By Scott 2 years ago, at the start of December, 5 Comments »
Right then, that’s the sort of cricket I want to see.
Tough, hard as nails, no mucking about, just getting in down and dirty.
Before we have any complaints that England ‘batted slow’, I just want to point out that it used to be always like this. Steve Waugh’s first day as captain was in the West Indies and Australia crawled to be 6 for 174 at stumps on Day 1. Off the full 90 overs. Of course, you don’t want to rush when you are facing Walsh and Ambrose.
And Australia went on to win that game by a mile.
No, today’s play was classic cricket, at its best. The Adelaide Oval was packed, the pitch was perfect, so it was just head to head between batsmen and bowlers. And a lot of what we saw in Brisbane flowed through to this game. England can bat well enough, but they just let themselves down with poor concentration. Strauss, Cook and Bell all gave their wickets away, after playing themselves in. These guys just have to kick themselves, because they’ll never get a better place to bat.
Not that it was that easy out there, because Australia did bowl well. Clark was the pick of the bowlers, even though he was confused as to why he didn’t bowl more. To be honest, I wasn’t entirely surprised myself- Clark was bowling beautiful lines and all, but you want to be bowling Lee in conditions like this. Lee bowled plenty of rubbish between his best bowling, and that is actually more likely to get you a wicket
That’s how Bell got himself out.
Even though England have had a strong day, as an Australian I’m not too worried yet. Once both sides have had a bat, it will be easier to tell who is placed the best. Australia’s batsmen are good at concentrating as well, and if England back themselves to score 450, Australia’s game-plan will be to first get something like that themselves, then, if possible, to build a first innings lead and try to erase the worry of a fourth innings chase.
But having said that, it has been a very good day for England and they will sleep well tonight.
5 Comments »England fight back, and some thoughts on coaches
By Scott 2 years ago, at the end of November, 5 Comments »
To the audible relief of South Australian cricket administrators, England provided some much needed resistance on day four, and saved them the prospect of half-empty stands for the Second Test starting on Friday.
England were set an insane target, worked out by Ricky Ponting on the formula of multiplying my overdraft times the speed of light, or some such nonsense, and let his bowlers loose, while retiring to the massage table. He would have dined well as England lost two early wickets, and with Cook playing a range of loose shots, promise of more to come.
However, Pieterson and Collingwood provided stout resistance and some fiery entertainment for another large crowd, stated as being 37,000.
Yet England will surely lose, and they deserve to lose- while there was some magnificent batsmanship today, there was also some shameful episodes. Strauss, Cook, Collingwood, Flintoff and Pieterson were all guilty of some dreadful shot selection at various points in the day, treating an Ashes Test as little more then a knockabout in the park.
Pieterson’s innings was an instructive example. There was some lovely drives, all through the V, yet there were also some grotesque cross-bat swipes. None of these have cost him his wicket (as yet), but what happens if rain comes about three PM tomorrow and England have been bowled out at 2.35?
If England had batted with a slightly more applied approach, they might well have been three wickets down tonight, not five. That’s a big difference.
****
What do readers think about Andrew Flintoff’s dismissal? Shane Warne gave him an ugly serve on his way, and Justin Langer was smiling in delight even before he took the catch; the arrogance of it will grate on English sensibilities.
But it is an arrogance reflective of an Australian team that knows the value of their wickets, and the absolute folly of Flintoff’s shot. I don’t recall Ricky Ponting playing such an agricultural heave during his defensive masterpiece at Old Trafford last year. Duncan Fletcher may or may not remind his charges of that innings between now and the morning.
****
Speaking of coaches, I came across this article on my web-meanderings this evening, asking about the worth of overseas coaches. Given the kvetching about Duncan Fletcher that I’ve read in British media outlets the last few days, I wondered about the role of the coach.
It seems to me that for a coach to be a benefit, rather then a hindrance, there needs to be an absolute understanding between the coach and his captain. In many first class teams, it seems to be the increasing trend that the coach is the top banana and the captain merely his on-field lieutenant, rather in the way a football manager operates. That may work, but there does need to be a clear line driven, and both sides working in tandem.
It’s never been the Australian way. Would you fancy being the coach telling Steve Waugh how he was to arrange his batting order? John Buchanan always knew his place in Waugh’s order of things.
I’m not sure about the inner workings of England’s team, but Michael Vaughan and Duncan Fletcher certainly were working on the same wavelength. It may well be that the relationship between Fletcher and Andrew Flintoff isn’t quite so attune.
5 Comments »
Review of Andrew Strauss’s autobiography
By Will 2 years ago, at the end of September, No Comments; be the first!
I read and reviewed Andrew Strauss’s Coming into Play…not much of a goer, to be honest. Promising but premature.
No Comments » « Previous Entries