| 
Posts and words
Loading ...
england-in-west-indies
The highs and lows of England’s winter
By Mark Tilley last year, mid-April, 4 Comments »
So England’s winter is finally over and after events in St. Lucia last Friday, a slight gloss has been applied to what was otherwise a woeful away season. Captaincy changes, managerial controversy and some truly dire results had left many writing off England in all formats of the game and, arguably, those critics were fully justified in their prognosis. But the one day series win against West Indies has altered the balance just a tad and will provide England fans with a cruel glimmer of hope and optimism.
With the home series return with the West Indies just weeks away, there is hardly any time for reflection on what state English cricket is in. But we can all try our best to analyse so let us have a brief look at the successes and failures of England’s mostly winless winter.
Successes:
Andrew Strauss – The main man. Strauss’ resurgence as one of England’s most important batsman started way back in early December with those twin centuries in Chennai against India, becoming the 10th Englishman in history to register three figures in both innings of a Test match. Elevated to the captaincy in the wake of the Kevin Pietersen/Peter Moores scandal, Strauss’ batting went on leaps and bounds as he blasted three big hundreds in consecutive games during the run fest against the West Indies. But it was in the one day arena where he really impressed both as a captain and batsman. With critics from all corners doubting his limited overs technique, Strauss scored a backs-to-the-wall hundred in Guyana before a rapid, match-winning 79 not out saw his team home in Barbados. England’s series win will be a huge fillip for Strauss as he looks to build on the slow progress his team are making.
Paul Collingwood – For a man who is supposedly on the brink of being dropped most of the time, he is a capable batsman. His century in India evoked memories of his maiden hundred in Nagpur back in 2006. But he really came to the party in the Caribbean, scoring two tons and falling agonisingly short of a third, trying to up the pace in Barbados. His one day exploits were crucial for the new captain Strauss. Perfect for keeping a lid on flamboyant scoring or for getting some important runs in a tight situation, Collingwood is England go-to guy in one day cricket and will be for a while yet.
Stuart Broad – For a while, Broad’s batting was threatening to overshadow his bowling. His performances with the ball in the Caribbean will have informed people that progress is being made. Broad wasn’t in the same verve as Harmison circa 2004 and at times he and the rest of the attack hardly looked like taking a wicket (those long spells in the field for England in Barbados and Trinidad spring to mind). But he did show promise; in Jamaica he took 5-95, his first five wicket haul. During England’s wicket hunt in Antigua, he bowled a superb spell to remove Ramnaresh Sarwan and Shivnarine Chanderpaul, ending their frustrating partnership. He has all the accuracy of a young Glenn McGrath and is developing a dangerous pace too. He is still a work in progress – but what a work he is.
Failures:
Ian Bell – From stylish fixture of the middle order to unused drinks carrier, all in one tour. Bell’s miserable winter has seen him lose his place from all formats of England’s side. Bell began in India at number three, hoping to secure the place vacated by Michael Vaughan. A desperately lean series was followed up by a poor performance in the first Test at Jamaica and with the selectors looking for a sacrificial lamb, Bell was replaced by Owais Shah. Cast aside for the time being, is Bell too gifted a player to be left out? It is frustrating watching him play for England. He looks technically superb and, when in the right frame of mind, can be a dominant, free scoring batsman. But he is light-years away from being consistent enough, especially for the coveted number three spot. His best hope for a recall would be in the middle order, where the bulk of his previous Test runs have come.
Ryan Sidebottom – Another player who has gone worryingly backwards in the last year. He ended last winter by taking a ridiculous number of wickets in New Zealand and becoming the leader of England’s blossoming attack. Frequent injuries have reduced him to a shadow of the bowler he was. Ailing, slow and unthreatening, Sidebottom’s performance in the Barbados Test match left plenty to be desired. He looked slow in the field and was frequently barracked by his team-mates for misjudgements. When bowling, his pace was down and he was generally off colour. His status as the teams most dangerous swing bowler has now gone to James Anderson, who is a great deal quicker too. One feels for him as the amount of injuries he has suffered has surely had a harsh effect but England cannot put up with his level of performance for much longer, especially with the Aussies rolling in soon.
Monty Panesar – From a claim to be the world’s best finger spinner to England’s number two – Panesar has gone through quite a turnaround in his international career. Dropped for the Antigua Test and replaced by Graeme Swann, Panesar had clearly exhausted the patience of the England selectors. His deficiencies are well documented; poor batting, awful fielding, lack of variation when bowling, etc. In short, Panesar had become an unthreatening spinner. His lack of success on a fifth day pitch in India was extremely exasperating, especially so given the success had by fellow spinner Swann, a Test match novice. Panesar was back quickly, though, as England opted for two twirlers at Trinidad. And, thankfully, he showed some imagination, bowling with a great deal of thought and variation. The jury is out for the Ashes, however. Swann is a fine spinner and at least offers something with the bat. Panesar will need a huge amount of selectorial faith and some early season accomplishment if he is to be trusted by England again.
Honourable mentions must go to Graeme Swann, who excelled after making his Test debut and had already bagged two five-fors after just a handful of games, and Andrew Flintoff, who played a fine, supporting innings to Kevin Pietersen in Mohali and really thrilled with the ball at times in the Caribbean, ending things with that hat trick. Dishonourable mentions? Steve Harmison didn’t really excel like we prayed he would in the West Indies and looks to be well short on pace and, crucially, confidence. Owais Shah finally had his long awaited chance handed to him and he promptly decided to keep everyone guessing with some inept performances. Whether his ‘extended run’ in the side will last depends purely on the early season form of Ian Bell and Michael Vaughan.
4 Comments »Flintoff proves his bowling worth
By Mark Tilley last year, mid-April, 1 Comment »
Just how good is Andrew Flintoff ? At 140-6, needing 33 runs to win off just 16 balls, the West Indies were knocking down the door at England. Denesh Ramdin was thick edging for four, there were singles everywhere and the game looked to be headed right down to the thinnest of wires. Step forward, Freddie. Probably one of the best death bowlers in the world right now, Flintoff fired out Ramdin with a fast leg stump yorker. That alone may have ended the host’s pursuit but it wasn’t enough for Flintoff. He then trapped LBW new man Ravi Rampaul with a quick, full delivery before achieving both his hat-trick and a five-wicket haul with another yorker to Sulieman Benn.
Flintoff, tired, battle hardened and at the end of a long, long tour, had won the game and, more importantly, the series for England in the space of three balls. His nonchalant celebration upon bowling Benn did a fine job of hiding the jubilation he was likely feeling inside. Injuries and defeat had ravaged Flintoff’s tour to the point where Kevin Pietersen was probably not alone in wanting to head home as soon as possible. His batting has come in for more criticism after, one innings aside, a painfully lean period. But his bowling is an impossibly vital component in England’s one day planning. He is frighteningly accurate, has the ability to mix up his pace to confuse the batsman and take crucial wickets when needed. The man really is worth his weight in gold.
He becomes the third Englishman to take a hat trick in one day cricket. The other two? You’d hardly believe it. James Anderson and Steve Harmison. The next time England are getting carted to all corners of the ground in a one day match, will you honestly believe that three of the bowlers on display have one day hat tricks to their names?
1 Comment »Strauss drags England back
By Mark Tilley last year, at the end of March, 1 Comment »
For all the criticism they have received, it was refreshing in the extreme to see Andrew Strauss and co. show us that there’s still an England cricket team out there. Yesterday’s win was something of a jolt to the system – it came out of the blue, especially when in the game’s infancy Chris Gayle was happily dispatching England’s best and brightest way back into the Bajan public in the stands. Once he was nipped out by the progressively angry Stuart Broad, it was as if the tide of the match had reversed completely.
England bowled cannily, with the possible exception of one Steve Harmison, and picked up key wickets when it mattered. Dimitri Mascarenhas bowled the medium pacer role to absolute perfection, wobbling the ball around at a deceptive speed, not so much keeping the lid on West Indian scoring but almost stopping it in it’s tracks. He picked up three wickets into the bargain, including the one everyone cherishes so when bowling at the West Indies, Shivnarine Chanderpaul.
Only the brilliant Dwayne Bravo really annoyed the tourists. At 173-7, England might have entertained thoughts of an easy win but Bravo played a whole host of textbook and more unorthodox shots on his way to a commanding 69 off 72 balls. Without him, West Indies would have had significantly less hope than they did after compiling an achievable but respectable 239 all out.
Andrew Strauss then demanded the centre stage. I mentioned previously that Strauss would have to lead his team from the front and inspire them in ways only a captain should. Well, he certainly achieved that goal and answered a hell of a lot of critics simultaneously. Chasing a revised 135 off 20 overs due to persistent rain, Strauss’ 79 off 61 balls was exactly the kind of innings you would want in the match situation. Bold, authoritative and assured, Strauss, with the understated and excellent support from Ravi Bopara, guided England to their target with time to spare and proverbially stuck two fingers up to those who had lambasted his one day credentials.
As hard as it is to believe, England have levelled the series at 2-2. Both sides head to St Lucia for the final game and it’s sure to be a nail biter (or an England collapse). Yesterday’s win will have surprised a fair few and shows that England, albeit an unconvincing side in all formats of the game at present, shouldn’t be written off. Even though at times watching them makes you want to question your love for the game. It’s an endless struggle, England fans, get used to it soon.
1 Comment »It’s not getting any better
By Mark Tilley last year, at the end of March, 5 Comments »
My goodness me, England truly are appalling at one day cricket.
Check today’s current scorecard for further evidence. Kevin Pietersen’s ‘mental fatigue’ comments this morning can only add to the wretchedness of what has so far been a miserable tour. I don’t think we’re reaching the cavernous lows of Australia in 2006 but Andrew Strauss and his men are not a really happy bunch at present.
This is where Strauss’ captaincy will be really pushed to the limit; that Guyana century aside, Strauss doesn’t look like he suits the one day side. He’s currently leading a weary bunch of unhappy and beleaguered cricketers and it’s up to him to lift them, somehow.
Pietersen’s admission that he “really and truly, can’t wait to get home” only serves to exacerbate the dark mood surrounding the England camp. It’s going to require a big, big performance to arrest this slide and I honestly don’t know where that performance is going to come from at present. How’s that for a defeatist attidude?
I’d rather watch Daniel Vettori perform minor miracles for New Zealand in their struggle with India.
5 Comments »Dyson’s blunder
By Will last year, mid-March, 4 Comments »
So John Dyson has handed England their first win, even before becoming their coach. Honk, honk, etc etc. I don’t think England will be rushing to place his name at the top of the pile. Or will they? God only knows.
Dyson – or “Die Soon” as some in the Caribbean are calling him – enlivened a match which, for once in ODIs, didn’t actually need enlivening. It was going down right to the wire, as my spluttering colleague can attest to as he attempted (and failed) to prepare his end-of-match report. “Which way is this fucking game going?” he screamed. “I hate cricket.” Well, only John really knew where it was going.
The look on the faces of the West Indies players in the dressing room was initially hilarious, but it soon dawned on them and us just how ridiculous cricket can be at times. We had a match that could’ve gone one way or t’other. It was perfectly set-up. The crowd had swelled, the atmosphere vibrant. And yet the gloom of the Guyana clouds set in and light was offered to the batsmen. Was it really so dark and dangerous to prevent a match from going ahead? Why, for example, wasn’t the interval cut short by five minutes (as had been suggested before the match, owing to the reliably forecast of rubbish weather approaching)? Why aren’t floodlights used more often? Why is cricket becoming so protected of itself these days, and yet in the same breath is shooting itself in the foot?
I couldn’t even begin to explain yesterday’s match to a non-cricket person. Where would you start? Dyson’s blunder aside, it was both a wonderful advertisement for the sport and shockingly awful advertisement.
“Yes, that’s right. The match only had about 20 minutes left, but it was getting a little bit dark.”
“Not that dark though. And where’re the floodlights?”
“Well, no. Not that dark, you’re right. Not sure why they can’t use floodlights more often; expensive I suppose. Waste not, want not, eh?”
“Err. So the match was nearly over, yeah? But bad light, and the coach’s dodgy calculations, stopped it in its tracks, yep? Yet England still won?”
“Bad light…Dyson’s calculations. Duckworth Lewis. Erm – yeah. That’s about the gist of it. It had been a great match though. Chanderpaul! Yeah – funny little crabby batsman, the bloke who went mental off Harmison.”
It continues to amaze me that for all the apparent professionalism in cricket; for all the new money, the innovations and the development of lesser nations, staging one simple cricket match is still fraught with difficulty. And danger. Bad light – oooh, it’s a bit murky. Drizzle affecting players’ expensive hair. Just get out there and play. If it’s pitch black, fine – but until they apply some common sense, no amount of innovation or IPL is going to spread this game to the golden markets of America and China.
4 Comments »Strauss not right for Twenty20
By Mark Tilley last year, mid-March, 6 Comments »
Just a thought on England’s miserable Twenty20 performance tonight. As admirable and as brilliantly as Andrew Strauss has played and captained the side since his elevation to skipper, how can the powers that be possibly have included him in the team for this format of the game?
Yes, he’s the captain and in an ideal world, the captain should play across all formats of the game. But, this isn’t an ideal world English cricket finds itself in. Strauss, a masssively talented batsman, is blatantly not a Twenty20 player. He may have a fine collection of shots in his locker and he may even have a good future in the 50 over version of international cricket. But he doesn’t really fit in with this format of the game.
His innings today wasn’t necessarily terrible. After all, in a lame England batting performance, Strauss notched up the second highest score. But his 22 came off 25 balls and featured just two boundaries. Twenty20 cricket is demanding and a strike-rate of under 100 is unforgivable in the majority situations. There comes a certain point where unless your partner down the other end is belting the ball to all parts, you are just wasting balls.
Surely, Paul Collingwood or someone else could have been asked to captain the side for just today’s game? Strauss will lead the team in the conventional one day series and rightly so but for this condensed version of cricket, why couldn’t someone else have done it? Was it really worth including Strauss in the side just because he is captain? Australia regularly choose Twenty20 games as an opportunity to rest Ricky Ponting and give Michael Clarke an opportunity to take charge. It baffles me as to why England have not done something similar here.
Strauss’ inclusion was not the sole reason for England’s defeat (you’d need about three blogs to cover their various Twenty20 inadequacies) but they aren’t doing themselves any favours at all with poor selection choices such as this one. People lambasted the England selectors for including Alastair Cook in the Stanford Series squad and by the same token Strauss should have been left out here. A great player, no doubt, but not the most innovative and Twenty20 is clearly not his forte. England, please take heed in the future.
6 Comments »Village
By Will last year, mid-March, 5 Comments »
I made the mistake of switching over to the cricket after watching England thrash France in the rugby. What a loser I am. Professional interest got the better of me when I saw Stephen Davies surprisingly chosen to open the batting, and although he immediately looked quite an attractive batsman, England quickly reverted to type and approached their innings with all the testosterone and impetus of a fucking flamingo stuck in quicksand.
They lost their last nine wickets for 66. Well played West Indies, and please do the honest and good thing by trouncing us in the one-dayers. I am in the mood for more making disparaging, bombastic statements about a team desperately seeking its own identity.
5 Comments »Time to take stock and try again
By Mark Tilley last year, mid-March, 4 Comments »
A great deal has been mentioned already on the subject of England’s series defeat in the West Indies. It’s an odd thing; England didn’t necessarily play their worst cricket we’ve seen and, at times, dominated the West Indies. Indeed, Andrew Strauss can point to two key sessions where had his side picked up just a few tail-end wickets, then they would have won the series (the last wicket stand in Antigua and yesterday’s tense finish in Trinidad). However, what is patently obvious is that good Test teams would have made more of those opportunities. Dominant sides like South Africa, Australia and India would have found the extra spark in those moments to do what was needed and win the game.
Tom Fordyce picks upon this point in his BBC blog. He also talks about the need for winning momentum in the run up to the looming Ashes series. Before that heart-stopping triumph in 2005, England won series in both the Caribbean and South Africa, as well as a summer whitewash over the New Zealand and West Indies in 2004. England had the mentality and the aura of a winning side. Under the astute leadership of Michael Vaughan, they were fresh, confident and effective.
One can argue that the quality of players back then was greatly superior than that of the current crop. But the bare facts still make for stark reading; England have now lost three consecutive Test series and are in poor, poor form. And whilst a few weeks ago some were saying that England need not worry about their own tribulations as the Australians were in a sharp decline of their own, those of that opinion need only look at the remarkable and supremely impressive resurgence of the Aussies down in South Africa. As much as I loathe to say it, they’re back and they’re looking ridiculously formidable.
As ludicrous as it sounds, there were precious few positives that England can reflect on in the aftermath of their defeat. Andrew Strauss embodies a man possessed with the desire to score as many runs as possible and it is clear that the captaincy of the side is driving him on and on. Alastair Cook finally got the ‘no century in ages’ monkey off his back and scored that elusive Test hundred, albeit in a nothing situation on a pitch more akin to a road that a competitive wicket. Ravi Bopara, Matt Prior and Paul Collingwood also notched up much needed runs, in a variety of situations, which will help their own personal form and confidence.
Stuart Broad bowled like a identikit version on a young Glenn McGrath. Naggingly accurate and massively consistent, he bowled to an immaculate line, picked up the prized wicket of Guyanese defensive wall Shivnarine Chanderpaul three times and bagged his first Test five wicket haul in Jamaica. He may not have the raw pace of Steve Harmison or Andrew Flintoff but a reliable, line and length bowler is just what England need and his runs at number eight are ideal for the the inevitable England batting collapse. Duncan Fletcher must rue not having him around when he was coach.
Regardless of individual promise, it is abundantly clear that England have problems – problems that require immediate and urgent attention if they are to ever get out of this decline and start becoming an competent Test side again. Will that era be shepherded in with a glorious Ashes victory this summer? At the moment, you’d pick up seriously long odds.
4 Comments »Khan to the rescue?
By Mark Tilley last year, mid-March, 4 Comments »
The start made to Test cricket yesterday by England’s most recent pace bowling attempt Amjad Khan will have provided fans with a touch of consternation. Five no-balls, including three in his opening over, indicated a nervous start and Khan conceded 27 off his four overs in the fading Trinidad light. It was almost as if the man he has edged ahead of, Steve Harmison, had given Khan that same advice that Harmison himself was given on that fateful Brisbane morning in 2006.
What a relief, then, for England fans the next morning. Soon after Stuart Broad had removed night-watchman Daren Powell for a duck, Khan was brought on and picked up the prized wicket of West Indian run machine Ramnaresh Sarwan, bowling fast, full and, most importantly, straight. Not only were the nerves of yesterday evening gone, he had also removed Sarwan, a man who has not just been a thorn in England’s side but rather sticking right the way through them as he plundered run after run after run.
Khan’s spell this morning had all the verve and potential that England have desperately needed this series. The pitches have been slow, about as slow as a Brendan Nash over, and wickets have been hard to come by. Now I don’t assume at all that Khan is the sole answer to England winning this Test but his style of bowling is probably just what they need on these types of surfaces. There is also the possibility of reverse swing, which will have bowling experts licking their lips. Reverse swing – that key component that England have sought after ever since Simon Jones brutally harassed the Australians in 2005. Khan has also slipped in a few excellent short balls; fast, well directed and with just about enough controlled aggression to trouble the West Indians.
It’s still early on this third day but the wicket of Sarwan will have boosted England and they will be growing ever so slightly in confidence as a result. A long way to go still, but Khan may be on the correct path to helping bring England level in this series.
4 Comments »Strauss the captain
By Mark Tilley last year, at the end of February, 2 Comments »
‘I am the master of my destiny; I am the captain of my soul.’
I wonder if, by any chance, Andrew Strauss is a fan of William Ernest Henley? His above quote is entirely appropriate for the England captain. His sublime, bold innings of 142 on the first day of the Fourth Test wasn’t merely a sole brilliant innings, drifting alone in a sea of low scores. It was his second big hundred of the series following on from that majestic 169 in Antigua. Both innings have come just after his captaincy of the side has been announced – a coincidence? Not on your life.
Strauss’ world class form is fundamentally linked to him being appointed captain. When in charge of the team, he is as confident as the gargantuan slog sweep for six that brought up his hundred in Barbados. The Jamaica debacle aside, Strauss has been quite brilliant with the bat this series and it follows his twin centuries in Chennai earlier this winter, made in much trickier conditions. Yes, the pitches so far this series may be as flat and as batsman friendly as your local village green but take nothing away from Strauss. His batting is ridiculously formidable at the moment and will hopefully tide over into that small matter of the Ashes later this summer.
It is not the first time Strauss’ batting and his captaincy have had a concurrent relationship. Way back in the heady days of 2006, when Monty Panesar was still a hugely promising young bowler, running rings round the Pakistani batsmen, Strauss was made captain in Andrew Flintoff’s enforced absence. He duly cracked two counter attacking second innings hundreds in the series and helped himself to as much acclaim from as many quarters as possible. He even wedged himself into contention to captain that winter’s Ashes series down under; he lost out to Andrew Flintoff and we all know what happened there.
Strauss’ form dipped dramatically from that moment on, likely as a result of his casting aside from the England selectors. He had a poor Ashes series, registering only one score of over fifty in the drubbing at Melbourne and proceeded to be equally as profligate in the home series with the West Indies and India. Without a Test hundred since that Pakistan series, he was dropped for the series in Sri Lanka, where England took something of a pasting, and managed to scrap his way back onto the tour of New Zealand. He hit a staggeringly huge hundred, although he was hardly at his convincing best and then reinforced his position with some sporadically good performances over that following summer. All of which has led to the Strauss that we now find ourselves with.
Strauss isn’t the only man to see his batting flourish in the role of captain. Many lament Flintoff’s captaincy and his form during the brief and painful time he was in charge but perhaps those critics forget his first few Tests in charge. Four consecutive fifties in four innings in India helped England to a famous draw, immediately after he was tossed into the breach as captain. It is noteworthy that his bowling also earned him a whole dictionaries worth of superlatives.
And who can forget Kevin Pietersen’s hundred at the Oval last summer in his first game as captain? There were concerns that the leadership of the side would hinder his explosive style of batting but Pietersen combined attacking flamboyance with restrained defence to score a wonderful century (before getting out next ball). He also weighed in with a supreme 144 in India this winter, even finding the time to unveil his unique switch hitting abilities.
Captaincy of a side can drive a man to great things. One needs only observe Ricky Ponting’s single minded determination to win back the Ashes in 2006. Ponting, found liable by many an Australian media outlet for the defeat in the 2005 Ashes, embodied a man possessed as he scored a massive volume of runs, crushing English spirit and hopes and showing his own side the way forward. His 196 in Brisbane was a master class of batting and a pure example of a captain showing his team what is possible. And don’t forget Graeme Smith’s courageous, match-winning 154 not out at Edgbaston against England last summer. Here was a man and a captain so determined to win a game and a series for his nation that he closed his mind to the possibility of getting out or anything else and just batted and batted and batted.
Strauss’ performances so far as captain have only served to reinforce the theory that his batting form is inextricably linked with the captaincy. Maybe it is just an ego thing, a man desperate for his name to be up in lights. Or maybe it’s just a man charged with representing and leading his country by example. Maybe it’s the responsibility that sits so well with Strauss – the need to back up his position with good scores and the desire to not have his authority or his place undermined. Either way, it’s extremely refreshing to see Strauss in such good form and providing there are no more dramas regarding English captaincy between now and July, then he could be in the best possible position to perform his own version of Ponting’s 2006 heroics and seriously murder some inexperienced Australian bowling. Here’s hoping the rest of the team can follow the example.
2 Comments »Just for one more wicket
By Mark Tilley last year, mid-February, No Comments; be the first!
What a match. When everyone arrived at the Sir Vivian Richards Stadium last Friday, you could have scarcely believed the turn of events that would progress over the next few days. In the end, we were treated to a fantastic Test match, culminating in a brilliant last day in which England tried and tried and ultimately came up short.
One can point to Andrew Flintoff’s hip injury, which, despite his lion-hearted, heroic effort, slightly hindered his bowling. However, to say that it lost England the game is inaccurate. They bossed the game and the only time they let the West Indies get on top was the mammoth partnership between the high scoring Ramnaresh Sarwan and Shivnarine Chanderpaul. You can argue that having dominated the game and then not been able to win it shows England for the slightly weakened force they may well be nowadays but in the wake of the Jamaica shambles, the performance was pretty impressive.
Particular highlights? Graeme Swann’s display in both innings was highly impressive and was exactly what England fans have been praying for from Monty Panesar in the last few years. His five-wicket haul was the focal point of England’s first attempt at bowling to the Windies and was agonisingly close to picking up that final wicket in the dying moments of the match.
Stuart Broad also impressed. He’s picked up Chanderpaul’s wicket every time he has batted this series and bowled an inspired spell with the new ball on the final day. He batted brilliantly for a number eight in the first innings and Johnathan Agnew on the BBC website was moved to say that he thinks this series could be the making of Broad at international level. Andrew Strauss played a quite superb innings on the first day and was well supported by Owais Shah, Kevin Pietersen and Paul Collingwood. Alistair Cook played his part too although, infuriatingly, he was out in the 50’s in both innings of the match.
All in all, England can be proud of their effort. Yes, the inability to pick up the last wicket and win the game was both heart-breaking and disappointing but the whole five days were a good way to bounce back from the shambles of 51 all out the week previous and Strauss will know a lot more about his team and their character. Both teams move on to Barbados next week for the fourth test.
No Comments »The halfway line
By Richard Seeckts last year, mid-February, 3 Comments »
Talk to cricketers of a bygone era and they will tell you that batting has become much easier since pitches were completely covered during rain breaks in the 1970s. Statistics strongly support their case. In 2008,46 batsmen averaged over 40 in English first class cricket. 40 years earlier, 10 players achieved the same.
There will be no going back to uncovered pitches. Apart from the fact that modern players could not cope, the commercial world requires weather related delays to be kept to a minimum, and one can only imagine what the health and safety experts would make of professional sportsmen running on wet grass.
We have seen the worst and the best of Antiguan ground management over the last few days. Few, if any, other grounds could have made the horlicks achieved at the Sir Vivian Richards Stadium, but can anyone seriously envisage an English ground being Test Match fit from a state of partial dereliction within 40 hours, as the Antigua Recreation Ground was? That the pitch had been used mostly for football since the ground was abandoned as a first class cricket venue in 2006 makes the transformation all the more laudable.
England’s first innings score suggested to many that the wicket remained as good as those on which Brian Lara twice broke the record Test score. Andrew Flintoff might beg to differ. Blasted out by a daisy-cutting shooter from Jerome Taylor, Flintoff was the first victim of the halfway line horror. Several deliveries pitched on the thinly disguised football pitch line, which runs straight across the pitch just short of a good length for bowlers from the Factory Road end. His was the first to take a wicket. Flintoff was desperately unlucky that his second ball was one such delivery, virtually unplayable, but with his bowling boots on, he may yet see the funny side of being the only member of England’s cosy top six not to reach 50.
Inadvertently, the groundsmen of the Antigua Recreation Ground have hit upon a great innovation to spice up top-level cricket. How much more interesting might the game be if all Test pitches had a five inch strip of unpredictable ground randomly placed by someone with no knowledge of cricket? The ICC wouldn’t have trouble finding the right personnel. It would be the same for both sides, but the kind of hazard that could strike any player at any time. A player could bat all day and score 169, like Andrew Strauss, or be sawn off without time to break sweat, like Flintoff.
A few averages might be dented, but how harsh would selectors be on players who were clearly victims of the halfway line lottery? Groundsmen would be free to prepare really good batting pitches with reduced risk of dull, high scoring draws as the line would surely claim a few victims in a five day match.
Most of cricket’s law changes have been made in favour of batsmen since the inception of one-day cricket. Thanks to the recent shambles in Antigua, we have chanced upon an opportunity for the bowlers to have one in their favour. The batsmen of yesteryear might also enjoy seeing their successors having just a small taste of what playing on uncovered pitches was like.
3 Comments »Moving on
By Will last year, mid-February, 1 Comment »
When you’re 51 all out, it seems inconceivable that you’ll ever escape the horror, let alone it become a distant memory. Much like bereavement and mourning, it takes time.
It hasn’t taken England long, though, and they’ve had two large slices of luck. Firstly, the sandy mess at North Sound was exactly what they needed. Not only were they not to blame (and crucially they were at the crease, so no one could crow and spit about the weakling tourists’ bowlers) but it gave them more time to mourn the rotting corpse of 51-all-out. And secondly, the movement of this Test took the pressure off their batsmen slightly, and took the gloss off West Indies’ starry bowling performance. In a matter of days, the Kingston calamity hadn’t been forgotten, but no longer were England caught in its gravitational pull. They’d moved on.
Their other piece of luck came today when Chris Gayle chose to bowl – which is exactly what Andrew Strauss would have done had the coin fell his way. Yet, amazingly, it morphed from spicy-track-of-horror-and-death to placid-lifeless-bowlers’-graveyard. Luck plays a far greater part in sport than anyone ever gives it credit, and it’s helped England hugely.
Still, Strauss needed a big score – lady luck or not. It’s difficult to put it into context given this tour’s various farces, but also the mess which led to Strauss’s appointment. Watching it today, he was pulling as quickly and confidently as he first did for England five years ago, but also his feet were dancing to the spinners. He’s still very much the cautious batsman these days, but he even hit a six (granted, the ground is postage-stamp-sized, but still)…the first time since 2006, would you believe.
All in all, a fascinating day to witness England’s revival. How long that will last, who knows, but to see Strauss assert his authority so emphatically was the year’s highlight so far as an England fan.
Shame about Owais Shah’s hapless running, though he batted sublimely until then.
1 Comment »England’s bowling attack
By Mark Tilley last year, mid-February, 3 Comments »
Is it just me or do England have a seriously good looking attack on display in the current Test match? Speed-wise, even the most skeptical of cricket fans would have to admit it’s impressive. Steve Harmison, Andrew Flintoff, James Anderson and, to a slightly lesser extent, Stuart Broad are all genuinely capable of the odd delivery in excess of 90 mph and they give the captain a wealth of options.
Harmison is painfully erratic and may well be a spent force but he is still capable of rattling his opponents, even if his days are becoming increasingly numbered. Flintoff is as reliable and dangerous as ever and Broad is a developing into a threatening force, fresh from his maiden five wicket haul in Jamaica last week. Jimmy Anderson, like Harmison, can be inconsistent but his pace is an asset and he can be a genuine strike bowler, especially when the ball is swinging (anyone remember 7-43 against New Zealand in Nottingham?).
But the decision to replace Monty Panesar with Graeme Swann could also be the most important one. Panesar’s recent struggles are heavily documented and he was out-bowled by Swann during England’s toiling in India. Swann’s ability with the willow also means England can potentially bat down to 9, so if he can turn it on with the ball in the way that Panesar hasn’t been able to for a while, then England will surely be forced to give him a run in the side.
Far be it from me to play the role of England selector, but the current bowling attack would probably be my first choice to play when the Aussies come to town in July. I would allow a bit of room for change over the spinner, as Panesar, for all his troubles, is capable of being dangerous but if you pinned me down and asked me for a set of names, then I’d be happy to give you this lot. It’s harsh on Ryan Sidebottom but he’d always be in contention to play, dependant on the conditions. The same goes for Simon Jones, although he may or may not ever be fit again.
Thoughts - would anyone rather see Monty back? Is there still life in Harmison? Answers on a postcard please.
3 Comments »The flimsiest of foundations
By Will last year, mid-February, 5 Comments »
I’m still feeling slightly euphoric and exhilarated, which are two adjectives no cricket fan could describe themselves after a day of unprecedented farce. As I’m in the fortunate position of being able to cover such chaos, today has been hugely fun: exciting, depressing in parts, even quite funny and a joy to report on. But it’s a feeling of detached delirium – how in the name of the three Ws, and Sir Viv, could this possibly have happened?
Sand stops play. It’s such a feeble, flimsy excuse on the surface (or, rather, just beneath the surface), yet we all take for granted that the green grass will be sufficiently thick to allow size sixteen boots, attached to sixteen-stone athletes, the cushioning and traction required for bowling. Without that, the game can’t happen. It’s like asking a pole-vaulter to do his stuff with a stick made from paper mache.
Just when we thought West Indies cricket was on the up after that sensational fourth day in Kingston, it regresses back to the laughing stock on which much of its administration is based. North Sound – the ground named in honour of Sir Viv – isn’t fit to host an execution let alone a Test match lasting five days. You could count the number of locals at the ground on two hands. They hate it. It’s a disgrace to the country, an embarrassment to the passion and soul of the West Indies’ supporters and a reprehensible waste of money.
Sir Viv later said: “This is not shooting me in the foot. This is shooting me straight through the heart.” That his name should be associated with such a contemptible construction does everyone in the region a huge, horrible, crying disservice. The ground is everything he is not: crass, ugly, broken, embarrassing and dishonourable.
Vaneisa Baksh, a fine Caribbean-based cricket writer and historian, popped up on messenger during the chaos and sounded almost in tears. Likewise, a friend in Jamaica asked simply: “Why now?” That the Test was ever allowed to take place is just one awful blot on the WICB’s ink-sodden copybook. But that it should happen days after the Caribbean’s brightest moment for a decade is a wound which will take a long time to heal.
Organisations and cricket administrations, like the grounds at which their product should be on glorious display, need sturdier foundations than sand.
Oh – and read this. We found an insider (or rather, Caribbeancricket did. But we’re all friends in cricket land).
5 Comments » « Previous Entries