| 
Posts and words
Loading ...
michael-vaughan
Wanderers ‘99 remembered
By Rich Abbott 2 months ago, 2 Comments »
It’s a bit overcast this morning in Jo’burg. As I write, at 08:00 local time, a dense layering of cloud is preventing the sun from making an appearance. Conditions are not, however, anywhere near comparable to those faced by England on the first morning of the Wanderers Test in 1999 – the 2-4 game, Gavin Hamilton’s sole Test appearance and the subject of my dream, make that nightmare, last night (though in that, England slipped to 0-4).
They say the night is darkest just before the dawn, and that match did mark the Test debut of Michael Vaughan, but it was a harrowing morning for England and their fans. Vaughan, who faced his first ball of international cricket with his side at 2-4, recalled that day’s events before this series started.
I’m certainly not expecting a repeat today, but even so, if England bat first, I won’t find myself able to relax until Strauss and Cook have safely guided the total into double figures.
2 Comments »Duncan Fletcher shows a new side
By Will 2 months ago, 2 Comments »
Ah. Maybe not then. Go on, Dunc – cheeeeeeeeeese.
From Test Match Special on Flickr.
2 Comments »Success breeds success?
By Rich Abbott last year, mid-December, 2 Comments »
When England sneaked the Ashes in 1953, winning by one Test, Bill Bowes wrote that “satisfaction in the result must not blind us to the need to build strongly.” When England sneaked the Ashes in 2009, winning by one Test, modern day scribes penned similar sentiments. In fact, most added ominous warnings about the winter tour to then-number one Test nation, South Africa.
Fast forward a few months and some uncharacteristic limited overs success, and the tone has changed. England now have a pretty decent chance – they must do, Michael Vaughan says so, revealing in his Sunday Telegraph column that he “really fancies England to win this Test series”.
But why? Are people reading too much into the impressive victory over South Africa in the Champions Trophy, and the subsequent drawn T20 and victorious ODI series? Is it wrong to read anything into such matches?
England’s recent record suggests it is. Results since the 06-07 debacle down under show very little correlation between limited overs and Test success: a slap in the face to that much vaunted variable, momentum. When Test and ODI series have been paired together in recent years, England have an uncanny and near-impeccable record – at winning one and losing the other.
Illustrating how England have become a model of inconsistency, and boding badly for the two months ahead, a win one/lose one pattern has occured on the following occasions:
Australia, away, 06-07
West Indies, home, 2007
India, home, 2007
Sri Lanka, away, 07-08
New Zealand, away. 2008
New Zealand, home, 2008
South Africa, home, 2008
West Indies, away, 2009
Australia, home, 2009
In other words, most series England have played. But, to take that as the full story would be to ignore the times that ODI series have been significant as eye-opening and mindset-altering precursors.
This theme is explored by Simon Barnes in his book, The Meaning of Sport. In it, he discusses England’s limited overs success in the early summer of 2005, and its subsequent ramifications for the Test series.
It showed the England players that the Australian side was composed exclusively of human beings. The sort of people who bleed when you prick them. The wine they drink is made of grapes. They ache, they err, they worry, they defecate, they get tired, they get homesick. And they could, conceivably and occasionally, be beaten.
Despite this bunch of South Africans sitting far below that Australian team on the greatness spectrum, there is probably no tougher hurdle in the game right now. Phase one of the tour has been completed to perfection: we may not have been led to believe it a few months ago, but it turns out Graeme Smith’s men are beatable.
2 Comments »Michael Vaughan’s autobiography: Time to Declare
By Will last year, at the end of October, No Comments; be the first!
Michael Vaughan’s autobiography, Time to Declare
The Times are serialising some of it and, in what we desperately hope will be a revealing insight into one of England’s most successful captains, and not mere fodder for the shelves, he has spoken out of his troubles in forging a successful working relationship with Peter Moores.
(From March 2008)
“The team is starting to get irritated by the new management regime – being told what to do and treated like schoolkids. Peter (Moores) loves talking and having the last word.”
“I still think that the England captain should have ultimate control, but Peter wanted to be in charge from the sidelines.
“What I found is that he wanted to do everyone’s jobs for them …
“Duncan would never do that; he would trust me to get on with it.”
Should be a good read.
No Comments »Ashes win just the start for the new England
By Will last year, at the end of August, 5 Comments »
England win the Ashes. No one even ponders an open-top bus tour. No medals are hung around players’ necks and, with due respect to MPs Brown and Cameron – and the Queen – very little fanfair has been afforded this England team.
And thank god for that. England’s win was unforgettable, in a tense, thrilling, pendulum-swinging series which might have lacked the greats of the game that we had in 2005, but for entertainment it was very much on a par.
Did the better team win? Just about. Man for man, the two sides are very close indeed, but England beat Australia on home advantage and a clearer idea of where they’re heading. Before the series, I thought England would win 2-1 owing to having an in-form spinner who can bat, and having a more balanced attack; the fact Hauritz wasn’t picked at The Oval by Australia was a remarkable decision. Surely, surely, they must have been made aware the pitch was a bunsen. It wouldn’t have taken much to realise that on first glance 24 hours before.
I almost felt deflated by the win. 25 days of ball-by-ball commentary can do that to you. But having had time to reflect, only now do I feel really excited; pleased that England won, even though it feels like a heist, because this is just the beginning. In 2005, the regaining of the Ashes was the culmination of Nasser Hussain, Duncan Fletcher and Michael Vaughan’s extensive planning. The 2009 win has come sooner than even Andy Flower would’ve hoped, and is just the beginning.
And one other thought, which I’ll write about when I can be bothered: Matt Prior, you played a blinder. What a turnaround in his career it’s been.
Oh, and by the way – just 457 days until the next series in Australia.
5 Comments »Hoggard on Vaughan
By Will last year, at the end of June, No Comments; be the first!
No Comments »Before I crack on with my eulogy to Michael Vaughan, there is one thing I’ve got to get off my chest: he ain’t a Yorkshire lad, he’s from fricking Lancashire!
Vaughan to retire
By Will last year, at the end of June, 1 Comment »
To steal Nasser Hussain’s comment today: Vaughan, a wonderful timer of a cricket ball, appears to have timed this announcement rather well too. Ignored by the England selectors last week, it seemed highly likely he’d call it a day, and we can expect a formal announcement this week to end the career of England’s greatest-ever captain.
Farewell, Michael. I hope he is put to good use, either by England or by other sporting bodies in his retirement.
1 Comment »Cheers, Michael
By Will last year, mid-May, 4 Comments »
I think we can say with some degree of certainty that Michael Vaughan’s glittering international career is now at an end. He limped off today in Yorkshire’s match against Warwickshire, and with the four-day game now taking a bit of a break, he won’t have another Championship match until June 6 to prove his worthiness to England. Given Ravi Bopara’s sublime statement in his first outing at No.3, everything – including luck – is against Vaughan returning to the England team.
We could well be saying farewell to him in the next few months if he can’t stay on the park for longer than a few overs. In which case, what have been your favourite Vaughan memories? I will always remember his innings against India in 2002 – 197 and 195. I remember that second knock especially, the way he picked up the length so quickly and crashed it over midwicket. It quickly became his signature shot, but it was a stroke which always surprised me having watched him graft for much of his early career (hence many people comparing him to Mike Atherton, unfairly so on many levels).
And then, of course, his dominance in Australia which left them all shocked that an Englishman could bat with such freedom and elegance. I could happily sit through DVDs of all his hundreds.
Yours?
4 Comments »No Vaughan, but another new keeper
By Will 2 years ago, at the end of December, 2 Comments »
It wasn’t expected that Michael Vaughan would return, but there was almost a feeling of hope that the selectors would relent and call him back for the West Indies. Possibly at the expense of the constantly-underperforming Ian Bell.
It wasn’t to be. The Mumbai attacks prevented Vaughan from having any match practice with England’s performance squad and, as such, it now seems increasingly unlikely that he’ll be able to force his way back into the side for the Ashes. The pressure, then, is firmly back on Bell to actually score some ugly runs when the team most needs it. When the backs aren’t so much against the wall, as holding up the ceiling entirely. All these pretty little 40s are kidding no-one.
So, no Vaughan. But at least we have a new wicketkeeper – another one! – in Steven Davies who will be Matt Prior’s backup for the one-dayers. Tim Ambrose is Prior’s wingman for the Tests so, in all, England have three keepers available for one tour. It’s a trifle over the top.
Then again, given the state of West Indies cricket (Gayle and Chanderpaul aside), England ought not to break sweat.
2 Comments »Vaughan’s first piece as Telegraph columnist
By Will 2 years ago, at the start of October, No Comments; be the first!
Well, here’s his first piece as a Daily Telegraph columnist. He’s “mad” for getting back into the England team, and has outlined his path to hopefully returning for the Ashes.
There are some obvious lines about tiredness, the Pattinson selection and so on, but overall it’s a worthy read. In particular, on Pietersen’s first tour as England captain:
No Comments »It will be the same in India. The first tour is the hard part for an England captain. You don’t get home conditions, and you have 15 players to manage and get ready to play. I couldn’t have asked for more help as captain – the ECB were good at taking the pressure off, but pressure is part of the job. The England captains who will last are the ones with steely determination to prove people wrong.
Vaughan becomes Telegraph columnist
By Will 2 years ago, at the start of October, 2 Comments »
Well, if you can’t beat them…
2 Comments »Vaughan’s best and worst moments
By Will 2 years ago, at the start of August, 7 Comments »
What a day. What a monstrous day it’s been. Here’s my thoughts on his career highs and low as a captain.
The highs…
Levelling the series in 2003
|
||
The reins were passed over by an emotional Nasser Hussain to Vaughan in 2003, but his tenure began poorly with a thumping innings defeat at Lord’s against South Africa. However, England’s new captain showed an early indication of the steeliness that would eventually characterise his style of leadership, as England bounced back at Trent Bridge to level the series with six wickets from James Kirtley. South Africa again stole the lead at Headingley but they couldn’t finish England off at The Oval. With Alec Stewart retiring, Marcus Trescothick cracking 219 and Graham Thorpe making a riveting comeback hundred after his marriage breakdown, in levelling the series at 2-2 Vaughan had begun to show that he had the credentials to lead England to greater success. Gone was the unquenchable show of passion that Hussain showed; in came a calm, apparently laid-back but ferociously competitive new leader in Vaughan, and England ended their summer on a surprising high.
Beating West Indies away
The Caribbean had been an impregnable fortress for England captains, but the old world order was utterly reversed. England didn’t sneak a win here and there; Vaughan’s side dominated them throughout, but for the small matter of Brian Lara nudging 400 all on his own. Vaughan had a young team bristling with ability and fearlessness, with a bowling attack who were brilliantly coached by Troy Cooley. Steve Harmison’s career zenith of 7 for 12 propelled England to a 10-wicket win in Jamaica, bowling with all the venom of one of West Indies’ greats, while Matthew Hoggard grew in confidence and Andrew Flintoff became so much more than a useful change bowler. West Indies’ fortress came tumbling down at Bridgetown. Vaughan had a four-man pace attack and aggressive, fearless batsmen – the winning nucleus that formed part of their Ashes-winning team of 2005.
A golden summer
It wasn’t just the fact England broke a record that was set in 1885-88 and 1928-29. 2004 was a summer of unforgettable attraction, of attacking batting and skilful bowling and a confidence in their game that English cricket had lacked for so long. England won seven Tests on the trot and 10 in 11 matches. Eight batsmen totalled 13 centuries. Harmison, so impressive in the West Indies a few months previously, was consistently venomous and a genuine spearhead for Vaughan. For a team once allergic to winning, England had forgotten how to lose. Andrew Strauss cracked a hundred on debut against New Zealand and batted with an authority belying his total inexperience. But it was the growing maturity of Flintoff that changed Vaughan’s team from merely challenging sides into walloping them. A brutal 167 sunk the West Indies at Edgbaston, and Vaughan began to shake his head in part-disbelief part-excitement at the cricketer he had the fortune of captaining. England were utterly in sync; Vaughan translated his silky batting into equally elegant leadership.
Beating South Africa away
7 Comments »
A gutting decision. But the right one
By Jonathan Liew 2 years ago, at the start of August, 11 Comments »
Following England’s worst run of form for many years, this was no more and no less than was required. With Vaughan gone, and Collingwood following him, the times really do appear to be a-changin’.
I suspect that could be it for Vaughan as an England player, unless he’s back by the start of next summer. As Mark Ramprakash has shown, an aging batsman needs more than runs to force his way into the England team. The pressure to recall him for the Ashes series will be immense, but ultimately will depend on many factors: injuries, selectorial whimsy, his own form, the form of whoever replaces him in the batting line-up, and the form of the new England team. For the first time in many years, Vaughan is no longer the master of his own destiny.
KP is the only viable candidate to take over. The job has probably come a couple of years too early for Ian Bell, and a couple of years too late for Andrew Strauss. There’s the Freddie factor, of course – expect some barmy tabloid columnist to push his case. Pietersen as captain could go either way. His success will depend whether it is ultimately he who stamps his mark upon the captaincy, or the captaincy that stamps its mark upon him. A good first step would be to move up to number three, thus relieving a new recruit of that weighty burden.
And what of that new recruit? After the Pattinson debacle, the selectors are unlikely to look beyond the main contenders of Shah, Bopara and Key. Key is the best replacement for Vaughan’s experience; Shah the closest fit to Vaughan’s strokeplay; Bopara a suitable substitute for Vaughan’s temperament. Whoever they do pick, one thing will be certain: when England arrive at The Oval on Thursday, there will be a conspicuous Virgil-shaped hole in that dressing room. Thanks for everything, Michael – things won’t be the same without you.
11 Comments »Poor technology hampers cricket
By Will 2 years ago, mid-July, 9 Comments »
Michael Vaughan dives to catch Hashim Amla. Or did he? (© Getty Images)
I really want technology to work in cricket, for it to help umpires, and avoid those unnecessary delays. But today highlighted just why no current technology can really be trusted to confirm or correct an umpire’s decision.
There were two incidents, one from each team. Andrew Strauss edged to AB de Villiers at third slip, who dived across and claimed a catch low to his right. Very low. One glance at the slow-mo replay – that is all it took – confirmed the ball had bounced well before de Villiers, and even when the ball made it into his hands, he was not in control of it. It was simply not out, despite his and all the other South Africans’ insistence. Strauss stood his ground and the replay clearly confirmed he was right to do so. I’ve no problem with de Villiers claiming the catch. It’s his duty, and if he felt he caught it, fine.
The second incident is trickier. Hashim Amla fended off a brute of a bouncer from Andrew Flintoff, the ball ballooning tantalisingly in front of Michael Vaughan. Amazingly, for someone with only half a knee, he made a terrific effort to reach the ball, diving in front of him and apparently scooping it up with his fingertips before it hit the ground. He immediately celebrated, whooping with delight, and it looked a clear winner.
Amla headed off, but his coach and captain gesticulated for him to stay, prompting the use of a replay which couldn’t confirm whether Vaughan’s catch was clean or not. From one angle, it looked like he had got his fingers underneath it and it never touched the grass. From another, you couldn’t see the ends of his fingers, so the ball appeared to be grounded. In short, it was inconclusive and Amla was allowed to stay. It could be a decision that defines the series should Amla go on to score a hundred.
Technology ought to be helping cricket, but at the moment we’re stuck in this awful halfway house. The players aren’t sure. The umpires are frightened that their errors will be exposed, and understandably refer it to the television official. But when that last line of defence is so utterly indecisive, the biggest losers are the players and the public for having to wait several minutes for a non-decision. It’s utterly crap.
I have no solution to this. We will have to wait another decade or more for technology to improve, but I’m sure it will. Eventually, I can see the day where all players are wired up, their fingers acting as remote sensors for a television official. When players’ hands touch the ball, it’ll send a signal; perhaps the ball’s own shape could be monitored, signalling to the umpire when it’s touched the ground. Maybe it’ll turn automatically turn green if it’s not-out, or explode for a player who continually abuses the referral system.
Who bloody knows. Maybe we’re asking too much of technology. It works almost flawlessly in tennis, but cricket is far more complex. Many more players on a much larger outfield (of varying sizes and shapes) makes it so hard for science and technology to monitor things…tennis is reliant on the lines on the court and sensors on the nets, and hawkeye has made that process brilliantly slick.
There’s no chance we’ll ever revert to players walking, accepting fielders’ puppy-eyed nodding that they took the catch. So what exactly is the solution until technology catches up?
9 Comments »Pietersen as a Test captain, anyone?
By Jonathan Liew 2 years ago, at the start of July, 9 Comments »
There’s always a tendency to make your best player captain, but of late it’s one England have found it quite easy to resist. Captains need guile, nous, subtlety and tact. Mike Brearley had those things. Conversely, I reckon there’s about a 10% chance Kevin Pietersen hasn’t even heard of Mike Brearley.
For the moment, though, KP appears to the man in possession, which allows a tantalising glimpse into an imagined, post-Vaughan future. The present skipper clearly wants to make it as far as the next Ashes series, although so did Graham Thorpe, you might remember. In fact, any one of a number of circumstances could derail Vaughan before next summer – poor form with the bat, a thumping at the hands of South Africa, a disastrous winter tour, that blasted knee, an invitation to take part in Strictly Come Dancing – you know, anything.
And so, a number of names would be in the frame. Collingwood, if he’s still in the team; Cook, probably; Flintoff as a romantic outside bet; Strauss, heaven forbid. Pietersen, though, will definitely be a front-runner. If his stint as one-day captain goes well or he has a sensational run of form, his hand will be strengthened still further.
What would Pietersen be like as a captain? More importantly, perhaps, what would Pietersen the captain be like as a batsman? This is how the captaincy has affected the batting averages of some modern-day captains:
Ricky Ponting: 62.00 as captain; 55.97 not as captain
Brian Lara: 57.83 as captain; 50.12 not as captain
Rahul Dravid: 44.51 as captain; 57.66 not as captain
Michael Vaughan: 37.71 as captain; 50.98 not as captain
Interesting, isn’t it? The best two captains – Dravid and Vaughan – are the two whose form actually dips when given the top job.
When you consider the circumstances, it begins to make a little sense. Imagine that Vaughan or Dravid comes out to bat at 10 for 1 in reply to a score of about about 500. Neither man is exactly going to come out with all guns blazing. As captain, that would be irresponsible. Vaughan and Dravid feel a great and justifiable sense of responsibility towards their team which sometimes inhibits them from playing their natural game.
If Ponting or Lara came in in the same situation (Lara’s retired, I know) they would feel less constrained by the match situation. The reason? Ponting knows that if he’s out cheaply, chances are one of the batsman coming after him will save the day. Lara knows, or knew, that even if he scored 150, the West Indies would still very possibly lose. Neither Ponting nor Lara are as central to their team’s batting line-up as Vaughan or Dravid are, and they can thus play with a far greater degree of freedom.
That’s not to say that players whose figures improve when they become captain are simply selfish and single-minded; merely that the more freedom you have to play your natural game, the less it matters whether you’re a good captain or not. Ponting could be a terrible captain and Australia would still win most of the time. Lara could be a brilliant one and the West Indies would still lose. It’s the likes of Vaughan and Dravid, in the middle ground, who have to rein themselves in for the good of the team.
The qualities that make players good captains, then, actually render them less effective as a batsman. If KP ever becomes England captain, it looks like someone else is going to have to get the runs.
9 Comments » « Previous Entries