| 
Posts and words
Loading ...
paul-collingwood
Covering all bases
By Will 1 month ago, 1 Comment »
Paul Collingwood:
Pakistan are a very strong Twenty20 side and we’re going to have to be right on our game to beat them. It might be a good time to play them, but you never quite know what you’re going to get on the day so I think we’ve just got to concentrate on our own game and see what we get on the day
So then. That’s:
1) Pakistan are a very good side
2) But we think they’re there for the taking, maybe
3) Who knows? We might win. But they might win, too.
Press conferences don’t get much more gripping.
1 Comment »Jo’burg, day four: SA level the series
By Rich Abbott 2 months ago, 2 Comments »
South Africa brought an excellent series to a close today, and in doing so added a touch more reality to the series scoreline.
Paul Collingwood was the sole reason to be cheerful for England fans, as the home side wrapped up proceedings before lunch. The Durham man was England’s life raft, but no one else was able to cling on with him. The South African supporters have a lot of respect for Collingwood – indeed, the ones I was sitting next to were unable to relax until he was out, and he fell for the ninth wicket. They admire his fighting mentality, and, with Smith, Kallis and Boucher in their team, can be considered experts on the subject. On a highlights programme for the day one action, a home commentator even described Collingwood as “the dangerman of the England side” – testament to both his form this series, and an outsider’s view of his importance to the team.
Pietersen’s forty minutes at the crease were in keeping with his form since Centurion, and his dismissal brought Ian Bell into the action. It says much for his form this series that he brought with him genuine hope, but the examination of character and reflexes that he received from Morkel proved too rigorous – as it would have done for most batsmen.
Ironically, at the end of a long tour, it is England’s two South Africans whose minds seemed to be focussed on home. Both Pietersen and Trott have demonstrated a strange metal detachment from proceedings at the Wanderers.
It’s hard to believe that this was only the third time South Africa have taken 20 wickets in a match in their last seven Tests, and only their second win in that time. But the past year has been something of a transition period for their attack. By successfully blooding De Wet, McLaren and Parnell in this series, they have found cover for the experience and wickets lost in the departure of Makhaya Ntini. The holy grail as far as their bowling attack goes, would be to turn JP Duminy into a genuine allrounder, thus being able to dispense with Paul Harris and finding an off-spinner to utilise the pitch marks left by Parnell’s narrow bowling run-up.
That may or may not happen, but to an extent, it doesn’t matter – the recent form of Morne Morkel, who was quiet last year against Australia, suggests that South Africa have found a worthy partner for Dale Steyn. Aptly, the twin pace threat shared the man of the match award, but at the end of a series, the feeling with those two, especially the less-established Morkel, is that this is just the beginning.
2 Comments »Colly fit for action
By Rich Abbott 2 months ago, 3 Comments »
It seems likely that Paul Collingwood will start tomorrow, given positive reports regarding his dislocated finger. Colly has always struck me as a ‘don’t know what you’ve got ’til it’s gone’ type of player – one whose true value to the side is only fully realised when they’re no longer in it. Several times he’s fought off such an eventuality occurring, but at Durban, injury meant we caught a glimpse of it.
His batting is rejuvenated. His scores in South Africa, in all formats, over the past few months (including the Champions Trophy) are excellent: 46, 82, 40, 34, 57, 105, 86, 2, 50, 26* and 91. And the void he left in the field was accentuated by his captain – himself a fine fielder – missing a couple of slip chances in a manner which suggested that Graeme Swann might not have been the first England spinner to take 50 wickets in a year were it not for Paul Collingwood.
3 Comments »Collingwood’s innings the equal of Watson and Bailey
By Will last year, mid-July, No Comments; be the first!
“The partnership between Willie Watson and Trevor Bailey in 1953 at Lord’s is the only one to match,” writes Scyld Berry.
Watson made 109, Bailey 71. Scorecard, Wisden report and a reflection by John Arlott.
No Comments »The Ashes are ablaze once more
By Will last year, mid-July, 2 Comments »
Of all the results. Of all the venues. I still can’t quite grasp how England’s Nos. 10 and 11 managed to seal a draw, but seal it they did in one of the tensest, most gripping matches I’ve had the great fortune of commentating on. Once Paul Collingwood fell, I and the rest of England had given up all hope. Monty Panesar does not instill great hope in anyone. He averages under 6 in Test cricket for a very good reason, yet somehow produced the innings of his life – and bar one or two understandably nervy strokes, for the most part played incredibly straight. James Anderson, well, we almost expect it from him nowadays.
So here are the final few overs that I cobbled – apologies for any errors, but in the heat of the moment and with fingers rapidly cramping, they are almost inevitable. There’s a shed load of class from our three at the ground, too – this, explaining Ponting’s anger at England’s use of the 12th man; and this on Collingwood, the tenacious ginger.
|
England need to survive until 6.41pm because that’ll be too late for Australia to come back on and chase |
|||||||||||||||
|
100.1 |
Hauritz to Anderson, no run, tossed up on leg, back and defending |
||||||||||||||
|
100.2 |
Hauritz to Anderson, no run, padded away |
||||||||||||||
|
100.3 |
Hauritz to Anderson, 1 run, comes forward and smothers it, opening the face and guiding down to third man. They’ll take a single |
||||||||||||||
|
Around the wicket |
|||||||||||||||
|
100.4 |
Hauritz to Panesar, no run, flighted on the off stump. Monty defends. Good ball though. Thousands and thousands cheer him as though he’s won the game for England |
||||||||||||||
|
100.5 |
Hauritz to Panesar, no run, wonderful ball but well played. On the off stump and defended |
||||||||||||||
|
100.6 |
Hauritz to Panesar, no run, wide of the off stump, prodigious turn and bounce |
||||||||||||||
End of over 101 (1 run) England 246/9
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Right here comes North. Change of bowling. My fingers are cramping massively so bear with me, might be slightly slow 12th man runs out for England and absolutely legs it out into the middle with a word for Anderson and Panesar. A reminder: it’s now a time issue. Four overs must be bowled, but Australia have 11 minutes to bowl England out. That’s the situation. Keep 6.41pm in your mind. It’s in exactly ten minutes. |
|||||||||||||||
|
101.1 |
North to Anderson, 1 run, cracked in the air square of the wicket – where’s this gone? It lands safe! It’s safe, but the pair crash into eachother mid-pitch while staring at the ball |
||||||||||||||
|
101.2 |
North to Panesar, FOUR, four! Panesar’s crashed him square of the wicket for four! Ponting can’t believe it. Monty can’t believe it. I certainly can’t believe it |
||||||||||||||
|
101.3 |
North to Panesar, no run, defended on the front foot |
||||||||||||||
|
101.4 |
North to Panesar, no run, flighted on middle, and he’s forward, defending |
||||||||||||||
|
He is around the wicket by the way. Has been all over |
|||||||||||||||
|
101.5 |
North to Panesar, no run, solidly defended – very firm |
||||||||||||||
|
101.6 |
North to Panesar, no run, perhaps the biggest cheer of the Test as Panesar smothers it on the front foot |
||||||||||||||
End of over 102 (5 runs) England 251/9
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Shafayat is on the field with some gloves and questions. Ponting’s told him where to go in true Aussie style, and you can’t blame him. The physio’s on, too. Oh come on England, just suck it up and get on with it. Embarrassing. Right, they’ve bogged off so here we go. The noise is just amazing, incredible |
|||||||||||||||
|
102.1 |
Hauritz to Anderson, no run, blocked off the back foot. The roof’s off again! The noise is just wonderful |
||||||||||||||
|
102.2 |
Hauritz to Anderson, no run, blocked once more. Cardiff erupts. Then silence. |
||||||||||||||
|
102.3 |
Hauritz to Anderson, no run, blocked again on the front foot. Cardiff explodes. Cardiff goes quiet. Silent. |
||||||||||||||
|
102.4 |
Hauritz to Anderson, no run, that’s well bowled but Hauritz is tensing up. Not really spinning it any more. Cardiff explodes with delight then a hushed whisper as Hauritz comes in once more |
||||||||||||||
|
102.5 |
Hauritz to Anderson, no run, full toss, pushed out to the off side |
||||||||||||||
|
102.6 |
Hauritz to Anderson, no run, quicker ball! Well bowled! Blocked. Cardiff explodes once more and this time it’s not followed by silence. The noisehere! |
||||||||||||||
End of over 103 (maiden) England 251/9
|
|||||||||||||||
|
The crowd think England have done it, but they haven’t yet. It’s one more over. Possibly two. |
|||||||||||||||
|
103.1 |
North to Panesar, no run, comes forward and gets a bit of backspin on it as he defends. Cardiff erupts. Cardiff goes silent |
||||||||||||||
|
103.2 |
North to Panesar, no run, forward onto the front foot and defends. Capital of Wales goes mad. Capital of Wales goes silent |
||||||||||||||
|
103.3 |
North to Panesar, no run, left alone outside off |
||||||||||||||
|
103.4 |
North to Panesar, no run, tense from North. Left alone. Too wide. Way, way too wide. Cardiff explodes |
||||||||||||||
|
103.5 |
North to Panesar, no run, edged, short of slip. Soft hands from Panesar. Slowish turn |
||||||||||||||
|
103.6 |
North to Panesar, no run, flighted on the off stump and Panesar survives. Cardiff is alight. The crowd are alive. Ponting is talking to the umpires and trying to work out the times |
||||||||||||||
End of over 104 (maiden) England 251/9
|
|||||||||||||||
|
It’s 6.39pm. 6.40pm is the cut-off. We’ll have one more over. This could be the last over of the match. This is so, so, so tense. Hauritz around the wicket |
|||||||||||||||
|
104.1 |
Hauritz to Anderson, no run, quicker ball on leg stump, nudged to leg. Cardiff explodes, then a hushed silence |
||||||||||||||
|
You can hear a pin drop |
|||||||||||||||
|
104.2 |
Hauritz to Anderson, no run, flighted on middle and defended |
||||||||||||||
|
104.3 |
Hauritz to Anderson, no run, tosses this up on the middle stump and he’s forward. It prompts more emphatic, cacophonous cheer from the crowd. And then silence |
||||||||||||||
|
104.4 |
Hauritz to Anderson, no run, huge turn for once but it’s too wide. It’s too wide from Hauritz |
||||||||||||||
|
104.5 |
Hauritz to Anderson, no run, drifts in, darts in on middle. Blocked. Blocked. |
||||||||||||||
|
This could be it. This is the last ball of the match in theory. |
|||||||||||||||
|
104.6 |
Hauritz to Anderson, 1 bye, wide of the off stump, off the pads and balloons over the slips. They run a bye. They run a bye. Ponting scratches his chin, he looks distraught. Anderson talks to the umpires. No one knows what’s going on! But they shake hands and England have drawn! It’s all over! |
||||||||||||||
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 »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 »Who should England drop? You decide
By Will last year, mid-February, 12 Comments »
Given England’s current debacle, it’s high-time we all did what England fans love to do: pretend we’re the selectors. It’s all very well everyone moaning about how dire the situation is when we all know how gleeful we really are. Britons can’t cope with success; we do, however, do a great line in depression and cynicism. This is our time. Stand tall, England fans, and show the world how we thrive in this meadow of misery.
I’ve chosen Cook, Bell, Harmison and Collingwood as the four candidates in the firing line, and you can choose a maximum of two to be dropped. So, vote in the poll and leave a comment with your reasoning.
12 Comments »Strauss relies on deep-rooted belief. Bell doesn’t
By Will 2 years ago, mid-December, 2 Comments »
When I woke up this morning at about 8 o’clock, England had just lost Kevin Pietersen and were three-down for not many. Were it not for needing to leg it to the estate agent to sign my contract, not to mention heading into the office for work, I’d have swallowed the cynaide there and then. England’s good position looked to be slipping away faster than the dying subcontinental sun.
What a turnaround; what guts, determination and skill Andrew Strauss and Paul Collingwood showed. It’s at times like these that we struggle to comprehend the importance of England’s position here: it is fast becoming a match-winning one and, if they win, it will count among the very best on Indian soil. If that’s putting too high a price on an England victory, then to call it one of the most unlikely is an understatement. The terrorist strikes; the will-they-won’t-they return; the fact it’s in India, against an Indian team who have just beaten Australia. Kevin Pietersen may not be sleeping too well at the moment, but MS Dhoni will be reaching for hot milk and nytol this evening.
Strauss has been immense in this Test. He is not the player of old, but that’s inevitable. Firstly he doesn’t have Marcus Trescothick at the other end to spur him on, and secondly he has suffered a fairly rubbish couple of years. He seems to have gone back in time, perhaps even to before he was at Middlesex. Dogged defence has replaced urgent strokeplay but, crucially, he’s still ticking along at a good rate. His innings in this Test have been of a true opener, and we’ve not had cause to say that about him for some time. He was too loose, too often.
Loose is one of many words that could be used to describe Ian Bell. How long will England persist? It seems inconceivable that Owais Shah won’t be considered in the next Test; a shock and a wake-up call is what Bell urgently needs. I’ve lost count of the number of times he gets off the mark with world cricket’s most sumptious and technically perfect cover drive (or on-drive), but he seems allergic to score ugly runs. It’s all about positivity and urgent run-making; appearing to make a statement; rolling up his sleeves, having a word with the fielders. This is not Ian Bell.
Bell was my first interviewee in 2005 and he came across as a really shy, quiet sort of bloke who was intimidated by the bravado Kevin Pietersen – who was the brash newcomer at the time – brought to the side. Shortly after that series he gave an interview in which he spoke about his “presence”, something Alec Stewart had been helping him with. So his theory went, he felt he needed to assert himself more – whether that meant skipping down the pitch for a lofted four to a spinner, or skipping down the pavilion steps and showing a “positive” way of reaching the crease when he first came in.
This is all clearly a facade of paper-thin proportions and it’s not kidding anyone, least of all Bell himself. Like Strauss, he should just be himself and rely on his ridiculously rare batting gifts to see him through.
2 Comments »The Collingwood howler
By Will 2 years ago, mid-December, 12 Comments »
Paul Collingwood has worn a sore loser’s face for a long time now, and with good reason. He seems to be magnetised to poor umpiring decisions, and today’s was about as bad as it gets. Have a look at the screengrabs below (kindly stolen from Patrick – cheers Paddy). The great irony is that over in New Zealand, the ICC is continuing its trial into the video-review appeal system – Chris Gayle’s successful challenge prevented Daniel Flynn from reaching his hundred yesterday. Hmm. I think now might be the time to “let this idea float”, as those sickly marketing types might say. Just check these howlers out:
Bristling moustaches abound, but cricket wins
By Alex Try 2 years ago, mid-December, 1 Comment »
Above anything which took place during today’s play, it is just a relief that cricket is back on again. The significance of this first Test for Indian cricket, with IPLs and Champions Leagues coming up, goes without saying. This might be the most important two-Test series ever played.
Security was tight but not oppressive. Lots of cops with bristling moustaches and ample girths glared at fans outside the stadium before play began. This moustache-to-belly ratio seemed to be an indicator of officer seniority but, despite their intimidating persona, almost everyone was welcoming.
Inside the stadium cameras, mobile phones and sun-cream were banned but many people managed to sneak them in anyway. A big screen which asks spectators to text messages onto it had a constant turnover, so the guards frisking can not have been that effective.
On the subject of ‘effective’ – England’s total was indebted to Andrew Strauss, who compiled his 13th Test hundred with minimum fuss. He and Alastair Cook seemed to be going some way to proving that a warm-up was not needed after all. If only the rest of England’s batting could have lived up to their start.
Paul Collingwood’s performance stood out in particular. Seemingly playing with a ping-pong bat, it would surprise nobody in the ground today if replays were used by the U.S Army to interrogate inmates in Guantanamo Bay. Given Owais Shah was England’s only consistent batsman during the one-day series, and Collingwood hardly scored a run, the England XI is confusing at best.
However, wherever England’s ended up at the end of the day’s play, the real story is that this Test is being played at all.
Alex Try is in India blogging England’s tour for The Corridor. He is envious of bristling moustaches
1 Comment »Collingwood, the poor man’s Ealham
By Will 2 years ago, mid-November, No Comments; be the first!
Alec Stewart is not the sniping type, but this must count as one of the vaguest, faintest forms of praise in many a year.
Collingwood, with respect, is a poor man’s Mark Ealham
Ouch! And meoww. “With respect” ranks alongside “to be fair” as one of those phrases which means decidedly less than nothing. It’s a minus-phrase, but not as bad as “I’m not a racist, but…”
Still, he’s a got a point has the Gaffer. Colly is having an unadulterated Barry at the moment.
No 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 »Collingwood in, Harmison out; Sidebottom in, Broad out
By Will 2 years ago, at the end of July, 7 Comments »
Well well – no Steve Harmison for Edgbaston. More of a surprise is that Paul Collingwood, who was dumped for the Headingley Test, has returned at the expense of Stuart Broad. I can’t say I’m over the moon about Collingwood. He’s a brawler, I’ll give him that, but when you’re forced to describe cricketers with words such as “gutsy” and “a real fighter,” when they are so woefully out of nick, you know you’re clutching at a big, fat, pile of straws.
Broad is clearly knackered, and he’ll no doubt be back shortly. So should Collingwood continue to fail, he’ll be out on his ear.
Still – every cloud, and all that. It gives us a chance to laugh at my mate Dan. To call him a Collingwood dissenter is to underestimate his thrilling anger. Mention the C word and young Dan explodes into a ball (a very small ball, admittedly) of puce, boiling rage. Fortunately, he’s managed to wipe the phlegm from his chin and compose a reasoned response to Colly’s recall, dripping in frustrated sarcasm. On ya, Briggers – don’t hold back!
7 Comments »Collingwood’s decision
By Will 2 years ago, at the end of June, 24 Comments »
You’ll no doubt have heard of the rucus in south London by now. Ryan Sidebottom charged down the crease to collect the ball, trying to run out Grant Elliott. The pair collided, Elliott was flattened unceremoniously, and the batsman subsequently run out. The umpires asked Collingwood if he’d like to withdraw his appeal and, in a split second, he declined. Elliott was out.
It leaves a bitter taste doesn’t it? But as Daniel Vettori said, the whole mess would be considered far worse had New Zealand actually lost. That they overcame Collingwood’s clear error of judgement ought to reduce this to a storm in a tea cup.
I’ve never seen a New Zealand team so outraged, firstly, nor so pumped up when they won. Some of the language was decidedly fruity, and the scenes were pretty disgusting. Collingwood admitted he made the wrong decision – he’ll have to live with that forever now – but it was a pretty sad state of affairs to see Vettori and New Zealand close the door on him initially when he went to congratulate them.
Fortunately, cricket’s a bigger game than most, and 20 minutes later everyone had shaken hands.
Where do you stand on it all? I’m too knackered to pass judgement other than invite you to read a slightly broader piece.
24 Comments » « Previous Entries