England finally managed a genuinely earned victory this winter, as Andrew Strauss's form continued with the bat to guide his side over the finishing line. Although results may not have
gone his way, on a personal note, Strauss has managed the pressure and responsibility manfully, and deserves more plaudits than he has received.
However, it is not the result that has caught my attention. As the match began England looked themselves, tired, worn down and lacking inspiration. However, there was a clear turning point, sparked partly by a flurry of wickets including that of the talismanic Gayle but just as much by the departure from the field of one Kevin Pieterson.
There was an irony that his back went into spasm in the week that he had had enough and wanted to be back in Blighty, an irony exacerbated by the fact that the damage occurred as Pieterson bowled to Shiv Chanderpaul, the same man KP had accused of picking up oddly timed injuries. The conspiracy theories start here.
Of more interest was how the England players responded. It could be an illusion, no doubt aided by the victory, but the team seemed almost immediately re-energised and more relaxed. There is no doubt that KP is a model professional and a world-class batsman, but it is equally clear that he isn't over the mental anguish he suffered during the tour of India and being stripped of the captaincy. His century in the final test match masked a series of disappointment which has continued into the ODI series and as a result there is a question which needs to be asked; even if fit, should KP be dropped for the last match of the series?
The notion of being dropped has all sorts of connotations, and perhaps "rested" would be a better choice, but there is a strong argument for putting KP out of his misery and sending him home. He will not have wanted to effect his teammates, but there can be no doubt that his outburst last week will have caused alarm around an already shaken dressing room. England need Pieterson at his best; it is his confrontational nature that makes him such a pleasure to watch, but if he is distracted his public profile is such that anything he says will be over-analysed, and at the moment it is possible that his own personal battle this winter could start to effect his teammates, more than this top sportsman would wish.
As a result, perhaps the best thing England can do is send home their top batsman, even as a series stands in the balance. The early retreat would allow Pieterson some clearly needed "me time", and the sooner he can relax the better for England with the Aussies just around the corner. Equally, it would allow his teammates time away from the media circus that will follow him even more keenly after his interview last week. It is possible his injury will make the decision for the selectors, but even if he is passed physically fit, perhaps his mind needs a break.
Monday 30 March 2009
Sunday 29 March 2009
England Slump to Devastating Defeat
Kevin Pieterson said this week that he couldn't wait to get home, and it seemed as though his top order friends were desperate to oblige him. It seems farcical that it required a spirited fightback, lead by Mascarenhas and Batty to force England's total up to 117, and past the previous worst, 86 against Australia eight years before.
Of more concern than the defeat, will be the manner in which class batsmen relinquished their wickets. The West Indians bowled well, but the loose and lazy manner in which England's top order were dismissed was very alarming. At a time when they should be fighting for the series, pride, and a place in the Ashes XI, very few looked interested in showing any kind of grit or determination to deal with a situation that was getting more embarrassing with ever over.
Chris Gayle then showed the exact gulf in confidence with a blistering innings, to show the England players exactly how easy batting could be, even on a track that had some moisture in it. Although not everyone is capable of that kind of aggressive batting, the conviction in his stroke play (no doubt helped by the small total he was chasing) was in stark contract to the timid attempts at aggression shown by his England equivalents.
However, as this tour slowly winds to a close there seems to be (yet again) an issue with the organisation of England's tours overseas. Very few teams would be on tour for over two months, especially after difficult India series, and it seems that England have had their fill of life overseas. Despite the long tour they still managed the age old touring affliction of failing to prepare adequately. Although this is perhaps an excuse, the England setup need to look at tour structures. International players shouldn't lose interest in playing as the current crop seem to have done, so the coaching set up may need more scrutiny as well. Either way, despite Strauss's platitudes one can't help but feel that the best thing for this wounded England team is to get home as soon as possible.
Of more concern than the defeat, will be the manner in which class batsmen relinquished their wickets. The West Indians bowled well, but the loose and lazy manner in which England's top order were dismissed was very alarming. At a time when they should be fighting for the series, pride, and a place in the Ashes XI, very few looked interested in showing any kind of grit or determination to deal with a situation that was getting more embarrassing with ever over.
Chris Gayle then showed the exact gulf in confidence with a blistering innings, to show the England players exactly how easy batting could be, even on a track that had some moisture in it. Although not everyone is capable of that kind of aggressive batting, the conviction in his stroke play (no doubt helped by the small total he was chasing) was in stark contract to the timid attempts at aggression shown by his England equivalents.
However, as this tour slowly winds to a close there seems to be (yet again) an issue with the organisation of England's tours overseas. Very few teams would be on tour for over two months, especially after difficult India series, and it seems that England have had their fill of life overseas. Despite the long tour they still managed the age old touring affliction of failing to prepare adequately. Although this is perhaps an excuse, the England setup need to look at tour structures. International players shouldn't lose interest in playing as the current crop seem to have done, so the coaching set up may need more scrutiny as well. Either way, despite Strauss's platitudes one can't help but feel that the best thing for this wounded England team is to get home as soon as possible.
Tuesday 24 March 2009
England Revel in World Cup Victory
In all honesty, I wasn't sure I would be able to write the words in that headline for any number of years, but England Women's Team have built on the unbelievable Ashes success they enjoyed over the winter to pick up the World Cup.
Their dominance of the tournament is reflected in the Team of the Tournament, where England have 5 representatives. They also boast the leading run scorer, the only century maker and the leading wicket taker. But for the blip against Australia in the final Super Six game (effectively a dead rubber as England were already in the final) their march to the trophy has been flawless.
In losing 5 wickets for 40 runs they briefly offered a wobble in the final, but the ultimate quality of this side shone through, posting a solid total and bowling immaculately to secure the victory.
It is difficult to see this as anything but a new dawn in the women's game.
The quality of the England team not only means the question of professionalism may be raised as the players battle to make ends meet, it has raised the level of the women's sport. Half the side are under 25 and they are building a platform, not only for sustained success but sustained quality. Although the first one will draw the plaudits, it is the second that is most important if the women's game is to grow. Other sides will need to catch up and provide sterner tests in the future but the signs are promising, and excitingly, it is an England side who have taken the first step. For once, the often derided ECB deserves to take some praise. The general consensus is that England cricket is on a downward spiral, but in one corner at least, it seems to be in wonderful health.
Their dominance of the tournament is reflected in the Team of the Tournament, where England have 5 representatives. They also boast the leading run scorer, the only century maker and the leading wicket taker. But for the blip against Australia in the final Super Six game (effectively a dead rubber as England were already in the final) their march to the trophy has been flawless.
In losing 5 wickets for 40 runs they briefly offered a wobble in the final, but the ultimate quality of this side shone through, posting a solid total and bowling immaculately to secure the victory.
It is difficult to see this as anything but a new dawn in the women's game.
The quality of the England team not only means the question of professionalism may be raised as the players battle to make ends meet, it has raised the level of the women's sport. Half the side are under 25 and they are building a platform, not only for sustained success but sustained quality. Although the first one will draw the plaudits, it is the second that is most important if the women's game is to grow. Other sides will need to catch up and provide sterner tests in the future but the signs are promising, and excitingly, it is an England side who have taken the first step. For once, the often derided ECB deserves to take some praise. The general consensus is that England cricket is on a downward spiral, but in one corner at least, it seems to be in wonderful health.
Monday 23 March 2009
Basic Errors Cost England
England went back to school on Sunday. After Friday's math's class Sunday was all about P.E.. This time it was England making junior school errors, rather than Mr Dyson as they crumbled to a 21 run defeat. Be under no illusions either, whilst the numbers may suggest a fairly close game, in truth England were seldom in this match.
Let's start with the pluses. England's stand out performers were Collingwood, Mascarenhas and Anderson. Anderson in particular looked dangerous, and the support bowlers were rewarded for tight control of line and length by being thrown the ball at key times. Collingwood also once again fielded superbly at all times, although his quality boundary catch will naturally take the focus, and Mascarenhas slugged admirably at the end. I still wonder how many other international sides he would get into, but he whilst he will forever frustrate with his batting, for the moment he adds some solidarity in all departments that England badly needs.
For me, Andrew Strauss provided the ugly between the good and bad. A century in international cricket is always worthy of praise, but it concerns me that the numbers will cement his place in the team as ODI captain while the manner of the innings will be ignored. He was sluggish at key points against a bowling attack without comparison to the top ODI sides in the world and although he had to stabilise England's rocky start this excuse does not convince me that this was the innings of a quality ODI opener.
The disappointments however, far outweigh the positives, simply because of the basic nature of a lot of them. Shah seemed devoid of his usual gap-finding inspirations in a sluggish 22, whilst Gareth Batty's inclusion seems another selection brought about through the lack of form of others and limited squad depth. But even more concerning than these were the performances of three key players at vital moments. Bopara and Pieterson have taken on the responsibility of key positions in this England batting line up, and both played lazy shots to chop on at times when their team needed them to build a foundation to push on from. Pieterson's stock may not have fallen much as a result of this, but with every innings Bopara looks more and more out of his depth at the top of the order. Stuart Broad also had a day to forget, but with his limited experience you would expect them more often than he has done and his more experienced team mates should be able to support him during these rare weak moments, although more often it has been him carrying them.
That said, the most disappointing performance by a distance was that of Matt Prior. Any cricketer knows that "catches win matches" and his drop of Chanderpaul (only a quarter of the way through his century) was an awful error. Even beyond that his glove-work has looked messy throughout the tour and if he isn't pitching in with the runs this aspect of his game needs to secure. Every player in the international setup must have two strings to their bow, so they can justify their place if one isn't firing. It was Collingwood's fielding and bowling that impressed whilst his batting letting him, and as such he could contribute effectively. Prior looks to me to be in the classic mould of recent English keepers, a one string cricketer who isn't consistent enough with the gloves. I wish the selectors had persevered with Mustard as an aggressive opener last winter, but once more this slot looks open to applications.
England need to learn their lessons quickly as they are lucky to not be 2-0 down in this series. Strauss has said he believes that the pitches in Barbados will be more to their tastes but, in truth, unless they eliminate these basic errors it won't matter.
Let's start with the pluses. England's stand out performers were Collingwood, Mascarenhas and Anderson. Anderson in particular looked dangerous, and the support bowlers were rewarded for tight control of line and length by being thrown the ball at key times. Collingwood also once again fielded superbly at all times, although his quality boundary catch will naturally take the focus, and Mascarenhas slugged admirably at the end. I still wonder how many other international sides he would get into, but he whilst he will forever frustrate with his batting, for the moment he adds some solidarity in all departments that England badly needs.
For me, Andrew Strauss provided the ugly between the good and bad. A century in international cricket is always worthy of praise, but it concerns me that the numbers will cement his place in the team as ODI captain while the manner of the innings will be ignored. He was sluggish at key points against a bowling attack without comparison to the top ODI sides in the world and although he had to stabilise England's rocky start this excuse does not convince me that this was the innings of a quality ODI opener.
The disappointments however, far outweigh the positives, simply because of the basic nature of a lot of them. Shah seemed devoid of his usual gap-finding inspirations in a sluggish 22, whilst Gareth Batty's inclusion seems another selection brought about through the lack of form of others and limited squad depth. But even more concerning than these were the performances of three key players at vital moments. Bopara and Pieterson have taken on the responsibility of key positions in this England batting line up, and both played lazy shots to chop on at times when their team needed them to build a foundation to push on from. Pieterson's stock may not have fallen much as a result of this, but with every innings Bopara looks more and more out of his depth at the top of the order. Stuart Broad also had a day to forget, but with his limited experience you would expect them more often than he has done and his more experienced team mates should be able to support him during these rare weak moments, although more often it has been him carrying them.
That said, the most disappointing performance by a distance was that of Matt Prior. Any cricketer knows that "catches win matches" and his drop of Chanderpaul (only a quarter of the way through his century) was an awful error. Even beyond that his glove-work has looked messy throughout the tour and if he isn't pitching in with the runs this aspect of his game needs to secure. Every player in the international setup must have two strings to their bow, so they can justify their place if one isn't firing. It was Collingwood's fielding and bowling that impressed whilst his batting letting him, and as such he could contribute effectively. Prior looks to me to be in the classic mould of recent English keepers, a one string cricketer who isn't consistent enough with the gloves. I wish the selectors had persevered with Mustard as an aggressive opener last winter, but once more this slot looks open to applications.
England need to learn their lessons quickly as they are lucky to not be 2-0 down in this series. Strauss has said he believes that the pitches in Barbados will be more to their tastes but, in truth, unless they eliminate these basic errors it won't matter.
Saturday 21 March 2009
A Worthless Win
England are finally off the mark this winter, but a manner of the victory makes this one of the least valuable victories in recent history. The muted nature of England's celebrations betrayed that, although relieved to finally be on the winning side, this was not the confidence boosting victory needed that I outlined earlier this week.
It is not the first time the Duckworth Lewis system has caused confusion (just ask Shaun Pollock) and although it is difficult to believe that this is the best way to resolve a shortened game, West Indies coach John Dyson must hold his hands up to a catastrophic error. Not only did it cost his side a chance at of victory, one wonders what harm such a basic oversight will have done to any chance he had of being offered the England coaching job. The Duckworth Lewis system can encourage this tactical decision making which benefits neither the game or the supporters, so some may argue that a twisted justice was done.
The England performance itself was patchy at best. Shah showed once more why, despite doubts over his credentials as a Test match no.3 why he is such a valuable ODI player and Broad and Anderson continued the partnership they built in the Test series whilst Dimi Mascarenhas bowled a wonderfully controlled spell despite failing with the bat.
The inclusion of Matt Prior makes his omission for the Twenty20 baffling, and sends a confused message to Worcestershire's Steve Davies who top scored as his replacement. Meanwhile, Steve Harmison's future as an international sportsman must once again be in doubt. The plaudits will rightly go to Shiv Chanderpaul for his wonderful clean hitting, but the lack of variation shown to try and counter this by the Durham paceman belied his experience and his dropped catch in the outfield seemed to be another indication of his lack of focus as much as anything. So many maintain that he has proven international pedigree, but one sunny day does not a summer make and too often have cloud darkened the skies of this undoubtedly talented individual and there was little in his body language that made you think he should be the spearhead of an England attack.
Andrew Strauss has four games to prove himself as a player in this form of the game, and thus unify the captaincy but England need performances as a team rather than as individuals in order to get the injection of confidence to put a spring in their step as they build towards the summer showpiece.
It is not the first time the Duckworth Lewis system has caused confusion (just ask Shaun Pollock) and although it is difficult to believe that this is the best way to resolve a shortened game, West Indies coach John Dyson must hold his hands up to a catastrophic error. Not only did it cost his side a chance at of victory, one wonders what harm such a basic oversight will have done to any chance he had of being offered the England coaching job. The Duckworth Lewis system can encourage this tactical decision making which benefits neither the game or the supporters, so some may argue that a twisted justice was done.
The England performance itself was patchy at best. Shah showed once more why, despite doubts over his credentials as a Test match no.3 why he is such a valuable ODI player and Broad and Anderson continued the partnership they built in the Test series whilst Dimi Mascarenhas bowled a wonderfully controlled spell despite failing with the bat.
The inclusion of Matt Prior makes his omission for the Twenty20 baffling, and sends a confused message to Worcestershire's Steve Davies who top scored as his replacement. Meanwhile, Steve Harmison's future as an international sportsman must once again be in doubt. The plaudits will rightly go to Shiv Chanderpaul for his wonderful clean hitting, but the lack of variation shown to try and counter this by the Durham paceman belied his experience and his dropped catch in the outfield seemed to be another indication of his lack of focus as much as anything. So many maintain that he has proven international pedigree, but one sunny day does not a summer make and too often have cloud darkened the skies of this undoubtedly talented individual and there was little in his body language that made you think he should be the spearhead of an England attack.
Andrew Strauss has four games to prove himself as a player in this form of the game, and thus unify the captaincy but England need performances as a team rather than as individuals in order to get the injection of confidence to put a spring in their step as they build towards the summer showpiece.
Wednesday 18 March 2009
The Summer Starts Here
As the majority of England enjoys temperatures that have outstripped Greece this week, it is easy to forget that the side in the West Indies are still technically on a winter tour. However, be under no illusion, for England to have any success in the summer improvements need to happen, starting on Friday. In fact, if we are honest it needs to have happened earlier.
There are few major sporting occasions where a team can pull an extended period of results out of nowhere. Be under no illusions, England's performance in the last Rugby World Cup is an exception and not a rule and if any further proof is required then look at the recent history of the Ashes. Australia were the form side (indeed the best side) in world cricket for a decade and a half, and took that confidence and success into retaining the Ashes. In 2005, England had an extended run in of success, including confident performances overseas in the preceding winter, but two years later, after what can best be described as a mixed build up they were resoundingly beaten by a resurgent Australia.
As a result, you would have to think that even if England manage to beat the West Indies on home soil in the run up to the Ashes (which at the moment is by no means guaranteed) it may be too little too late. That series should be used for perfecting the lineup and the performances, not for building a team from scratch. England need to use these next five ODI's to take whatever momentum they can into the summer.
Without wishing to make excuses for the players, England's off the pitch activity has been far more news worthy than their performances ever since they briefly returned from the tour of India following the Mumbai bombings. Captain and coach have since departed and the tour of the West Indies became an increasingly drab affair as the pitches were rightly criticised.
Ironically, it is those same pitches that could prove the saviour of this tour, both for the supporters in the Caribbean and, should they come out victorious for England. They should provide the sort of high scoring and exciting games that, if won flood the victors with immeasurable confidence. Admittedly, this will never replace a Test series victory but it is all England have at the moment and they have to take it with both hands. If they don't, it will be another huge blow in their attempts to regain the precious urn, months before the series begins in earnest.
There are few major sporting occasions where a team can pull an extended period of results out of nowhere. Be under no illusions, England's performance in the last Rugby World Cup is an exception and not a rule and if any further proof is required then look at the recent history of the Ashes. Australia were the form side (indeed the best side) in world cricket for a decade and a half, and took that confidence and success into retaining the Ashes. In 2005, England had an extended run in of success, including confident performances overseas in the preceding winter, but two years later, after what can best be described as a mixed build up they were resoundingly beaten by a resurgent Australia.
As a result, you would have to think that even if England manage to beat the West Indies on home soil in the run up to the Ashes (which at the moment is by no means guaranteed) it may be too little too late. That series should be used for perfecting the lineup and the performances, not for building a team from scratch. England need to use these next five ODI's to take whatever momentum they can into the summer.
Without wishing to make excuses for the players, England's off the pitch activity has been far more news worthy than their performances ever since they briefly returned from the tour of India following the Mumbai bombings. Captain and coach have since departed and the tour of the West Indies became an increasingly drab affair as the pitches were rightly criticised.
Ironically, it is those same pitches that could prove the saviour of this tour, both for the supporters in the Caribbean and, should they come out victorious for England. They should provide the sort of high scoring and exciting games that, if won flood the victors with immeasurable confidence. Admittedly, this will never replace a Test series victory but it is all England have at the moment and they have to take it with both hands. If they don't, it will be another huge blow in their attempts to regain the precious urn, months before the series begins in earnest.
Tuesday 10 March 2009
England Ratings For West Indies Test Series
Andrew Strauss 8/10: Excellent stats with the bat and did a good job by and large with the captaincy. Was brave in his selection but needs to develop tactical nous and missed a key chance to dismiss Brendan Nash in the final Test. May seem harsh but catches win matches.
Alistair Cook 6/10: His century in Barbados papered over the cracks. Rarely has a player scored 200 runs in one Test match and still looked totally devoid of confidence and form the very next game. Make no mistake that his runs this series have been courtesy of the dead wickets and a less than effective bowing attack rather than a rich vein of form.
Owais Shah 4/10: Despite being promised an extended run at number 3, that position still looks like if it is open to applicants. He is developing a habit for being run out as well which suggests a lack of focus or confidence
Kevin Pieterson 6/10: Another man whose solitary century should have been complimented by many more. He will have wanted to make a much bigger impression after his public spat with Peter Moores and losing the captaincy prior to the tour.
Paul Collingwood 7/10: Has done well for a man whose place was under threat at the start of the tour of India. Excellent as usual in the field and is a man who England will need to be at his solid and steely best during the summer series.
Ian Bell 4/10: Has been close to being dropped for several series and was the natural scapegoat for the debacle in Antigua. Looks painfully lacking in terms of form and confidence but a strong start to the county season could easily see him back in the frame unless Shah steps up to the mark.
Ravi Bopara. 6/10: His low score is a result of his lack of appearances, although nobody can deny the sumptuous ease of his batting and his century was well deserved. Was unlucky to lose his place but it was the right choice as he will never be a Test number 3. That easy style, whilst being attractive will not be so successful against stronger bowling attacks or on more challenging wickets.
Andrew Flintoff 6/10: Injury once more robbed England of the one bowler in their attack who could have consistently troubled the West Indies on flat tracks. Still not a test number 6 but without his bowling England look somewhat toothless
Matt Prior 5/10: Was fine with the bat (but who wasn't). I agree with Geoffrey Boycott that his decision to return home to see a healthy mother and child seems odd and put England in a difficult position in terms of selection. If you are going to return home at any time then surely you return in time for the birth, if not couldn't it have waited? His glovework was shoddy in the final test and on a pitch so flat an international quality wicket keeper shouldn't give away so many byes.
Tim Ambrose 7/10: Did well with the gloves and with the bat in his one display. If you could combine his keeping skill with Prior's batting then England would finally have a keeper/batsman approaching the quality desired.
Graeme Swann 8/10: A couple more runs would have been nice but this has been an excellent series for a man who wasn't selected for the first test. His experience and variation put Monty to shame at times and he was the pick of the bowlers on either side for me.
Stuart Broad 6.5/10: This young man's temperament is undoubtedly his main strength. Given what his father went through in the middle of the tour to still give his all on lifeless wickets is an unbelievable effort. His moan about the wickets was understandable but couple his undeniable talent to his temperament and he will trouble quality batsmen for years to come. The stats make it hard to give him a better rating but he can be proud of his efforts
James Anderson 7/10: A shaky start to the tour but was arguably the pick of the England seamers come the end of the series. If there was any swing he found it and if it didn't he showed more patience and consistency than in previous series. A good effort from the Lancashire player.
Monty Panesar 6/10: Managed in just 2 weeks to do what most analysts have been asking for for about a year and half and showed some variety. If he can develop this he will finally start to fulfill his potential. Endured a torrid start to the tour but came back strongly (mentally as much as anything) in the last match to such an extent that Strauss trusted him with the ball as England fought for the win at the death.
Ryan Sidebottom 3/10: Not fit so shouldn't have played any part in the series. Will be better back in English conditions with some overs under his belt but his one appearance in this series is one that he will want to forget.
Steve Harmison 4/10: If he was ever going to reignite his career it should have been here. You would have thought that the memories of what he did in this part of the world before would have fired him up and given him some drive. Instead he was once more disappointing and Strauss needs to find a way of getting the best from him or else he is a burden.
Amjad Kahn. 5/10: Erratic and unpredictable and this probably came a bit too early in his career for him. He has the right attributes to be a good international strike bowler but needs a lot of work and arguably more time at county level before he is ready for this stage.
Adil Rashid not used.
Alistair Cook 6/10: His century in Barbados papered over the cracks. Rarely has a player scored 200 runs in one Test match and still looked totally devoid of confidence and form the very next game. Make no mistake that his runs this series have been courtesy of the dead wickets and a less than effective bowing attack rather than a rich vein of form.
Owais Shah 4/10: Despite being promised an extended run at number 3, that position still looks like if it is open to applicants. He is developing a habit for being run out as well which suggests a lack of focus or confidence
Kevin Pieterson 6/10: Another man whose solitary century should have been complimented by many more. He will have wanted to make a much bigger impression after his public spat with Peter Moores and losing the captaincy prior to the tour.
Paul Collingwood 7/10: Has done well for a man whose place was under threat at the start of the tour of India. Excellent as usual in the field and is a man who England will need to be at his solid and steely best during the summer series.
Ian Bell 4/10: Has been close to being dropped for several series and was the natural scapegoat for the debacle in Antigua. Looks painfully lacking in terms of form and confidence but a strong start to the county season could easily see him back in the frame unless Shah steps up to the mark.
Ravi Bopara. 6/10: His low score is a result of his lack of appearances, although nobody can deny the sumptuous ease of his batting and his century was well deserved. Was unlucky to lose his place but it was the right choice as he will never be a Test number 3. That easy style, whilst being attractive will not be so successful against stronger bowling attacks or on more challenging wickets.
Andrew Flintoff 6/10: Injury once more robbed England of the one bowler in their attack who could have consistently troubled the West Indies on flat tracks. Still not a test number 6 but without his bowling England look somewhat toothless
Matt Prior 5/10: Was fine with the bat (but who wasn't). I agree with Geoffrey Boycott that his decision to return home to see a healthy mother and child seems odd and put England in a difficult position in terms of selection. If you are going to return home at any time then surely you return in time for the birth, if not couldn't it have waited? His glovework was shoddy in the final test and on a pitch so flat an international quality wicket keeper shouldn't give away so many byes.
Tim Ambrose 7/10: Did well with the gloves and with the bat in his one display. If you could combine his keeping skill with Prior's batting then England would finally have a keeper/batsman approaching the quality desired.
Graeme Swann 8/10: A couple more runs would have been nice but this has been an excellent series for a man who wasn't selected for the first test. His experience and variation put Monty to shame at times and he was the pick of the bowlers on either side for me.
Stuart Broad 6.5/10: This young man's temperament is undoubtedly his main strength. Given what his father went through in the middle of the tour to still give his all on lifeless wickets is an unbelievable effort. His moan about the wickets was understandable but couple his undeniable talent to his temperament and he will trouble quality batsmen for years to come. The stats make it hard to give him a better rating but he can be proud of his efforts
James Anderson 7/10: A shaky start to the tour but was arguably the pick of the England seamers come the end of the series. If there was any swing he found it and if it didn't he showed more patience and consistency than in previous series. A good effort from the Lancashire player.
Monty Panesar 6/10: Managed in just 2 weeks to do what most analysts have been asking for for about a year and half and showed some variety. If he can develop this he will finally start to fulfill his potential. Endured a torrid start to the tour but came back strongly (mentally as much as anything) in the last match to such an extent that Strauss trusted him with the ball as England fought for the win at the death.
Ryan Sidebottom 3/10: Not fit so shouldn't have played any part in the series. Will be better back in English conditions with some overs under his belt but his one appearance in this series is one that he will want to forget.
Steve Harmison 4/10: If he was ever going to reignite his career it should have been here. You would have thought that the memories of what he did in this part of the world before would have fired him up and given him some drive. Instead he was once more disappointing and Strauss needs to find a way of getting the best from him or else he is a burden.
Amjad Kahn. 5/10: Erratic and unpredictable and this probably came a bit too early in his career for him. He has the right attributes to be a good international strike bowler but needs a lot of work and arguably more time at county level before he is ready for this stage.
Adil Rashid not used.
Series Finally Bubbles as Australia Come To The Boil
Many had doubted that this series would ever ignite, but the last day finally delivered what dead pitches had robbed us of. The two teams teased their respective supporters right until the very end, but ultimately the West Indies earned the draw they required. If only the rest of the match (indeed the series) had been played at anything approaching that level of intensity.
It was undoubtedly a monumental effort by England to force such an exciting finish. The Windies aided their cause with some nervous batting as they closed in on a rare Test series victory over a team at the top table and their first over England in 11 years. However, Andrew Strauss and his team may look back at key points over the last five days when they could have made their task somewhat easier. England allowed part timer Brendan Nash too many overs on day one, and if they were as truly intent on the victory as they seemed this afternoon they should have looked to take full advantage. The same man was then dropped on 19 by Strauss before going on to make a century in the West Indian first innings. Had this one man been dealt with more severely by England then the result may have been different.
The series itself has been largely forgettable as a cricketing spectacle, and has unfortunately done little to advertise the positive aspects of the sport at a time when they really needed accentuating. From an England perspective there haven't been too many highlights. The large run totals seem impressive until they are equalled or surpassed but in truth this was more often down to lifeless wickets than confidence or form - a fact highlighted by Alistair Cook who scratched his way towards 200 runs last week, but still looked woefully short of confidence in this final Test. That said, Strauss has done well as captain, and his stats at the top of the order clearly show he is capable of taking on the extra responsibility. His inexperience has sometimes shown tactically, but he has dealt well with a tour that has thrown up a variety of selection problems and must surely be guaranteed the role for the summer. Equally impressive has been Graeme Swann, who has gone from squad tourist to arguably the outstanding bowler from either side in the series. His experience and control will be sorely missed in the ODI series
Given how little they had to work with, it is difficult to criticise the bowlers, but one can't help but wonder if the class of 2005 would have posed the West Indian's more difficulty. That said, Anderson and Broad toiled manfully, but Harmison and Sidebottom looked well off the pace. Sidebottom was almost certainly not fit enough to return to international cricket and will be back for the summer series when the conditions will also be better suited to him. As for Harmison, he continues to frustrate, even on the same grounds that showcased his finest hours. He will probably return, but that perhaps says more about the lack of competition for strike bowler slots than his own international credentials at this moment in time. In the batting department, despite scoring the runs which gave England a chance at a memorable victory, Kevin Pieterson will have wanted a more productive tour after the political disaster which preceded the series.
The major positive for this series however was the attitude of the West Indian side. Too often in recent years have they played careless and throw-away cricket in a manner which their fanatical supporters do not deserve. This series may prove to be a turning point for them. Chris Gayle will always frustrate purists, but he added steel to his explosive batting style this series and his selection for the last test showed a drive to win the series at all costs which ultimately earned his side the Wisden Trophy. If he can add some tactical nous to these qualities he may be able to oversea something of a revival in this part of the world.
With the Ashes just around the corner it has been interesting to see Australia reassert their number 1 status. Although they may not be the same force that they were, they have undoubtedly displayed the qualities they lacked in the home series loss against South Africa. The Protees have not been up to the same standard, but there aren't many sides who could take on Graeme Smith's men without Lee, Clark, Symonds and Watson and take a 2-0 lead. If England have learnt anything from this somewhat turgid series it is that they will need to improve in all departments before the summer's main event.
It was undoubtedly a monumental effort by England to force such an exciting finish. The Windies aided their cause with some nervous batting as they closed in on a rare Test series victory over a team at the top table and their first over England in 11 years. However, Andrew Strauss and his team may look back at key points over the last five days when they could have made their task somewhat easier. England allowed part timer Brendan Nash too many overs on day one, and if they were as truly intent on the victory as they seemed this afternoon they should have looked to take full advantage. The same man was then dropped on 19 by Strauss before going on to make a century in the West Indian first innings. Had this one man been dealt with more severely by England then the result may have been different.
The series itself has been largely forgettable as a cricketing spectacle, and has unfortunately done little to advertise the positive aspects of the sport at a time when they really needed accentuating. From an England perspective there haven't been too many highlights. The large run totals seem impressive until they are equalled or surpassed but in truth this was more often down to lifeless wickets than confidence or form - a fact highlighted by Alistair Cook who scratched his way towards 200 runs last week, but still looked woefully short of confidence in this final Test. That said, Strauss has done well as captain, and his stats at the top of the order clearly show he is capable of taking on the extra responsibility. His inexperience has sometimes shown tactically, but he has dealt well with a tour that has thrown up a variety of selection problems and must surely be guaranteed the role for the summer. Equally impressive has been Graeme Swann, who has gone from squad tourist to arguably the outstanding bowler from either side in the series. His experience and control will be sorely missed in the ODI series
Given how little they had to work with, it is difficult to criticise the bowlers, but one can't help but wonder if the class of 2005 would have posed the West Indian's more difficulty. That said, Anderson and Broad toiled manfully, but Harmison and Sidebottom looked well off the pace. Sidebottom was almost certainly not fit enough to return to international cricket and will be back for the summer series when the conditions will also be better suited to him. As for Harmison, he continues to frustrate, even on the same grounds that showcased his finest hours. He will probably return, but that perhaps says more about the lack of competition for strike bowler slots than his own international credentials at this moment in time. In the batting department, despite scoring the runs which gave England a chance at a memorable victory, Kevin Pieterson will have wanted a more productive tour after the political disaster which preceded the series.
The major positive for this series however was the attitude of the West Indian side. Too often in recent years have they played careless and throw-away cricket in a manner which their fanatical supporters do not deserve. This series may prove to be a turning point for them. Chris Gayle will always frustrate purists, but he added steel to his explosive batting style this series and his selection for the last test showed a drive to win the series at all costs which ultimately earned his side the Wisden Trophy. If he can add some tactical nous to these qualities he may be able to oversea something of a revival in this part of the world.
With the Ashes just around the corner it has been interesting to see Australia reassert their number 1 status. Although they may not be the same force that they were, they have undoubtedly displayed the qualities they lacked in the home series loss against South Africa. The Protees have not been up to the same standard, but there aren't many sides who could take on Graeme Smith's men without Lee, Clark, Symonds and Watson and take a 2-0 lead. If England have learnt anything from this somewhat turgid series it is that they will need to improve in all departments before the summer's main event.
Thursday 5 March 2009
Cricket in Turmoil
In 2007 the untimely death of Pakistan coach Bob Woolmer at the Cricket World Cup shocked the the world and drew comment from persons far removed from our sporting bubble. I was in Barbados at the time and even the final display in the glittering career of Brian Lara couldn't distract from the shock emanating from nearby Jamaica. What followed was a media orgy of speculation and intrigue, culminating in a repeatedly botched investigation by the local police and a tragically long period of extended grief for Woolmer's wife and family.
Perhaps we should have learnt our lesson. After Chris Broad's emotional outburst to the press yesterday, angrily airing the suspicions many had held that the security was not up to scratch, the PCB moved quickly. Not to launch an investigation (although one has begun) nor to apologise, but to lodge a complaint with Broad's employers, the ICC. Not only that, PCB chief and spokesman Ijaz Butt said that Broad's statement was "fabricated" and he encouraged the ICC not to be "hasty" with regards to Pakistan's hosting of 2011 World Cup. Whether or not this is the last act of a man desperate to save his job or the genuine view of the PCB, to say this at this time is, at best, a serious lapse in judgement.
Dominic Cork has immediately responded on Sky Sports News in defence of Broad, whilst fellow umpires Simon Taufel and Steve Davis have moved swiftly defended their fellow official. I am no expert in Presidential Security (the level promised to players and officials alike), but the pictures of the minibus under fire seemed to support the umpires and officials.
It is not a phenomena exclusive to the cricketing world, but almost two years to the day to the death of Bob Woolmer we seem already to be lurching towards a similar disaster in the aftermath of tragedy. One can only hope this is not the case and the enquiry is concluded promptly and diligently. Either way, it seems without doubt that the PCB may be yet to get their priorities sorted, in the shock of the terrorist attack. If their goal is to ever regain the trust of cricketing world then they cannot afford to wait too long.
Perhaps we should have learnt our lesson. After Chris Broad's emotional outburst to the press yesterday, angrily airing the suspicions many had held that the security was not up to scratch, the PCB moved quickly. Not to launch an investigation (although one has begun) nor to apologise, but to lodge a complaint with Broad's employers, the ICC. Not only that, PCB chief and spokesman Ijaz Butt said that Broad's statement was "fabricated" and he encouraged the ICC not to be "hasty" with regards to Pakistan's hosting of 2011 World Cup. Whether or not this is the last act of a man desperate to save his job or the genuine view of the PCB, to say this at this time is, at best, a serious lapse in judgement.
Dominic Cork has immediately responded on Sky Sports News in defence of Broad, whilst fellow umpires Simon Taufel and Steve Davis have moved swiftly defended their fellow official. I am no expert in Presidential Security (the level promised to players and officials alike), but the pictures of the minibus under fire seemed to support the umpires and officials.
It is not a phenomena exclusive to the cricketing world, but almost two years to the day to the death of Bob Woolmer we seem already to be lurching towards a similar disaster in the aftermath of tragedy. One can only hope this is not the case and the enquiry is concluded promptly and diligently. Either way, it seems without doubt that the PCB may be yet to get their priorities sorted, in the shock of the terrorist attack. If their goal is to ever regain the trust of cricketing world then they cannot afford to wait too long.
Tuesday 3 March 2009
England Face Selection Headache
Once Andrew Strauss and his fellow selectors have recovered from events in Pakistan, they will need to set about the difficult task of trying to get England level in the Windies. How one goes about this when team mates and friends have just gone through such a trauma one can only guess, but it is a task that Strauss must get down to.
In many ways, this selection provides a chance for the outsider to see what kind of captain Strauss will be. In Barbados, robbed of all rounder and most well suited number 6 Andrew Flintoff, England went with four front line bowlers and, although the wicket was less than helpful the attack looked toothless. Will Strauss look to an extra batsman to make his side harder to be bowled out, or will he increase the risk of losing, to enhance his chances of dragging his team level in the series. More importantly who will those personnel be. Whether he proves himself to be ambitious or prudish in his selection, will be a good indication of how he will behave in crunch moments on the pitch.
I find it hard to believe that he will not opt to go with five bowlers. If you are going to lose a series if you don't win, you may as well risk losing by two rather than one. The question is who will make way?
If we first consider the batting line up, four of them are guaranteed their positions.Strauss completed his most fluent innings in years in the first innings while Cook, although far from his best finally managed to convert from fifty to three figures, although from an hour after lunch he was under little or no pressure.
Collingwood has managed to secure his place from the precarious position he found himself in at the start of the India tour and no England side pushing for a victory would prepare for battle without Kevin Pieterson.
Without a fully fit Flintoff, England will almost certainly require their wicket keeper to bat at number 6. Matt Prior, who missed the Barbados test due through returning home to visit his newborn child and wife is most likely to fit this berth. Attempts to fit Ambrose into that position over the summer failed and I would suggest that, despite his undefeated 76 Prior will return to the lineup.
With this in mind, Ravi Bopara and Owais Shah are left fighting for the last batting place. Shah was recently promised a real shot at the number 3 slot and he would be my choice for the 5th test. Bopara's supporters will rightly say that he scored a composed hundred and therefore has earned his place. However, his inclusion would surely require Pieterson to move to 3 and Collingwood to 4, positions which neither feels comfortable in. Equally, Bopara's easy style may suit dead wickets, but I remain unconvinced that he has the mental steel as of yet for tough, attritional Test cricket.
Of more concern will be the bowling attack. Sidebottom may have to make way, presumably for Harmison who should have played in Barbados. If you have a man of his size and pace, then he should always be preferred to an unfit swing bowler on a hard track in a dry climate. James Anderson looked fit and quick, and although Stuart Broad struggled a bit during the 4th test, if he is mentally ready given the ordeal suffered today by his father then he is more than worth his place with bat and ball. Graeme Swann's experience told on a flat deck, and he was still able to manage a second test match five wicket haul. The last bowling place will most likely be filled by Monty Panesar (should the selectors agree that Sidebottom is not suited to West Indian conditions unless fully fit) although it is not impossible that a debut could be given to either Amjad Kahn or Adil Rashid. Rashid would certainly be a bonus with the bat although his bowling is yet to be the finished article. Another hard deck may give Kahn the perfect platform to use his pace and bounce.
It may mean that the side needs to be pulled apart in order to find the right balance, but for what is essentially a one off game this may be the best option.
In many ways, this selection provides a chance for the outsider to see what kind of captain Strauss will be. In Barbados, robbed of all rounder and most well suited number 6 Andrew Flintoff, England went with four front line bowlers and, although the wicket was less than helpful the attack looked toothless. Will Strauss look to an extra batsman to make his side harder to be bowled out, or will he increase the risk of losing, to enhance his chances of dragging his team level in the series. More importantly who will those personnel be. Whether he proves himself to be ambitious or prudish in his selection, will be a good indication of how he will behave in crunch moments on the pitch.
I find it hard to believe that he will not opt to go with five bowlers. If you are going to lose a series if you don't win, you may as well risk losing by two rather than one. The question is who will make way?
If we first consider the batting line up, four of them are guaranteed their positions.Strauss completed his most fluent innings in years in the first innings while Cook, although far from his best finally managed to convert from fifty to three figures, although from an hour after lunch he was under little or no pressure.
Collingwood has managed to secure his place from the precarious position he found himself in at the start of the India tour and no England side pushing for a victory would prepare for battle without Kevin Pieterson.
Without a fully fit Flintoff, England will almost certainly require their wicket keeper to bat at number 6. Matt Prior, who missed the Barbados test due through returning home to visit his newborn child and wife is most likely to fit this berth. Attempts to fit Ambrose into that position over the summer failed and I would suggest that, despite his undefeated 76 Prior will return to the lineup.
With this in mind, Ravi Bopara and Owais Shah are left fighting for the last batting place. Shah was recently promised a real shot at the number 3 slot and he would be my choice for the 5th test. Bopara's supporters will rightly say that he scored a composed hundred and therefore has earned his place. However, his inclusion would surely require Pieterson to move to 3 and Collingwood to 4, positions which neither feels comfortable in. Equally, Bopara's easy style may suit dead wickets, but I remain unconvinced that he has the mental steel as of yet for tough, attritional Test cricket.
Of more concern will be the bowling attack. Sidebottom may have to make way, presumably for Harmison who should have played in Barbados. If you have a man of his size and pace, then he should always be preferred to an unfit swing bowler on a hard track in a dry climate. James Anderson looked fit and quick, and although Stuart Broad struggled a bit during the 4th test, if he is mentally ready given the ordeal suffered today by his father then he is more than worth his place with bat and ball. Graeme Swann's experience told on a flat deck, and he was still able to manage a second test match five wicket haul. The last bowling place will most likely be filled by Monty Panesar (should the selectors agree that Sidebottom is not suited to West Indian conditions unless fully fit) although it is not impossible that a debut could be given to either Amjad Kahn or Adil Rashid. Rashid would certainly be a bonus with the bat although his bowling is yet to be the finished article. Another hard deck may give Kahn the perfect platform to use his pace and bounce.
It may mean that the side needs to be pulled apart in order to find the right balance, but for what is essentially a one off game this may be the best option.
A Day To Forget
There are times when, no matter how opinionated or vocal an individual you are, you have to be rendered speechless. Today is one of those days. After the horrific terrorist attacks on the Sri Lankan team, words are not enough. What a sad indictment it is of how used we have become to acts of terrorism that with multiple deaths and countless injuries one of the first things said to me today was, “it could have been so much worse. “ A poor choice of words perhaps from the individual, but undeniably true.
Thoughts have to be with the families of those policemen, civilians and drivers caught up in this gunfight. Perhaps the only saving grace to come out of today is that there aren’t more families facing that life shattering phone call. It would be tough enough to attempt to rationalise the attack, were it not for the miserable selection of events that put the Sri Lankan team, the media and their security entourage in that position in the first place.
The Sri Lankan’s had stepped in to fill the void left by India who dropped out for security reasons just as the Australian’s had done before them. Mahela Jayawardene and the Sri Lankan government required serious reassurances before they could be persuaded to tour Pakistan in the first place. One can’t help but wonder what went through Indian players minds as they donned black armbands at the change of innings in their ODI against New Zealand.
As far as the Pakistani authorities and governments are concerned some serious questions must be asked. Although the determination of terrorists is not to be under-estimated, should those assurances over safety have ever been given? Equally, given rumours that there was a tip off of the ambush on Monday (the team’s route to the ground was changed) was enough done to step up security?
Once people have been given time to recover, these would naturally be the most pressing issues. However, the ICC also has some serious decisions to make, and quickly. Having already postponed the Champion’s Trophy once, it will now surely be moved, and the World Cup will probably not be far behind. Following the Mumbai bombings, the Tamil’s in Bangladesh and of course today’s tragedy, the suitability of the sub-continent to host a tournament of that magnitude and importance must be called into question.
With the IPL as the most immediate tournament of quality, the superstar names of England and other countries who fought so hard for their chance to make the big bucks must now seriously be rethinking their options. Some prizes aren’t worth the prices. Equally, Pakistan must surely now resign itself to a long absence from hosting international sport. Although it must not be abandoned by the cricket community, there is no way it can be deemed a suitable place for prestigious sportsmen to ply their trade. What a shame that it is the sub-continent, where cricket supporters are most fanatical, is the place that their cricket heroes must now be most afraid to go.
For the time being however, we should simply mourn those lost and be thankful for those who survived. People are already talking about trying to use England as a neutral venue but now is not the time. Although the bureaucrats will need to start dealing with these highly complicated issues in the near future, cricket can wait.
Thoughts have to be with the families of those policemen, civilians and drivers caught up in this gunfight. Perhaps the only saving grace to come out of today is that there aren’t more families facing that life shattering phone call. It would be tough enough to attempt to rationalise the attack, were it not for the miserable selection of events that put the Sri Lankan team, the media and their security entourage in that position in the first place.
The Sri Lankan’s had stepped in to fill the void left by India who dropped out for security reasons just as the Australian’s had done before them. Mahela Jayawardene and the Sri Lankan government required serious reassurances before they could be persuaded to tour Pakistan in the first place. One can’t help but wonder what went through Indian players minds as they donned black armbands at the change of innings in their ODI against New Zealand.
As far as the Pakistani authorities and governments are concerned some serious questions must be asked. Although the determination of terrorists is not to be under-estimated, should those assurances over safety have ever been given? Equally, given rumours that there was a tip off of the ambush on Monday (the team’s route to the ground was changed) was enough done to step up security?
Once people have been given time to recover, these would naturally be the most pressing issues. However, the ICC also has some serious decisions to make, and quickly. Having already postponed the Champion’s Trophy once, it will now surely be moved, and the World Cup will probably not be far behind. Following the Mumbai bombings, the Tamil’s in Bangladesh and of course today’s tragedy, the suitability of the sub-continent to host a tournament of that magnitude and importance must be called into question.
With the IPL as the most immediate tournament of quality, the superstar names of England and other countries who fought so hard for their chance to make the big bucks must now seriously be rethinking their options. Some prizes aren’t worth the prices. Equally, Pakistan must surely now resign itself to a long absence from hosting international sport. Although it must not be abandoned by the cricket community, there is no way it can be deemed a suitable place for prestigious sportsmen to ply their trade. What a shame that it is the sub-continent, where cricket supporters are most fanatical, is the place that their cricket heroes must now be most afraid to go.
For the time being however, we should simply mourn those lost and be thankful for those who survived. People are already talking about trying to use England as a neutral venue but now is not the time. Although the bureaucrats will need to start dealing with these highly complicated issues in the near future, cricket can wait.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)