England’s Key: Part 1 The Batsmen

Any major sporting event is the perfect excuse for any writer to self-indulge and offer up their editor the perfect excuse for not coming up with two separate ideas for a couple of articles; the two parter. Here at the Comment Bureau we are no different and over the next two articles I’ll be looking at the key performers for England, the men on whom the Ashes will be secured or lost. In Part 1, I’ll be looking at the batsmen.

Without a single batsman in the top twenty of the ICC rankings you would have thought the Aussies had little to fear from the England top six. However, no matter how weak one’s perception of the opposition batting unit is, there is always a lynchpin whom you feel is both the physical and mental key to dominating your opponent. Get under their skin, get them out cheaply and the rest will suffer for it, far more so than the dismissal of any other team mate. Think Lara, Tendulkar, Ponting; the players with the ability to set the tone not only of their own innings, but of the side’s.

Trying to find this individual in an England batting lineup which is as inconsistent as it is talented is a more difficult proposition. All of the top six have the potential to score hundreds but Prior often fails to push on towards three figures (3 centuries to 15 fifties), Cooke currently finds himself in the worst form of his career and Collingwood and Bell have both repeatedly been in the last chance saloon. Indeed were it not for Collingwood’s mental determination to pull an innings out the bag he may well have joined Bell as something of an Hokey-Cokey cricketer; as much out of the team as he is in it.

Despite Trott having the top ranking, in truth there are only two players in the current lineup with any real claim to this position; captain and predecessor. Ashes winner Michael Vaughan believes that it is the level headed Strauss (England’s outstanding performer for the last two calender years) who will fulfill the role in this series. Vaughan said earlier this week that if Strauss could average around fifty he will lead his side on the first victorious tour of Australia in twenty years, while if he fell closer to the 25 mark Ponting would reclaim the urn.

Despite his undoubted ability to lead from the front, and the validity of Vaughan’s claims, I would suggest that he is ill suited for the role. Strauss is a captain and batsman who commands a huge amount of respect from fellow and opposition players, but there is only one man in the England team that the Aussies truly fear. Think of the man who repeatedly sent Warne into the stands in 2005, the man who had the audacity the switch hit Murali and the man who can’t stay off the back pages even when he can’t buy a run.

The last two years have been a tough time for Kevin Pietersen. After coming back injured from the IPL he was sidelined for the majority of the last Ashes campaign before enjoying a stunning ICC World T20 and being rightly crowned the Player of the Tournament. Despite those performances in the Caribbean the last six months have seen him dropped from the ODI side, have a public fallout with his county club and struggle against weaker bowling units in Bangladesh and Pakistan.

With no Test century since March this year Pietersen’s mental state has repeatedly been called into question.As with Ian Bell there has never been any doubt of the man’s ability, but both have mental weaknesses that have consistently been their undoing. For Bell it has been a perceived lack of maturity and grit in the middle, but for Pietersen it has been a far less forgivable arrogance. Some of his dismissals, often at key times when he could have set a platform for his team have had the air of man who was more concerned with imposing himself at all costs than one who would do anything to cement his team in a strong position. Imagine what a cricketer we would have if one could combine Pietersen’s flair and talent with Collingwood’s mental strength.

Fortunately for England, Pietersen’s preparation for the 2009/10 Ashes could not have been more meticulous. Although a return to South Africa yielded little in terms of runs, it showed a determination to get himself ready mentally that has been lacking in recent times. His half century in the opening tour warm up game provided further indication that although he is still far from his best, the trend is at least an upwards one. Make no mistake, this focus has not gone un-noticed in Australia, with former Somerset captain Peter Roebuck writing in the Sydney Morning Herald that his preparation will ensure that KP finds his form on this tour. In an online poll 71% of Australians agreed.

If he can get back to something approaching his best then there is no doubt that England’s chances greatly improve, however there is something to what both Roebuck and Vaughan say. In a line up packed with inconsistency, Strauss and Pietersen are the two stand out men with the capability of making high contributions, regularly and at the key moments in the series. As a result of this I would have to disagree with Vaughan. It is not about whether Strauss averages fifty that will determine whether England will be victorious. To my mind, if Strauss and Pietersen average between 90 and 100 between them something else will have to go spectacularly wrong for the Ashes not to be in English hands after the five Tests. If you are desperate for the key metaphor to be extended just think of this as being a multi-lock door, because I believe that without both hitting some form England will fall short.

Whispers From Australia

As a race the Australians don't get "rattled". They pride themselves on the fact that their greatest character trait is embodied by the emu and kangaroo emblazoned on their coat of arms; both animals incapable of taking a backwards step. Australians will tell you that it is this drive which has seen a country with almost 20 million less inhabitants than England become one of the most feared sporting competitors in the world.

It is Australia who spearheaded the changes we now take for granted in the Test arena. Eager for results and success Steve Waugh pushed his batsmen to score at more than 4 an over, preferring to lose aggressively than draw meekly. Even before that they had been at the forefront of changes in the field. My father tells me he once saw the West Indies bowl 6 overs in an hour and Lords', but the Australians stormed through their overs.

Their eagerness changed the face of cricket, with Richie Benaud whooping and hollering like a madman upon taking a wicket, and bringing mind games and sledging into what had previously been a very stoic and gentile affair.

Over time, these mindsets brought about a period of dominance that made Australia all but untouchable for over fifteen years. Yet despite this, in the last twelve months something seems to have changed.

In truth, several somethings have changed, with personnel being the most noticeable. It is difficult to take the likes of Warne, Langer, Hayden and McGrath out of a side and replace them instantly, but with them went that air of invicibility and since then there has been a sense that although they are till a class outfit, they are far from untouchable.

The case in point, rather pleasingly is England who have enjoyed a wonderful 12 months against the old enemy, thwarting them in the Ashes, T20 World Cup and until the recent defeat went on an 8 match ODI unbeaten run. Over a pint in the local cricket club I put the case to three Brisbane residents and cricket lovers that come November, England may well be seen as favourites for an Ashes series victory in Australia.

"That's not going to happen," said Merv Bennett as the other two nodded in absolute agreement. "The gap has closed and England have finally figured out how to play the shorter stuff, but an Ashes Test series on Australian soil is a different story."

"Especially when you don't seem to have a plan if Graeme Swann doesn't bowl out whoever you are against," asserted his brother Ted.

I had been prepared for this. If everyone in England is muttering about a lack of firepower in the bowling department you can bet that the Aussies are fully aware and my plan had been to play the Steve Finn card at this point, but I was somewhat beaten to the punch.

"What about the young lad Finn?" inquired an up until this point silent Jordan Bews. "That boy shows some promise. He'll be a fine bowler without a shadow of a doubt. Maybe not this tour but come four years time and we'll have a real cause for worry." He then looked at me almost accusingly and added, "don't you ruin him."

The conversation meandered along for a while, the conclusion being that Australia would have enough to regain the Ashes this year, but this part of the conversation stuck with me for a variety of reasons.

Finn is an interesting young man with great potential, and it is to be hoped that he has a great England future ahead of him. However, at just 21 he needs to be managed well and will need to well looked after as Bews rightly pointed out. More interesting however was how the Aussies responded to him. This article began with an analysis of the traits which had made them so successful; their drive, their hunger, their passion. But there are other traits which go unsung as my conversation revealed. Not only a great knowledge but a love of the game. Whilst their passion on the pitch is there for all to see, but there are plenty of Australians out there who are enjoying the battles with England all the more now for their more even and competitive edge.

They are having to rely more on these latter traits now as the team boasts less talent, but make no mistake they have as much brain as they do heart and England's current run of success will be examined and learnt from in detail. This Ashes series may not have the bluster and swagger of 2005, but it will be the thinking man's game at it's finest.

Seeds don't always Flower

The ICC doesn't have the best track record for hosting events in the West Indies. In 2007 the World Cup was robbed of the Caribbean flavour that it demanded by a mixture of bureaucratic blunders turning away the locals, a farcical final in near pitch black conditions and the untimely death of Pakistan head coach Bob Woolmer. Fortunately, the sport's carnival format hasn't been denied the carnival atmosphere, and the only place the ICC have been made to look foolish this time around is in the seeding.

In their defence it is difficult to find fault with the decisions they made. With the sub-continent expected to dominate once more, England and Australia weren't seeded for the World T20. England's T20 record only bests minnows Bangladesh, while Australia were famously dumped out of the competition in the group stages the last time the event was held. Yet it is these two sides who are comfortably dispatching every opposition put in front of them. Only Duckworth Lewis has taken points off England while Australia remain undefeated with just one game remaining in the Super Eights.

For both teams, part of their somewhat shocking success is the nature of T20 itself. Unlike Test or even ODI, the demand isn't for extended periods of dominance, merely correctly timed assertions of force. The rewards and penalties for the outcome of each ball in the shortest format of the game are far more keenly felt, meaning that any underdog, no matter how little fancied can have that over of brilliance or fortune which bring home the prized scalp.

The tournament also places a high value on momentum. The high turnover of games means that the winning habit and feel good factor are easier to maintain than on a long tour. If evidence is needed think only how Pakistan won the trophy last time out after a horror start.

There is also another factor that no other team in the competition has, spurring on these players to perform. With both sides looking unsettled at Test level, and England especially showing consistent inconsistency at ODI level, there are spots up for grabs. Four months ago Eoin Morgan said in an interview that everything he did from that point to the announcement of the touring party was designed to get him on that plane in some capacity, and there is no doubt that many others will be thinking the same.

For some like Kevin Pieterson, places are assured, but what of the Morgans, the Steve Smiths and the Tim Bresnans? All will be eyeing up weakness in their own team's, desperate to make a spot undeniably theirs. Playing any role in a World T20 victory, although far from guaranteeing their place would certainly give them some pedigree to bargain with, and perhaps this is why both sides have produced such strong team performances over the last few days. While sides like India and South Africa have floundered under the expectations of trying to win the tournament, their English and Australian counterparts have had one eye on simply using this event as a stepping stone. Perhaps proof if ever it was required that there is still life in the old dog of Test cricket yet.

With all this and their current form in mind, it is difficult to predict anything other than an Ashes appetiser of a final; an early mind game for the players to sweat through and the fans to enjoy. It will give little more than bragging rights, but there isn't a sports fan alive who doesn't enjoy bragging....

Equally, trying to genuinely predict T20 matches is like trying to pick the seeds for a T20 tournament; arduous, long winded, and despite logically processing all the evidence almost certainly doomed to failure. Put your money on a Pakistan v Sri Lanka final.

2010 Ashes Predictions (Part 2)

In part 2 of this article, I’ll be turning my attention to the Australians, who despite their recent successes over a Pakistan team which exists in perpetual turmoil have a few selection headaches of their own in the bowling department and are looking for a fresh spearhead since the retirement of Brett Lee.

Shane Watson: Although Phil Hughes announced himself with a bang in South Africa before the Ashes last year, since replacing him Watson has barely put a foot wrong. In many ways he is a natural replacement for Hayden; a bully of an opener, who enjoys hitting straight past the bowler and pulling off the front foot. A trademark of that decade of Aussie dominance was that they regularly scored at over 4 an over and Watson gives them impetus at the start as well as an added option with the ball, although injury has made him less able to contribute in this area.

Simon Katich: After a torrid 2005 in the middle order he remodeled himself as an opener and has been a lynchpin in the Australian side since his return. His recent gritty innings have highlighted his mental toughness and he is a batsman who rarely gifts his wicket away. He is the perfect foil to his partner, happy to play Langer to Watson’s Hayden and England must look to dismiss him early because once settled he will dig in for the long haul.

Ricky Ponting: If anything the retirement of so many around him seems to have made him hungrier. After losing another series in England he will be looking for his side come out with all the fight they showed in 2006/7 and he will be at the heart of everything. Still impressive with the bat and electric in the field, he is one of those players who never seems to drift in a game. Questions still remain over his captaincy; years of being able to throw the ball to McGrath and Warne mean that he isn’t as tactically astute as other captains with similar experience may be, but make no mistake, he will be fired up and dangerous. England will be hoping the ball swings early in his innings as he remains prone to falling over and being trapped LBW.

Michael Clarke: Recent trouble in his personal life hasn’t distracted him, and he was named man of the match in the first Test against New Zealand after a splendid century. Many wouldn’t have played in his circumstances, let alone performed to that level and the fact that he did tells you everything you need to know about this world class performer. He was a thorn in England’s side last year and nobody would be shocked if he was again.

Michael Hussey: Mr Cricket completes the experienced 3, 4, 5 that England must dismiss cheaply if they are to win Test matches, and he mirrors his fellow no.5 Paul Collingwood for mental steel. He loves to beat England and he has regained his form after a shakey start to the 2009 Ashes. He loves a personal battle as well as a team one, and having struggled against Swann in England will be looking to redress the balance in front of fans who adore his passion for the sport.

Marcus North: With so many stellar names ahead of him, North is almost a forgotten man overseas, but in Australia they recognise his value. He not only boasts a fine average with the bat, but along with Michael Clarke provides more than adequate backup spin should Hauritz be unselected or ineffective and he is a stunning gully fielder.

Brad Haddin: When Adam Gilchrist retired, many expected Australia to chop and change their wicket keepers, but Haddin had waited so long he clearly didn’t want to miss the opportunity and has retained the position as long as he has been fit. With his lightening hands and aggressive batting it is easy to see why, and the only question mark is over his fingers. He has broken 3 in the last year, which is a shock given how cleanly he takes the ball.

Mitchell Johnson: The smiling assassin struggled initially in England, but was still at the top end of the wicket taking statistics come the end of the series. His slinging action will always be somewhat scattergun, but he is capable of producing wicket taking deliveries in the middle of woeful spells, and his slower ball is a constant danger. In addition, if England’s bowlers have had to toil agains the top order and allow themselves mental or physical lapses, then his aggressive batting can quickly alter the complexion of a game.

Nathan Hauritz: Hauritz has taken his time adapting to international cricket, but seems now to understand his role with both bat and ball and weighed in heavily with both against Pakistan. There is a chance that his duel with Kevin Pieterson, whose recent troubles with left-arm spinners has been well documented could be the pick of the series, with both fancying their chances against the other.

Ben Hilfenhaus: Hilfenhaus was a revelation in the 2009 Ashes. Despite his size and obvious power and strength, it was his precision and accuracy that ensured his possession of the new ball when Mitchell Johnson’s radar went haywire. He took 4 for 16 on his return for Tasmania but aggravated a knee injury which he has been battling with. If fit, his consistency of line and length make him the nearest replacement Australia have to Glenn McGrath; not only a wicket taker in his own right, but a dream for the bowler at the other end in virtue of how much pressure he applies with economical figures.

Doug Bollinger: As with England, this spot is something of a head-scratcher for the Australian selectors. Since Brett Lee’s sad retirement through injury they need a new spearhead. Five years ago that looked like being Shaun Tait, but mental frailties put his career on hold, and although he is back in the one day lineup it is unlikely he would be risked in a Test series where so much is at stake. Although Peter Siddle can still be called upon, Bollinger has impressed in a variety of conditions since being called up in January 2009. He took his first ODI five wicket haul in tough conditions on the tour of India, and excelled in all formats against both Pakistan and in the recent series against New Zealand. Although they already have a prominent left armer in Johnson, Bollinger is a different proposition, more inclined to kiss the turf than go for the jugular. From an English point of view, Graeme Swann will be hoping that he does play, with the additional rough created by two left armers sure to aid him against right handed batsman.

It seems fair to say that for both selection committees it is the bowling department that causes the greatest worry. That said I would rather be in the Australian camp. They can be relatively safe in the knowledge that any combination of Johnson, Bollinger, Hilfenhaus, Siddle and Watson has the ability to cause England problems, and with Tait and Clint McKay on the sidelines they boast a strength in depth of talent and experience in this department that England can only currently dream of. Australia’s ability to replace first choice seam in cases of injury or form loss may well play a vital role in the outcome of the series.

With all this in mind I expect Australia to win the series 3-1. Watch this space.

2010 Ashes Predictions (Part 1)

With the Ashes now just over 6 months away, writers around the world are dipping their toes into the unruly world of Ashes starting line ups, praying that a star player remain in form and injury free, and that no upstart wildcard ruins their predictions. To act as a bridge into a greater Australian focus for this blog, in this first of a 2 part article I'll be examining England's likely lineup.

Andrew Strauss: Has flourished with the bat since being given the added responsibility of captaincy and will be well rested after not touring Bangladesh and not being involved in England's short term plans. If anything a lack of cricket may be a concern compared to others but expect him to lead from the front in Australia.

Alistair Cook: Has rediscovered form with good performances in South Africa and now as captain in Bangladesh. Shows a startling amount of maturity for one so young and this may be the year that makes him. With so much experience already behind him including a miserable tour over here 4 years ago, England will be hoping that he and Strauss can regularly produce 3 figure opening partnerships against the Aussies.

Jonathan Trott: Wouldn't make the cut if England were to go with a 5 bowlers but I expect them to try and scrape through with only 4 and 7 frontline batters. After exploding into international cricket with a century in the final Ashes Test, has failed to impress with a mixture of starts and odd dismissals which have failed to distract from his poor fielding, including dropping a sitter in the last Test. However, England will persevere with him for several reasons, not least the lack of an obvious alternative at the moment. Will be hoping the openers can take the pressure off him.

Kevin Pieterson: Rediscovered some form with the bat in Bangladesh but needs both regular cricket and to stay fit in order to pose the same threat to Australia as he did in 2005. Along with Strauss and Collingwood he will still be seen as a vital wicket, but will be looking to make match winning contributions more frequently. Much of England's chances rest on his shoulders.

Paul Collingwood: The grafter is one of the first names on the team sheet, boasting as he does the mental grit which many of his peers are criticised for lacking. One of the few players to emerge from the last tour with any credit and can be relied on to perform under pressure. Gives his captain an option with the ball which will be needed more than ever if England are to persist with 4 front line bowlers.

Ian Bell: Has appeared to be a changed man since his return to the England lineup in South Africa. Clearly enjoys batting at 6 far more than he did at 3 and appears to have used his time on the sidelines to address mental weaknesses. The criticism of being unable to bat under pressure seems to be increasingly null and void, with good performances as England teetered in South Africa and in Bangladesh. If he can maintain his current form he could contribute to the large totals England will need with only 4 frontline bowlers.

Matt Prior: Although he has come under increasing pressure from Craig Kieswetter in the shorter forms of the game, I expect him to hold on to gloves for at least another year. He has undoubtedly improved behind the stumps since coming into the England setup, but will be disappointed with his glovework in Bangladesh and will no doubt be aware that it will be this area of his game that will be under most scrutiny in the upcoming months as his batting remains easily strong enough for a Test no.7, and he has strong batting to follow him in Broad and Swann.

Stuart Broad: Although aspects of his temperament continue to frustrate, Broad shows flickers of brilliance and can produce the sort of match winning spells that England will need if they are to win matches with only 4 bowlers. His batting is hit or miss, but the combination of him and Swann at 8 and 9 mean England have a very short tail. For a bit man he is a gifted fielder and his safe hands in the deep are vital for all the bowlers.

Graeme Swann: England's star man of the last 18 months, Swann's mastery of finger spin make him a threat on even the most docile of surfaces. Despite the talents of Anderson and Broad, for most he is the key bowler for England, and without him claiming 7 or more wickets in a Test it is difficult to see how England possess the firepower to take the 20 required to win a Test match in Australia.

James Anderson: Without Flintoff he is the spearhead of the attack and must make inroads with the new ball. Will want to be more effective when the ball isn't swinging and will flourish on some wickets here and struggle on others unless he develops something other than swing. That said, when the conditions are right he is nigh on unplayable and if he can get it right on the those pitches conducive to aerial movement then he may be able to give England a position in the series that they can hold on to.

Liam Plunkett: Every selection has a wildcard and this is mine. Onions is struggling with a back injury and, although it hardly seems fair that he should be omitted because of it, he seems to be an unlucky bowler at international level. While Swann has the knack of taking a wicket in his first over, Onions seems to have the knack of bowling great deliveries that don't take wickets. Bresnan is a workhorse but will not win Test matches with the ball and Sidebottom is also a fitness worry, and you can't afford a question mark over fitness when the captain already has so few people to throw the ball too. As a result, Plunkett gets my nod. He is a proven performer who has improved beyond measure since he last played for England. He adds depth to both the batting and fielding lineups. The only thing that counts against him is the strength in depth at Durham, who boast such seam bowling riches that nobody up there is guaranteed to start.

So there you have it. In my mind certainly 2, and possibly 3 are up for debate. Trott needs to return to no.3 and impress there and the fourth bowler is there to be claimed. The other question mark hangs over Prior, who will be hoping that his glove work returns to the levels shown in South Africa.

Sachin Sets The Bar

Wednesday's ODI between India and South Africa was special for many reasons. The cameo from Dhoni, the swashbuckling from Karthik or even the stunning century from AB de Villiers which, on any other day would have been a worthy talking point. India dismissed a strong South African side by posting a massive total and bowling them out, but in the years to come nobody will talk about the humbling result, they will say "I saw the Little Master make history".

Trying to say something new about Sachin Tendulkar is a thankless task. In India he can't even go out of his house without wearing a disguise for fear of being mobbed. He has been studied, almost down to atomic level as his fans and admirers seek new ways of describing a man whose achievements and conduct under extreme public pressure defy description. One almost wonders if he keeps trying to break new ground even after 20 years in the game, simply to give people something new to write about.

Wednesday's innings made him the first batsman to score a double century in limited overs internationals, and the quality of the innings from the off was such that as he reached his century that commentators immediately speculated that they might see him "double up". There are precious few batsmen in the world who could attract such speculation, but he not only attracts it, it lives up to it and thrives on it. His knock was a masterclass in precision, pacing an innings and executing every shot, either textbook or improvised. Put simply, you will not see a better innings, and there is no finer player or man in the cricket world who could reach this landmark.

On a personal note, this innings comes at a perfect time for me; a natural place to start a departure from England, both physically and in terms of cricket writing, as I fly out to Australia on Monday morning. I don't want to write on the progress of Strauss's team in the build up to the Ashes without seeing them play, so I am going to turn my attention to the Australian camp, providing up to date information on their build up as I travel around the country.

More Drama Reignites Selection Question

Graeme Onions was called on once more as last session drama in Cape Town reduced England from a position of security to 9 down. The Durham seamer faced 11 deliveries and intense scrutiny from Morne Morkel to secure the draw for his country and ensure that Andrew Strauss's men will not leave South Africa as losers of either the ODI or Test series.

In many ways it is a difficult match to write on, as there is a feeling it has all been done (and said) before. This is the third time in just eight Test matches that England have salvaged a draw from near certain defeat on the last day; asking their strong lower order to see them over the line. With this in mind I am going to use this blog to put to bed the issue which has dominated the first three blogs on this Test series. I promise that this is the last time I give it such prominence, and equally assure that this will be a broader discussion than the usual "we need five bowlers" format.

However, that is the place we will start, and a quick examination of the recent evidence will offer some support. Of the three matches where England have given their captain only four strike bowlers to play with, the opposition has been able to amass a total that allows a declaration with nearly a day and a half left to play. This means that the best England have been able to hope for going into the last day of two matches has been to draw, and this is no longer good enough because, Test match cricket is a far more even playing field than it was ten years ago.

In the days of Atherton and Hussain, the three Lions couldn't eat at the top table and as a result, two draws against a side with the talent of this South African team would be considered a major success. But England's rise has coincided with a slight decline in two of it's major rivals, largely down to the retirement of two pairs of all time great bowlers. Alan Donald and Shaun Pollock, Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne were four players who were world class whoever they were against, but often saved their very best for England. Obviously they were not alone, but they tormented the England sides at the end of the last century and the start of this one and they have proved difficult to replace.

This may seem like an odd thing to say, particularly given the South Africans boast the number one rated bowler in the world in Dale Steyn. But this is a discussion for England, and unlike his predecessors he has rarely shown us his best. Add to this the fact that England now has a much stronger all round line up than they did in those bleak days and, as shown by the recent successes over the Australians (who did boast Warne and McGrath in '05) at home and in South Africa and nobody would suggest that England haven't got the talent to challenge the top sides in the world.

So why then are we letting an average South African side dominate us. The ICC may say they are they were the top side in the world going into this series, but their top 6 has two players in Duminy and Prince who have looked like walking wickets, a spinner who can't turn it and a seam attack which hasn't looked fully fit until England's second innings in this Test. In layman's terms, they have been there for the taking...but they are not only still in the series, they have been 2 balls away from leading it.

From England's point of view, the lineup they have been selecting is actually tuned to save a draw rather than force a win. By hopefully trying to extend the time they can bat for they are limiting the number of wicket takers at their disposal, and everyone knows you need wickets more than you need runs to win a Test Match.

The theory is of course sound, but there is a practical problem that lies in a batting lineup which is failing to reach its potential. Just as in the summer, there aren't enough match winning 3 figure innings out there. England have mustered two this series, which came in the same innings and sure enough they won the Test match. South Africa have spread their four centuries over the four innings of the first and third Test matches, both games they would have expected to win going into the last day.

As a result, England find themselves trapped in an unwelcome situation this winter. They can either increase the likelihood of victory but make these match saving performances less likely, or hope to make losing as unlikely as possible and try and pick up a win when the opposition have an off day as in the second test.

Make no mistake, I expect the current selection format to be the one England stick with over the tour to Bangladesh, but I feel it is one that belongs int he days when England didn't believe they were real contenders. If winning the success of 2005 and the reclaiming of the Ashes this summer don't make them think of themselves (and select like) as a side that can defeat the best in the world then I don't know what will.