A seven-game ODI series was expected to be snooze-inducing; instead it was truly captivating. Moreover, England's success was built chiefly around hitherto unestablished one-day players, boding very well for the future. Here is how they rated in the series:
Alastair Cook 5
Cook made an excellent century in the first game, accelerating after a fairly slow start to suggest he was learning to adapt to the nature of the one-day game. Thereafter, he declined alarmingly, scoring just four runs in his last three innings. In the final analysis, both his average (30) and strike-rate (75) were not good enough, and he clearly needs to learn to score singles with more regularity.
Matt Prior 4
Prior generally kept better than expected, but, as an opener, he resembled Geraint Jones in South Africa in 2005. He made plenty of starts, but does not fully convince against the new ball and continually got out to rash shots. Time for Phil Mustard or Tim Ambrose?
Ian Bell 9
At last, Bell made a one-day hundred for England, and developed his ability to hit over the top during the series. Both his average - 70 - and strike-rate - 91 - were outstanding, as was his fielding, and he was rightly named Man of the Series. Though he was restricted to cameos in the last four games, Bell has now established himself in the top three.
Kevin Pietersen 6
After a bizarre, prolonged slump - 16 home ODIs without a half-century - Pietersen made important contributions in the last two games, though he could still pick up more singles early on in his innings, and was culpable for two run-outs. But the great news is that, if he fails, an England victory no longer seems an impossibility.
Paul Collingwood 8
Collingwood grew as a one-day leader, captaining astutely, aggressively and - when dismissing Tendulkar and Dravid with Pietersen and Shah - opportunistically. With the bat, he scored at virtually a run a ball, making two fifties; with the ball, he was canny but unlucky.
Owais Shah 7
After a trio of nothing scores, there were fears that, like Vikram Solanki, a player who should have been a tremendous asset to England's ODI team was fading sadly from view. However, Shah showed his dexterity against spin and unorthodoxy in making a terrific maiden ODI hundred, and should soon be a regular in the side.
Luke Wright 7
Wright's debut 50 hinted at a rare one-day talent; his clean-hitting and uncluttered thinking were reminiscent of Andrew Flintoff in 2004. Promoted to open in the final game, his impetuosity got the better of him but it seems certain Wright, also a good fielder and promising bowler, will have a big part to play in England's one-day future.
Andrew Flintoff 7
In between the constant injury scares, there was some superbly hostile bowling for a side always in need of middle-over wickets. But his batting was predictably brainless, making a total mockery of the number six position. On current form, he should be used as a bowling all-rounder at number eight.
Ravi Bopara 6
A superbly mature innings at Old Trafford, but three failures elsewhere, as well as disappointing bowling.
Dimitri Mascarenhas 7
Mascarenhas is probably neither good enough to bat at seven nor good enough to be a third-seamer; but he carved a niche out for himself as a wicket-to-wicket bowler in the middle overs (taking 3-23 at Lord's) and as a belligerent hitter at number eight, hitting 10 6s from just 54 balls.
James Anderson 8
Bar the sixth game at the Oval, Anderson was outstanding, displaying new-found control, late swing and impressive speed to claim 14 wickets, while he is also an exceptional fielder in the deep.
Stuart Broad 6
Broad played exceptionally to score 45* in the 4th ODI to take England home, showing he has the technique and temperament to be, at least, a very good number eight in the future. However, his bowling was a little less impressive; though his promise is palpable, he is perhaps a little too predictable with the ball (save for a brilliant leg-stump yorker to dismiss Yuvraj) and both his average - 38 - and economy rate - 5.2 - were ultimately disappointing.
Monty Panesar 6
There were some signs that Panesar was maturing as a one-day player and daring to flight the ball, but Graeme Swann and Chris Schofield, both three-dimensional cricketers, also have cases for the spinner's slot.
Chris Tremlett 5
Tremlett was simply too easy to hit in the two games he played, lacking any real one-day nous, but he came back impressively to take two key wickets in the victory in the third game.
Jon Lewis 4
A token, unsatisfactory appearance for a bowler whose age means he is unlikely to make the next World Cup. Still, hugely unlucky that Duncan Fletcher preferred Messrs Plunkett and Mahmood in the ODI side.
Showing posts with label England-India 2007. Show all posts
Showing posts with label England-India 2007. Show all posts
Sunday, 9 September 2007
Thursday, 30 August 2007
Broad and Bopara: England's future
The nerveless 99-run partnership between Stuart Broad and Ravi Bopara to secure an incredible victory for England contained much for fans to be excited about. The two youngest players in the side eschewed risk, and played with skill, calm and, above all, common sense. In all probability, their brilliant partnership has secured the one-day series.
Broad and Bopara embody the new England ODI era: they are young, fearless cricketers who can contribute in all three disciplines of the game. Bopara, of course, scored a tremendous, valiant 52 in England’s exhilarating World Cup loss to Sri Lanka, displaying a fine, if slightly unorthodox, technique and a relish for the big occasion. He is capable of constructing larger innings, too, and averages 62 for Essex in the championship this season. Bopara's bowling is not yet as good as Paul Collingwood's but, with 15 wickets at 23 in domestic one-dayers this season and a yorker learned from Darren Gough, he should one day be a useful fourth seamer in Tests and good enough to regularly bowl 10 overs on ODIs.
Yet Broad could be even more pivotal for the England side in the next few years. The Man of the Match has formed a terrific opening partnership with the improved James Anderson this series, and today took a career best 4-51. He uses his 6ft6in frame to get good bounce and pace in the mid-80s, generates significant movement off the seam, is aggressive and is constantly improving his control.
With the new white ball, he has done very well. Though he has sometimes proved too profligate bowling towards the end of the innings, and may be better off bowling out before the final slog, Broad is also working on his variety, as his superb yorker to Yuvraj Singh illustrated. Crucially, however, Broad is learning to walk before he can run – credit to both himself and the team management – unlike Sajid Mahmood, say.
So the maturity displayed by Broad and Bopara bodes very well for the future of England’s limited-overs and Test sides alike; both will surely make their Test debuts within the next twelve months or so. Broad already looks a good enough batsman to fill the problem position of number eight in the Test team and, given that he also made 40* and 91* in his last championship game for Leicestershire, could one day bat higher still.
Yet their outstanding partnership should not detract from the woeful display of England’s top order. It was a performance bereft of any coherent thinking; virtually the entire top order got themselves out though, as Broad and Bopara showed, all that was required was sensible accumulation. Of particular concern is the continued batting travails of Andrew Flintoff, who, in his desperation to impose himself on the opposition has lost all selectivity with the bat. He could certainly learn much from the disciplined accumulation exhibited by Broad and Bopara.
Broad and Bopara embody the new England ODI era: they are young, fearless cricketers who can contribute in all three disciplines of the game. Bopara, of course, scored a tremendous, valiant 52 in England’s exhilarating World Cup loss to Sri Lanka, displaying a fine, if slightly unorthodox, technique and a relish for the big occasion. He is capable of constructing larger innings, too, and averages 62 for Essex in the championship this season. Bopara's bowling is not yet as good as Paul Collingwood's but, with 15 wickets at 23 in domestic one-dayers this season and a yorker learned from Darren Gough, he should one day be a useful fourth seamer in Tests and good enough to regularly bowl 10 overs on ODIs.
Yet Broad could be even more pivotal for the England side in the next few years. The Man of the Match has formed a terrific opening partnership with the improved James Anderson this series, and today took a career best 4-51. He uses his 6ft6in frame to get good bounce and pace in the mid-80s, generates significant movement off the seam, is aggressive and is constantly improving his control.
With the new white ball, he has done very well. Though he has sometimes proved too profligate bowling towards the end of the innings, and may be better off bowling out before the final slog, Broad is also working on his variety, as his superb yorker to Yuvraj Singh illustrated. Crucially, however, Broad is learning to walk before he can run – credit to both himself and the team management – unlike Sajid Mahmood, say.
So the maturity displayed by Broad and Bopara bodes very well for the future of England’s limited-overs and Test sides alike; both will surely make their Test debuts within the next twelve months or so. Broad already looks a good enough batsman to fill the problem position of number eight in the Test team and, given that he also made 40* and 91* in his last championship game for Leicestershire, could one day bat higher still.
Yet their outstanding partnership should not detract from the woeful display of England’s top order. It was a performance bereft of any coherent thinking; virtually the entire top order got themselves out though, as Broad and Bopara showed, all that was required was sensible accumulation. Of particular concern is the continued batting travails of Andrew Flintoff, who, in his desperation to impose himself on the opposition has lost all selectivity with the bat. He could certainly learn much from the disciplined accumulation exhibited by Broad and Bopara.
Friday, 24 August 2007
Coming of Age
England’s resounding victory over India at the Rose Bowl on Tuesday was not just important for morale, it also saw the emergence of two of England’s most promising batsmen as One Day International players. Both Alastair Cook and Ian Bell brought up their first centuries for England in One Day Internationals. They were two vastly different innings though and Bell was the main man in the partnership which the two shared. From the moment he strode to the crease he demonstrated the body language of a man who was in control, who knew what he wanted to achieve and how he was going to go about it. He used his crease and feet brilliantly against the spinners and he offered a chanceless innings, importantly seeing it through to the end. Playing on the centre pitch at the Rose Bowl meant that there were fairly deep boundaries on either side of the wicket and Bell used this to his advantage, superbly placing the ball between fielders in order to turn ones into twos. When the run rate seemed static he stepped up to the plate and found the boundary, once with a glorious straight six. He also finished with a healthy strike rate of more than a run a ball, a great achievement.
It has taken Bell a long time to register his first tonne for England in this form of the game, this was his forty-eighth match. However, the manner of his innings suggests that it will not be his last and that now that he has broken his duck he can push on and cement his place in the side for the next decade. Bell has always had the quality to be a very good played indeed at International level. It has always been the mental side of his game which has needed the most work. As he matures with age though he looks a calm, composed and complete player and there will be many more hundreds to come from him.
Cook on the other hand registered three figures in just his sixth One Day International, most impressive. However, he did struggle to regularly find the boundary and unlike Bell played the spinners with less certainty, a pre-meditated sweep appearing on the occasions when he did score, a sign that he has been working with Andy Flower no doubt. In fact, during one over Cook struggled to score against the spin of Piyush Chawla. Showing his growing confidence in the team, Bell strode down the wicket and spoke to Cook, the very next ball out came the sweep and the strike was rotated once more. Cook will though continue to develop and learn and once he has more confidence in hitting over the top in the latter half of the innings he will be a more complete One Day player. He is certainly worth persisting with, especially if he continues to take catches like this:
The success of Cook and Bell was not all good news though. The exclusion of Owais Shah was a slightly puzzling move from England, after he had been the main success story to emerge from the games against the West Indies earlier in the summer. He has shown that he can succeed at this level and play a very important role for England during the middle overs, with his wristy play of both pace and spin alike, along with his explosive hitting. One solution would be to bring him in for Dimitri Mascarenhas, whose overs could probably be bowled by Ravi Bopara, who has been criminally underbowled and Paul Collingwood. By dropping Matt Prior down the order and moving Bell and Kevin Pietersen up, England could fit Shah in at number four. The alternative would be to drop Cook and open with Bell, but that would be a shame. One thing which Tuesday did prove, is that England do have a capable top order, that they can win without a major knock from Pietesen and that perhaps Pietersen should be coming in at number three, to maximise his effectiveness throughout the innings.
Chris Pallett
Ian Bell unleashes a pull shot for four off Zaheer Khan
It has taken Bell a long time to register his first tonne for England in this form of the game, this was his forty-eighth match. However, the manner of his innings suggests that it will not be his last and that now that he has broken his duck he can push on and cement his place in the side for the next decade. Bell has always had the quality to be a very good played indeed at International level. It has always been the mental side of his game which has needed the most work. As he matures with age though he looks a calm, composed and complete player and there will be many more hundreds to come from him.
Alistair Cook clips to leg for a single
Cook on the other hand registered three figures in just his sixth One Day International, most impressive. However, he did struggle to regularly find the boundary and unlike Bell played the spinners with less certainty, a pre-meditated sweep appearing on the occasions when he did score, a sign that he has been working with Andy Flower no doubt. In fact, during one over Cook struggled to score against the spin of Piyush Chawla. Showing his growing confidence in the team, Bell strode down the wicket and spoke to Cook, the very next ball out came the sweep and the strike was rotated once more. Cook will though continue to develop and learn and once he has more confidence in hitting over the top in the latter half of the innings he will be a more complete One Day player. He is certainly worth persisting with, especially if he continues to take catches like this:
The success of Cook and Bell was not all good news though. The exclusion of Owais Shah was a slightly puzzling move from England, after he had been the main success story to emerge from the games against the West Indies earlier in the summer. He has shown that he can succeed at this level and play a very important role for England during the middle overs, with his wristy play of both pace and spin alike, along with his explosive hitting. One solution would be to bring him in for Dimitri Mascarenhas, whose overs could probably be bowled by Ravi Bopara, who has been criminally underbowled and Paul Collingwood. By dropping Matt Prior down the order and moving Bell and Kevin Pietersen up, England could fit Shah in at number four. The alternative would be to drop Cook and open with Bell, but that would be a shame. One thing which Tuesday did prove, is that England do have a capable top order, that they can win without a major knock from Pietesen and that perhaps Pietersen should be coming in at number three, to maximise his effectiveness throughout the innings.
Chris Pallett
Monday, 13 August 2007
England Series Ratings
Though England were ostensibly only a wicket at Lord’s away from a drawn series, the fact remains they were outclassed for large portions of the final two Tests. Oddly enough, only Matt Prior had a genuinely poor series; England’s problem was they were seldom able to consolidate the initiative, with their batsmen prone to getting themselves when set, and their bowlers only at Lord’s bowling well as a unit.
Here are the series ratings:
Alastair Cook 6
Made at least 17 in each innings, yet never passed 61. Cook was continually dismissed attempting to play straight deliveries to leg – he could do with a few months to work on this fault, but his place is not under serious threat.
Andrew Strauss 6
Made 96 in the first innings of the series, and a fine 55 at Trent Bridge, before twice giving it away with an injudicious shot. Technically he looks ok; but not so mentally – and, if Andrew Flintoff is to bat at six again, then Strauss deserves to be the one to make way. He averages less than 30 in his last 12 Tests – and the feeling is this is more than a mere dip in form.
Michael Vaughan 7
The skipper made a magisterial hundred at Trent Bridge to confirm he is still worth his place as a batsman alone, although, like his team-mates, he is too often dismissed to a poor shot. His captaincy was also a touch below par.
Kevin Pietersen 8
Two fine hundreds including, pleasingly, his first archetypal match-saving knock, is testament to his increasing batting maturity, while his sheer excellence is epitomised by four Test centuries in the summer.
Paul Collingwood 6
Started poorly at Lord’s, but played important knocks thereafter, and was less culpable than his colleagues for failing to notch a truly big score. However, with talk about the side’s balance continuing, his fine bowling was particularly pleasing.
Ian Bell 5
Bell was under immense pressure coming into the final Test, but proceeded to make two fine 60s – only to fall disappointingly on both occasions, a familiar sight. There is a slight sense he is treading water, and, with Messrs Shah and Bopara waiting, he needs a match-defining innings soon.
Matt Prior 3
A score of three may seem a tad harsh, but Prior’s keeping – not to mention his sledging – looked below international standard, with the byes and drops mounting up. His batting is equally unproven: all he has done, yet, is score runs of a second-rate West Indian attack, and his two key failures against the second new-ball were of particular concern, though he scored a crucial 40 at Lord’s. Nonetheless, he is almost certain to play the first Test in Sri Lanka.
Ryan Sidebottom 7
Sidebottom’s figures belay his true worth, for he bowled marvelously to Sachin Tendulkar and suffered enormously through Prior’s gloves. With his ability to swing the ball both ways, aggression and good control, he showed he could trouble good players on good wickets and would be extremely unfortunate to be dropped.
Chris Tremlett 6
Had the best average of the four bowlers, though this was boosted by three wickets when the fate of the second Test was decided. He was terrific in the first two games, impressing with his control, bounce and seam movement, before, disappointingly, rather wilting at the Oval, when so much was expected of him.
Monty Panesar 5
Panesar was hugely disappointing at the Oval, unable to provide penetration or control, but he did adequately in the first two Tests and remains an automatic pick. However, his batting was desperately poor, totally bereft of the discipline which Duncan Fletcher helped imbue in his tailenders.
James Anderson 6
England’s official Man of the Series, though seldom can there have been a less deserving one. Anderson was superb at Lord’s and bowled with good heart at the Oval, but, as his economy rate of 3.40 testifies, he is still too prone to bowling four balls.
The Verdict
The consistency in the ratings bears out the fact most the side offered glimpses of their worth, before falling victims of ill-discipline. India were excellent, for sure, and England’s bowling depleted, so the real blame must lie in the inability of batsmen to bat for a day at a day, and their dogmatic determination to play their ‘natural games’ when, as in the first innings of Trent Bridge, resolute play is required.
Here are the series ratings:
Alastair Cook 6
Made at least 17 in each innings, yet never passed 61. Cook was continually dismissed attempting to play straight deliveries to leg – he could do with a few months to work on this fault, but his place is not under serious threat.
Andrew Strauss 6
Made 96 in the first innings of the series, and a fine 55 at Trent Bridge, before twice giving it away with an injudicious shot. Technically he looks ok; but not so mentally – and, if Andrew Flintoff is to bat at six again, then Strauss deserves to be the one to make way. He averages less than 30 in his last 12 Tests – and the feeling is this is more than a mere dip in form.
Michael Vaughan 7
The skipper made a magisterial hundred at Trent Bridge to confirm he is still worth his place as a batsman alone, although, like his team-mates, he is too often dismissed to a poor shot. His captaincy was also a touch below par.
Kevin Pietersen 8
Two fine hundreds including, pleasingly, his first archetypal match-saving knock, is testament to his increasing batting maturity, while his sheer excellence is epitomised by four Test centuries in the summer.
Paul Collingwood 6
Started poorly at Lord’s, but played important knocks thereafter, and was less culpable than his colleagues for failing to notch a truly big score. However, with talk about the side’s balance continuing, his fine bowling was particularly pleasing.
Ian Bell 5
Bell was under immense pressure coming into the final Test, but proceeded to make two fine 60s – only to fall disappointingly on both occasions, a familiar sight. There is a slight sense he is treading water, and, with Messrs Shah and Bopara waiting, he needs a match-defining innings soon.
Matt Prior 3
A score of three may seem a tad harsh, but Prior’s keeping – not to mention his sledging – looked below international standard, with the byes and drops mounting up. His batting is equally unproven: all he has done, yet, is score runs of a second-rate West Indian attack, and his two key failures against the second new-ball were of particular concern, though he scored a crucial 40 at Lord’s. Nonetheless, he is almost certain to play the first Test in Sri Lanka.
Ryan Sidebottom 7
Sidebottom’s figures belay his true worth, for he bowled marvelously to Sachin Tendulkar and suffered enormously through Prior’s gloves. With his ability to swing the ball both ways, aggression and good control, he showed he could trouble good players on good wickets and would be extremely unfortunate to be dropped.
Chris Tremlett 6
Had the best average of the four bowlers, though this was boosted by three wickets when the fate of the second Test was decided. He was terrific in the first two games, impressing with his control, bounce and seam movement, before, disappointingly, rather wilting at the Oval, when so much was expected of him.
Monty Panesar 5
Panesar was hugely disappointing at the Oval, unable to provide penetration or control, but he did adequately in the first two Tests and remains an automatic pick. However, his batting was desperately poor, totally bereft of the discipline which Duncan Fletcher helped imbue in his tailenders.
James Anderson 6
England’s official Man of the Series, though seldom can there have been a less deserving one. Anderson was superb at Lord’s and bowled with good heart at the Oval, but, as his economy rate of 3.40 testifies, he is still too prone to bowling four balls.
The Verdict
The consistency in the ratings bears out the fact most the side offered glimpses of their worth, before falling victims of ill-discipline. India were excellent, for sure, and England’s bowling depleted, so the real blame must lie in the inability of batsmen to bat for a day at a day, and their dogmatic determination to play their ‘natural games’ when, as in the first innings of Trent Bridge, resolute play is required.
The Campaign for Real Wicket-Keepers
I was lucky enough to spend a rather entertaining day at the Oval on Friday, with Dhoni scoring a wonderful 92 and Kumble getting a well deserved ton. However as the day went on, I became more interested in "what might have been" if two fairly regulation chances had been taken by Matt Prior to dismiss Tendulkar and Laxman.
However, this isn't about Chris Read. James Foster is another whose wicket-keeping skills have been conveniently forgotten about in the search for the new Alec Stewart. And it is this realistation that we are looking for a new Alec Stewart that worries me.
While we were in the pub after the game on Friday, I ended up at the toilet alongside Derek Pringle, which got me thinking. As worthy a county player as Pringle was, his career will always be associated with the search for the new Botham. And his isn't the only career to have suffered such high expectations. Chris Lewis, Phil DeFreitas, David Capel, Craig White, Dominic Cork, Ronnie Irani, Alex Tudor, Ben and Adam Hollioake and even Darren Gough all the way to Andrew Flintoff have to varying levels of success been touted as a new Botham.
Rather than concentrating on the basics and accepting the bonus when a genuine all-rounder came along, lesser players have been given an opportunity over specialists in the hope that bits and pieces will get the job done. Was Derek Pringle ever one of the best four bowlers in the country? I very much doubt it. Likewise, was David Capel ever worthy of his place in the England team as either a batsman or bowler? Absolutely not. Nowadays we seem to have jumped that hurdle with the batting bowling allrounder. Andrew Flintoff would make it into the England team purely on his bowling ability. Paul Collingwood is in for his batting - his bowling is a bonus.
We need to make the same jump with wicket-keepers. Is Matt Prior the best wicket-keeper in England? Of course he isn't. Was Geraint Jones ever an International standard wicket-keeper?These players should either have been in the team as a batsman or not at all. It's time England stopped looking for a "new Alec Stewart". We haven't got one at the moment (although Steve Davies looks promising for the future). Let's play the best we've got, and make sure our players do the job they are there to do. We now have real batsmen and real bowlers, rather than the bits and pieces players listed above. We need a real wicket-keeper.
I have written about my thoughts on wicket-keepers before. Chris Read, to my mind, has been shoddily treated by England despite probably being the best keeper in workld cricket today. A player with that amount of tatent in a single discipline should be viewed as a strength, in the same way that Monty Panesar has been embraced. And lets' get things into perspective. While Monty clearly works hard on his fielding and batting, he is still not a natural fielder and Read's batting is far superior to that of Monty.
However, this isn't about Chris Read. James Foster is another whose wicket-keeping skills have been conveniently forgotten about in the search for the new Alec Stewart. And it is this realistation that we are looking for a new Alec Stewart that worries me.
While we were in the pub after the game on Friday, I ended up at the toilet alongside Derek Pringle, which got me thinking. As worthy a county player as Pringle was, his career will always be associated with the search for the new Botham. And his isn't the only career to have suffered such high expectations. Chris Lewis, Phil DeFreitas, David Capel, Craig White, Dominic Cork, Ronnie Irani, Alex Tudor, Ben and Adam Hollioake and even Darren Gough all the way to Andrew Flintoff have to varying levels of success been touted as a new Botham.
Rather than concentrating on the basics and accepting the bonus when a genuine all-rounder came along, lesser players have been given an opportunity over specialists in the hope that bits and pieces will get the job done. Was Derek Pringle ever one of the best four bowlers in the country? I very much doubt it. Likewise, was David Capel ever worthy of his place in the England team as either a batsman or bowler? Absolutely not. Nowadays we seem to have jumped that hurdle with the batting bowling allrounder. Andrew Flintoff would make it into the England team purely on his bowling ability. Paul Collingwood is in for his batting - his bowling is a bonus.
We need to make the same jump with wicket-keepers. Is Matt Prior the best wicket-keeper in England? Of course he isn't. Was Geraint Jones ever an International standard wicket-keeper?These players should either have been in the team as a batsman or not at all. It's time England stopped looking for a "new Alec Stewart". We haven't got one at the moment (although Steve Davies looks promising for the future). Let's play the best we've got, and make sure our players do the job they are there to do. We now have real batsmen and real bowlers, rather than the bits and pieces players listed above. We need a real wicket-keeper.
Tuesday, 31 July 2007
Should England make changes for the Oval?
England are in an unusual position: only once since 1996 have they gone into the final Test of the summer needing to win to square the series. That was in 2003, when they made three changes for the last Test at South Africa, and inevitably there have been calls for new blood after today's defeat by India. So what are the main areas of consideration ahead of next week's Oval Test?
Opening batsmen
Until the tour to Australia last winter, Andrew Strauss had a phenomenal record of 10 hundreds in just 31 Tests, averaging 46; in his last 11 Tests, he has failed to score a century while averaging just 28. He may have ground out half-centuries in his last three Tests, but there are still worries about his static feet - and he was dismissed through an aberrant swipe at Trent Bridge, perhaps betraying his mental state. His opening partner Alastair Cook has been dismissed LBW four times this series, playing across the line on each occasion, but has shown such promise that his place is not under any threat.
If England decide to dispense with Strauss, which remains unlikely, they have two options; they can either pick a specialist opener, or move Michael Vaughan up to open (a job he has done just once since the West Indies tour of 2003-04) and rejig the batting order. If they opt for the former, the most likely candidate is Kent's Joe Denly, who, at 21, already averages 54 in first-class cricket. He has played two innings of particular note this campaign: an outstanding 115 not out (out of only 199) against a Hampshire side featuring Shane Warne, Stuart Clark and Chris Tremlett; and an exhilarating, 90-ball 83 against the Indians for England Lions.
Middle order batsmen
With some impressive performances since his recall against Pakistan last year, Ian Bell looked to be establishing himself as one of England's untouchables. However he has failed four times this series, while England's selectors may also note that he averages just 19 after five Tests against India, and murmurings about his inability to perform under pressure remain. The words that dare not speak their name - flat-track bully - are becoming increasingly voluble - Paul Collingwood's tenacious 63 in the last Test, meanwhile, will ensure he remains in the side for the Oval.
Owais Shah played in the first Test of the summer and, especially after his fine one-day showings, is probably the next cab on the middle-order rank. Memories of his superb 88 on Test debut in Mumbai remain; and, at 28, Shah's time should be now. Of the other candidates, Ravi Bopara is averaging 65 in the championship, and his wristy batting and steely temperament caught the eye in the World Cup. It may seem fanciful but, with this being a must-win Test that exists in isolation, it would be wrong to discount the technically proficient Mark Ramprakash, who is once more leading the first-class averages and, nearing 38, is a more mellow character than during his Test career.
Wicket-keeper
Matt Prior is sure to keep his place for the final Test but, considering his decidedly iffy wicket-keeping and the fact his runs have only come against West Indies - whose bowling attack would be amongst the worst in Division Two - his long-term position is by no means secure. As shown by his selection for England Lions, Tim Ambrose, a markedly better keeper than Prior and outstanding with the bat this season, leads the chasing pack, although he has not reached fifty in his past five first-class knocks. There are a multitude of other potential candidates, led by the unlucky James Foster, who, at 27, should be entering his prime.
Pace bowling
Chris Tremlett, who has taken 10 wickets in two Tests, is surely assured of a place. Ryan Sidebottom has bowled well in both matches against India; and Jimmy Anderson was excellent at Lord's, but disappointingly wayward at Trent Bridge. However, with Monty Panesar completing the bowling quartet, the England selectors will no doubt be aware of the need to extract more runs from the tail.
This could aid the case of Stuart Broad, omitted at the last for the first Test. He has scored half-centuries in consecutive seasons against the tourists to give evidence he could be an England No8, while he also claimed five wickets against India for England Lions. Though almost as tall as Tremlett, he generates less bounce, but has good pace, gets movement off the seam, offers aggression and has a temperament well suited to the international game. The recovery of Matthew Hoggard is still in its infancy - he is not yet back at Yorkshire - and it would smack of desperation were he to be selected, especially as he averages 40 at the Oval. The same, of course, could be said of a recall for Andy Caddick, although he has 56 first-class wickets this season and an excellent record at the Oval.
Opening batsmen
Until the tour to Australia last winter, Andrew Strauss had a phenomenal record of 10 hundreds in just 31 Tests, averaging 46; in his last 11 Tests, he has failed to score a century while averaging just 28. He may have ground out half-centuries in his last three Tests, but there are still worries about his static feet - and he was dismissed through an aberrant swipe at Trent Bridge, perhaps betraying his mental state. His opening partner Alastair Cook has been dismissed LBW four times this series, playing across the line on each occasion, but has shown such promise that his place is not under any threat.
If England decide to dispense with Strauss, which remains unlikely, they have two options; they can either pick a specialist opener, or move Michael Vaughan up to open (a job he has done just once since the West Indies tour of 2003-04) and rejig the batting order. If they opt for the former, the most likely candidate is Kent's Joe Denly, who, at 21, already averages 54 in first-class cricket. He has played two innings of particular note this campaign: an outstanding 115 not out (out of only 199) against a Hampshire side featuring Shane Warne, Stuart Clark and Chris Tremlett; and an exhilarating, 90-ball 83 against the Indians for England Lions.
Middle order batsmen
With some impressive performances since his recall against Pakistan last year, Ian Bell looked to be establishing himself as one of England's untouchables. However he has failed four times this series, while England's selectors may also note that he averages just 19 after five Tests against India, and murmurings about his inability to perform under pressure remain. The words that dare not speak their name - flat-track bully - are becoming increasingly voluble - Paul Collingwood's tenacious 63 in the last Test, meanwhile, will ensure he remains in the side for the Oval.
Owais Shah played in the first Test of the summer and, especially after his fine one-day showings, is probably the next cab on the middle-order rank. Memories of his superb 88 on Test debut in Mumbai remain; and, at 28, Shah's time should be now. Of the other candidates, Ravi Bopara is averaging 65 in the championship, and his wristy batting and steely temperament caught the eye in the World Cup. It may seem fanciful but, with this being a must-win Test that exists in isolation, it would be wrong to discount the technically proficient Mark Ramprakash, who is once more leading the first-class averages and, nearing 38, is a more mellow character than during his Test career.
Wicket-keeper
Matt Prior is sure to keep his place for the final Test but, considering his decidedly iffy wicket-keeping and the fact his runs have only come against West Indies - whose bowling attack would be amongst the worst in Division Two - his long-term position is by no means secure. As shown by his selection for England Lions, Tim Ambrose, a markedly better keeper than Prior and outstanding with the bat this season, leads the chasing pack, although he has not reached fifty in his past five first-class knocks. There are a multitude of other potential candidates, led by the unlucky James Foster, who, at 27, should be entering his prime.
Pace bowling
Chris Tremlett, who has taken 10 wickets in two Tests, is surely assured of a place. Ryan Sidebottom has bowled well in both matches against India; and Jimmy Anderson was excellent at Lord's, but disappointingly wayward at Trent Bridge. However, with Monty Panesar completing the bowling quartet, the England selectors will no doubt be aware of the need to extract more runs from the tail.
This could aid the case of Stuart Broad, omitted at the last for the first Test. He has scored half-centuries in consecutive seasons against the tourists to give evidence he could be an England No8, while he also claimed five wickets against India for England Lions. Though almost as tall as Tremlett, he generates less bounce, but has good pace, gets movement off the seam, offers aggression and has a temperament well suited to the international game. The recovery of Matthew Hoggard is still in its infancy - he is not yet back at Yorkshire - and it would smack of desperation were he to be selected, especially as he averages 40 at the Oval. The same, of course, could be said of a recall for Andy Caddick, although he has 56 first-class wickets this season and an excellent record at the Oval.
Sunday, 15 July 2007
Broad the best of England's young quicks
With Steve Harmison rated as "extremely doubtful" for the first Test by David Graveney, and Messrs Jones and Flintoff still far from consideration, England's pace-bowling resources, yet again, appear stretched, with only Matthew Hoggard a certainty for the next few Tests.
Ryan Sidebottom, who took 16 wickets at under 20 against the West Indies, should also be considered a definite pick - for now at least. Though some worry about his lack of pace – and, subsequently, lack of penetration on docile tracks – Sidebottom offers genuine variety, in that he is a left-armer, and, crucially, control. The Notts bowler surely deserves at least two Tests to prove he can be a threat against good batsmen on flat tracks.
James Anderson has been bowling a lot better in recent weeks (though he did go for 78 in the 2nd ODI against the West Indies) and was today named in the 13-man match squad. In the long-term, he should aim to be a Hoggard with extra pace – but he remains far too erratic. Although he has a strong case for selection, which will be boosted by his terrific bowling (6/79 in the match) during England’s win in India last year, Anderson does not offer anything greatly different to Hoggard and, equally significantly, would probably bat at 11.
The other man in the squad, Stuart Broad is just 21, but he has already impressed with his big-match temperament and penetrating bowling, as when taking 3/20 in the recent ODIs, even being compared, a little prematurely, to Glenn McGrath. He is a 6ft7 beanpole – so his enormous bounce offers a completely different threat – and bowled very well to take 5/76 against India for England Lions. Crucially, Broad has sufficient batting aptitude to bat at number eight, and has scored 50s against the last two English tourists. But, like so many young English bowlers, Broad can prove extremely expensive, and has an economy rate of 3.94 in the Championship this campaign.
Another huge bowler, Chris Tremlett, also played for England Lions against India, and had Sachin Tendulkar twice dropped. Tremlett has all the attributes to be an excellent quick, and a very good first-class record to boot, but he is perceived to have a lackadaisical attitude, and was poor in the CB Series. At 25, his time should be now, but he has only averaged 37 for Hampshire in the Championship this campaign and, though he averages almost 20 with the bat in his career, does not merit a Test debut.
Liam Plunkett played three Tests against the West Indies earlier in the summer and, though occasionally lethal when he gets it right (which he did in the CB Series), Plunkett is very erratic, often causing extras to be amongst the top scorers. At 22, the Durham quick should have a long international career ahead of him, but there are problems with his action (a victim of excess biomechanics) and England, thankfully, look to have realised he would be best served with a run in county cricket.
His Durham colleague Graham Onions has been talked of all season as a potential England bowler, but can prove horribly expensive and was dropped for the game at Surrey recently. However the pacey seamer is regarded as a wicket-taker and has a very aggressive approach, as he proved in taking three wickets against the Indian tourists.
A wildcard who could be considered is Sidebottom’s Nottinghamshire team-mate Charlie Shreck. A late developer, Shreck only made his county debut at 25 and is now 29, but, on form, deserves to be selected, having taken 40 Championship wickets at just 23 this season. He is no innocuous seamer, either; Shreck is 6ft7 and has an outstanding career strike-rate of 47. But, though he is experienced and in fantastic form, his status as the ultimate rabbit will probably preclude his selection
Verdict
It is not hard to notice the pattern here: there are a lot of young and promising bowlers who generate a good pace and are renowned as “wicket-takers”, but there is one central problem: they are all very expensive. Indeed, of those under 29, Anderson has the best economy rate this season, a not-so-miserly 3.32 in the Championship. England would probably be best served with someone who can both reduce the size of their tail and go some way to replacing Harmison’s pace, bounce and hostility to supplement Hoggard and Sidebottom in the attack. The best option, hence, appears Stuart Broad: young, aggressive and with a fearless temperament, he should make his Test debut on Thursday.
Ryan Sidebottom, who took 16 wickets at under 20 against the West Indies, should also be considered a definite pick - for now at least. Though some worry about his lack of pace – and, subsequently, lack of penetration on docile tracks – Sidebottom offers genuine variety, in that he is a left-armer, and, crucially, control. The Notts bowler surely deserves at least two Tests to prove he can be a threat against good batsmen on flat tracks.
James Anderson has been bowling a lot better in recent weeks (though he did go for 78 in the 2nd ODI against the West Indies) and was today named in the 13-man match squad. In the long-term, he should aim to be a Hoggard with extra pace – but he remains far too erratic. Although he has a strong case for selection, which will be boosted by his terrific bowling (6/79 in the match) during England’s win in India last year, Anderson does not offer anything greatly different to Hoggard and, equally significantly, would probably bat at 11.
The other man in the squad, Stuart Broad is just 21, but he has already impressed with his big-match temperament and penetrating bowling, as when taking 3/20 in the recent ODIs, even being compared, a little prematurely, to Glenn McGrath. He is a 6ft7 beanpole – so his enormous bounce offers a completely different threat – and bowled very well to take 5/76 against India for England Lions. Crucially, Broad has sufficient batting aptitude to bat at number eight, and has scored 50s against the last two English tourists. But, like so many young English bowlers, Broad can prove extremely expensive, and has an economy rate of 3.94 in the Championship this campaign.
Another huge bowler, Chris Tremlett, also played for England Lions against India, and had Sachin Tendulkar twice dropped. Tremlett has all the attributes to be an excellent quick, and a very good first-class record to boot, but he is perceived to have a lackadaisical attitude, and was poor in the CB Series. At 25, his time should be now, but he has only averaged 37 for Hampshire in the Championship this campaign and, though he averages almost 20 with the bat in his career, does not merit a Test debut.
Liam Plunkett played three Tests against the West Indies earlier in the summer and, though occasionally lethal when he gets it right (which he did in the CB Series), Plunkett is very erratic, often causing extras to be amongst the top scorers. At 22, the Durham quick should have a long international career ahead of him, but there are problems with his action (a victim of excess biomechanics) and England, thankfully, look to have realised he would be best served with a run in county cricket.
His Durham colleague Graham Onions has been talked of all season as a potential England bowler, but can prove horribly expensive and was dropped for the game at Surrey recently. However the pacey seamer is regarded as a wicket-taker and has a very aggressive approach, as he proved in taking three wickets against the Indian tourists.
A wildcard who could be considered is Sidebottom’s Nottinghamshire team-mate Charlie Shreck. A late developer, Shreck only made his county debut at 25 and is now 29, but, on form, deserves to be selected, having taken 40 Championship wickets at just 23 this season. He is no innocuous seamer, either; Shreck is 6ft7 and has an outstanding career strike-rate of 47. But, though he is experienced and in fantastic form, his status as the ultimate rabbit will probably preclude his selection
Verdict
It is not hard to notice the pattern here: there are a lot of young and promising bowlers who generate a good pace and are renowned as “wicket-takers”, but there is one central problem: they are all very expensive. Indeed, of those under 29, Anderson has the best economy rate this season, a not-so-miserly 3.32 in the Championship. England would probably be best served with someone who can both reduce the size of their tail and go some way to replacing Harmison’s pace, bounce and hostility to supplement Hoggard and Sidebottom in the attack. The best option, hence, appears Stuart Broad: young, aggressive and with a fearless temperament, he should make his Test debut on Thursday.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)