Three months after my previous England Ashes ladder, what's changed? England have lost a Test series they were expected to win, won an ODI series when their tour threatened to go off the rails, and are set to appoint Andy Flower as their new coach. So who's up and who's down from three months ago?
1) Andrew Strauss (-)
His position could hardly be more secure.
2) Alastair Cook (+1)
Finally ended his century drought to confirm his status as an automatic selection.
3) Kevin Pietersen (+1)
Has been well below his best of late but, providing his head is in the right place, absolutely will play.
4) James Anderson (+7)
A huge winner from the West Indies tour: advanced from being out of the side to being England's premier quick bowler, bowling with immense skill with new and old ball alike.
5) Stuart Broad (+1)
Continues to demonstrate the skill and, especially, the temperament to relish an Ashes challenge, even if England would ideally like him to be their number eight and fourth seamer.
6) Paul Collingwood (+1)
A fine tour of the West Indies, aided by the struggles of Bell and Shah, has made Collingwood a certain starter.
7) Andrew Flintoff (-5)
A disappointing Test series in the West Indies - and, more importantly, more injury worries. However, if fit, England couldn't leave out their 'talismanic' all-rounder? Or could they?
8) Matt Prior (-3)
Appears unfortunate to slip three places after batting magnificiently in the Test series in the West Indies. However, his keeping continues to be a source of great concern. And, if Flintoff is not in the side and England only select four bowlers, the need to hang onto every chance may supersede the extra runs Prior could bring. Still, would have to do a lot wrong in the next three months.
9) Graeme Swann (-)
Swann was superb in the West Indies, providing a fine example of the classical off-spinners' craft. He fully deserves his chance against Australia, particularly given their dislike for off-spinners.
10) Steve Harmison (-2)
Endured a poor tour of the West Indies - but his replacement Amjad Khan was even more disappointing. If he can start the season well, may yet get another chance against Australia.
11) Michael Vaughan (+5)
His reputation has increased hugely of late other contenders have struggled while he has been in the runs for Yorkshire - albeit in Dubai. All the signs indicate England would like him to bat at three (or why not open?) in the Ashes, providing he can show some semblance of form in the meantime.
12) Monty Panesar (+1)
Displayed some increased variations when recalled for the final Test in the West Indies, Panesar is near-certain to feature in the Ashes. But that may well be as England's second-choice spinner, providing they can recognise that is one area in which they may just enjoy supremacy over Australia.
13) Owais Shah (-1)
Given his long-overdue chance, Shah struggled. But he may yet get another two Tests against the West Indies to show he has the technique and temperament to bat at number three. But would England trust him in an Ashes campaign?
14) Ravi Bopara (+6)
A fine century in his only Test innings of the winter will have only boosted his chances, despite mediocre ODI returns. However, would England really be happy to pick such an inexperienced player to bat at number three - especially one who appears the happiest of hookers?
15) Ryan Sidebottom (-)
Played when patently unfit in the Carribean and it would be of little surprise if he never played international cricket again.
16) Adil Rashid (+1)
Were England not impressed with what they saw in the West Indies? How else to explain his non-selection over Gareth Batty? But if England, as they should, prepare turning tracks for the Aussies then he could feature as a secret weapon.
17) Tim Ambrose (+2)
Scored a fluent 76* in his only innings on tour, while his keeping was of a higher calibre than Prior's. So if England only play four bowlers, he could have a chance of selection, even if few would really fancy his chances of scoring big against Australia given his struggles against South Africa.
18) Mark Davies (N/A)
Could be coming good at just the right time, having had a strong tour with the England Lions in New Zealand. He has been afflicted by injuries throughout his career, but at 28 he should be in the form of his life. And his statistics: 232 wickets at 21 in first-class cricket are mindbogglingly good.
19) Sajid Mahmood (N/A)
Yes, yes. But Mahmood has all the raw attributes to be a destructive wicket-taker at international level. And, given how Harmison and Khan performed in the West Indies, he has an outside chance of featuring.
20) Simon Jones (-6)
Injured again. But if he could only put together a handful of impressive performances, temptation would run high.
21) Ian Bell (-11)
Dropped after the First Test debacle and not seen since. Bell will play again for England but probably not until this summer has passed.
22) Robert Key (-1)
Captain of the England Lions, and perhaps England in the World Twenty20 too, Key is a character who inspires respect. But competition for the number three spot is fierce.
23) Amjad Khan (-5)
Did himself no favours in the West Indies with shoddy fielding and wayward bowling.
24) Kabir Ali (-2)
If the England side was selected on county form from the last two seasons, Ali would be in. As it is, he isn't even deemed good enough for the Lions.
25) Matthew Hoggard (-2)
He's still hoping. But few are joining him.
Bubbling under
Batsmen: Joe Denly, Samit Patel, Eoin Morgan, Mark Ramprakash
Keepers: James Foster, Steven Davies
Bowlers: Darren Pattinson, Liam Plunkett, Chris Tremlett
What are your views on this ladder and the makeup of the England side?
Showing posts with label Tim Ambrose. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tim Ambrose. Show all posts
Wednesday, 8 April 2009
Friday, 1 August 2008
Shambolic England On The Brink
Mickey Arthur this week denounced the recall of Steve Harmison as a desperate and short term move by England which took no account of the upcoming 2009 Ashes series. He was right. Michael Atherton tore into the selectors both in general and specifically for recalling Harmison in The Times, stating that they were sending out the wrong message about selection. He was right. Harmison would have been a temporary and short sighted pick. He is bowling well at present and would undoubtedly take wickets, but he doesn’t play ODI’s, he doesn’t travel as every Tom, Dick and Harry knows and he takes a good few matches to get into form, largely because he doesn’t put in the training which other players do. So that would make him available for the second Test series of every summer which just is not viable.
Meanwhile, “The Michael Vaughan Batting Club”, to quote a friend, seems now to be more exclusive and cosy than ever, when it’s hegemony should be in the process of being disrupted. To the untrained eye it appears as though England have imploded in a relatively short period of time. However, look a little closer and the problems have been mounting for a year. The series loss to India was unfortunate, but signalled the start of the latest period of turmoil. The embarrassing performance in Sri Lanka hit the side hard and many a mistake was made. Owais Shah, one of England’s best players of spin and slow, low pitches was bafflingly left out of the side so as to accommodate Ravi Bopara, who proceeded to have one of the worst debuts by an England Test player. And following a series of drops, Matt Prior himself was dropped, which saw Tim Ambrose take over the gloves, another compromise between keeping and batting ability was made.
To New Zealand and one poor match spelled the end for Matthew Hoggard, whilst Steve Harmison finally got what had been coming his way for the previous two years. Team England escaped with a 2-1 series win, but they had been expected to thrash the Kiwis. Tim Ambrose and Paul Collingwood looked good and Andrew Strauss appeared to be back to his best. However, the fact that the Kiwis are a very limited side was completely forgotten. On to the home series against New Zealand and England faced an even more limited side, eventually triumphing 2-0. However, they deserved to lose the second Test after yet more woeful batting and despite a Michael Vaughan revival (currently expected in 1 in 4 series). A good side would have thrashed the Kiwis twice.
Then South Africa arrived and on a placid pitch England racked up the runs, but the ease with which South Africa avoided defeat showed that the pitch had played a major role. The key point was also that only Ian Bell and Kevin Pietersen made big runs. The bowling attack meanwhile lacked hostility and pace. Whilst swing may account for average batsman, good batsmen need to be tested with pace and bounce. Andrew Flintoff’s return has been claimed to have unbalanced the side. That is simply not true. He has kept this England side in the hunt and given them drive which was sorely lacking. Ultimately, the sad truth is that England are playing a very good side, a testing side and they are realising that they are just not good enough.
Alistair Cook last scored a ton ten Tests ago, but at least he has averaged 40.00 since November 2007. Vaughan is averaging 27.52 since the start of the Sri Lanka tour, with 1 hundred in 23 innings. Collingwood averages 28.25 in the same period with no hundreds in 18 innings. And Tim Ambrose’s average in down to 26.76 as it continues it’s descent. England can not afford to keep on carrying players, but that is exactly what they continue to do. The term “Michael Vaughan Batting Club” is of course meant to be comical, but it sums up this current England side perfectly. Vaughan has always been staunchly loyal to his charges and this was once a virtue, in the days after the brutally honest regime of Nasser Hussain, but it has now most certainly become a problem, with judgement now blurred by loyalty.
Andrew Strauss was out of form for an age before he was finally dropped and then recalled without hitting a single run in county cricket. Paul Collingwood was dropped for one match before being recalled for the current Test in place of Stuart Broad. The reasoning behind this seemed stupid at the start and even stupider now. Stuart Broad needed a rest, yet is playing a four day game for Nottinghamshire. The extra batsman would balance the side, yet they essentially replaced a cricketer who has averaged 55 this year with one who has averaged 8. Are the fans missing something here? The end result was obvious for everyone to see even before Collingwood had gone out to bat and once he was there it was even more painfully obvious, no less so than to Collingwood himself, whose torturous 45 minute innings was packed full of nerves and completely devoid of any semblance of confidence. His lack of confidence seems even to be effecting his fielding, as he dropped a relatively easy catch off of Neil McKenzie later on.
England need a reality check and now. They will lose this series, that is all but a certainty, barring a Flintoff inspired miracle and changes to the team. Even worse though, they will slip to 4th in the world and are likely to be humiliated in India and at home by Australia if they do not do what is necessary and change the batting line-up. If it means changing the captain then so be it. Players can only live on past glories for so long and Geoffrey Boycott is not alone in seeing Vaughan as a cricketer who is far from the man who peaked in Australia in 2002. It isn’t as if he excels for Yorkshire either and one good score every other series simply isn’t enough. Who comes in for Vaughan and Collingwood is up for debate, but the leading candidates are Ravi Bopara and Owais Shah, whilst the likes of Rob Key and Joe Denly will be watching the latest troubles of Cook and Strauss with great interest. The captaincy would have to pass to either a younger player, or the more experienced Andrew Strauss, who is statistically proven to improve his run output as captain, averaging around 15 runs more as captain for Middlesex and England (55.66). Vaughan incidentally averages 5.62 runs less as captain (36.02).
On the wicket keeping front it is probably time to go with the best keeper in the country, who in my opinion is James Foster. He will also fit nicely into the ODI side, allowing England to keep consistency of selection which they see as being crucial. If Broad has been returned to county cricket to work on his bowling then playing four bowlers becomes an easier task for England, with the current incumbents the most deserving, although Broad and Simon Jones would be pushing the likes of Bopara and Sidebottom hard for their places in the near future. It is worth noting that at the moment Broad and Jones could only play in a five man attack. Perhaps if the batting line-up could deliver the runs then five bowlers would once again be a viable option. For the moment though it is not.
England Test Batting Averages since November 2007:
Strauss 45.07
Cook 40.00
Vaughan 27.52
Pietersen 41.31
Bell 46.66
Collingwood 28.25
Ambrose 26.75
Broad 41.22
Flintoff 45.5 (3 innings, 1 not out)
Bopara 8.40 (5 innings)
Test Debuts Since 2000:
4 Wicket Keeper debuts;
10 Batsman debuts;
22 Bowler debuts;
3 Allrounder debuts.
Test Debuts Since Ashes 2005:
2 Wicket Keeper debuts;
2 Batsman debuts;
9 Bowler debuts;
1 Allrounder debut.
Meanwhile, “The Michael Vaughan Batting Club”, to quote a friend, seems now to be more exclusive and cosy than ever, when it’s hegemony should be in the process of being disrupted. To the untrained eye it appears as though England have imploded in a relatively short period of time. However, look a little closer and the problems have been mounting for a year. The series loss to India was unfortunate, but signalled the start of the latest period of turmoil. The embarrassing performance in Sri Lanka hit the side hard and many a mistake was made. Owais Shah, one of England’s best players of spin and slow, low pitches was bafflingly left out of the side so as to accommodate Ravi Bopara, who proceeded to have one of the worst debuts by an England Test player. And following a series of drops, Matt Prior himself was dropped, which saw Tim Ambrose take over the gloves, another compromise between keeping and batting ability was made.
To New Zealand and one poor match spelled the end for Matthew Hoggard, whilst Steve Harmison finally got what had been coming his way for the previous two years. Team England escaped with a 2-1 series win, but they had been expected to thrash the Kiwis. Tim Ambrose and Paul Collingwood looked good and Andrew Strauss appeared to be back to his best. However, the fact that the Kiwis are a very limited side was completely forgotten. On to the home series against New Zealand and England faced an even more limited side, eventually triumphing 2-0. However, they deserved to lose the second Test after yet more woeful batting and despite a Michael Vaughan revival (currently expected in 1 in 4 series). A good side would have thrashed the Kiwis twice.
Then South Africa arrived and on a placid pitch England racked up the runs, but the ease with which South Africa avoided defeat showed that the pitch had played a major role. The key point was also that only Ian Bell and Kevin Pietersen made big runs. The bowling attack meanwhile lacked hostility and pace. Whilst swing may account for average batsman, good batsmen need to be tested with pace and bounce. Andrew Flintoff’s return has been claimed to have unbalanced the side. That is simply not true. He has kept this England side in the hunt and given them drive which was sorely lacking. Ultimately, the sad truth is that England are playing a very good side, a testing side and they are realising that they are just not good enough.
Alistair Cook last scored a ton ten Tests ago, but at least he has averaged 40.00 since November 2007. Vaughan is averaging 27.52 since the start of the Sri Lanka tour, with 1 hundred in 23 innings. Collingwood averages 28.25 in the same period with no hundreds in 18 innings. And Tim Ambrose’s average in down to 26.76 as it continues it’s descent. England can not afford to keep on carrying players, but that is exactly what they continue to do. The term “Michael Vaughan Batting Club” is of course meant to be comical, but it sums up this current England side perfectly. Vaughan has always been staunchly loyal to his charges and this was once a virtue, in the days after the brutally honest regime of Nasser Hussain, but it has now most certainly become a problem, with judgement now blurred by loyalty.
Andrew Strauss was out of form for an age before he was finally dropped and then recalled without hitting a single run in county cricket. Paul Collingwood was dropped for one match before being recalled for the current Test in place of Stuart Broad. The reasoning behind this seemed stupid at the start and even stupider now. Stuart Broad needed a rest, yet is playing a four day game for Nottinghamshire. The extra batsman would balance the side, yet they essentially replaced a cricketer who has averaged 55 this year with one who has averaged 8. Are the fans missing something here? The end result was obvious for everyone to see even before Collingwood had gone out to bat and once he was there it was even more painfully obvious, no less so than to Collingwood himself, whose torturous 45 minute innings was packed full of nerves and completely devoid of any semblance of confidence. His lack of confidence seems even to be effecting his fielding, as he dropped a relatively easy catch off of Neil McKenzie later on.
England need a reality check and now. They will lose this series, that is all but a certainty, barring a Flintoff inspired miracle and changes to the team. Even worse though, they will slip to 4th in the world and are likely to be humiliated in India and at home by Australia if they do not do what is necessary and change the batting line-up. If it means changing the captain then so be it. Players can only live on past glories for so long and Geoffrey Boycott is not alone in seeing Vaughan as a cricketer who is far from the man who peaked in Australia in 2002. It isn’t as if he excels for Yorkshire either and one good score every other series simply isn’t enough. Who comes in for Vaughan and Collingwood is up for debate, but the leading candidates are Ravi Bopara and Owais Shah, whilst the likes of Rob Key and Joe Denly will be watching the latest troubles of Cook and Strauss with great interest. The captaincy would have to pass to either a younger player, or the more experienced Andrew Strauss, who is statistically proven to improve his run output as captain, averaging around 15 runs more as captain for Middlesex and England (55.66). Vaughan incidentally averages 5.62 runs less as captain (36.02).
On the wicket keeping front it is probably time to go with the best keeper in the country, who in my opinion is James Foster. He will also fit nicely into the ODI side, allowing England to keep consistency of selection which they see as being crucial. If Broad has been returned to county cricket to work on his bowling then playing four bowlers becomes an easier task for England, with the current incumbents the most deserving, although Broad and Simon Jones would be pushing the likes of Bopara and Sidebottom hard for their places in the near future. It is worth noting that at the moment Broad and Jones could only play in a five man attack. Perhaps if the batting line-up could deliver the runs then five bowlers would once again be a viable option. For the moment though it is not.
England Test Batting Averages since November 2007:
Strauss 45.07
Cook 40.00
Vaughan 27.52
Pietersen 41.31
Bell 46.66
Collingwood 28.25
Ambrose 26.75
Broad 41.22
Flintoff 45.5 (3 innings, 1 not out)
Bopara 8.40 (5 innings)
Test Debuts Since 2000:
4 Wicket Keeper debuts;
10 Batsman debuts;
22 Bowler debuts;
3 Allrounder debuts.
Test Debuts Since Ashes 2005:
2 Wicket Keeper debuts;
2 Batsman debuts;
9 Bowler debuts;
1 Allrounder debut.
Tuesday, 22 July 2008
Team England; Consistently Confused
In what can only be described as a bizarre twenty-four hours, Darren Pattinson somehow found himself in the England Test starting XI on Friday of last week. From being consistently stupid to just plain stupid could be one way of describing the situation. Consistency had been the word of the moment whilst England were just about beating New Zealand in two series. Unfortunately consistency had nothing to do with those victories, the limited skill of the opposition played the major role. Whilst players like Paul Collingwood and Tim Ambrose were contributing nothing, they were nevertheless assured of their places and were it not for the return of Andrew Flintoff, Collingwood would undoubtedly still be playing today despite series averages of 32.83 (India (h)), 33.00(Sri Lanka (a)), 40.66 (New Zealand (a)), 10.66 (New Zealand (h)) and 7.00 (South Africa (h)) which is plainly not good enough (cumulative 30.71, HS 66). Michael Vaughan though tells us that the whole squad are disappointed that Collingwood is not in the XI, perhaps because they now fear for their own places given their own dwindling averages. Consistency must be applied, but needs to take into account form.
Nevertheless, the message of consistency indeed vanished for this particular test match, well for the bowlers anyway, but then that always seems to have been the case with the England side of late. Batsmen have all the time in the world, bowlers do not. Darren Pattinson was on Thursday afternoon called up as a replacement for James Anderson should he not be fit for the game. Chris Tremlett, who has been following both the Test and ODI squad around all summer, was already on standby in case Ryan Sidebottom came up short on Friday morning. Friday morning came and Anderson was fit, but Sidebottom was not, in you step… Darren! Utter madness! Whilst the Australian roof tiler, albeit raised for six years in England, has had a good county season with Nottinghamshire so far, he has played just 13 first class games and only 6 of them this season in England. He doesn’t even play his cricket at Headingley, the location of the second test.
I have no problem with the fact that he is a self-confessed Aussie through and through, but the usual pattern is that you are born abroad, move to England, confess your love for the motherland and qualify, rather than move away for two decades, immerse yourself in the culture of another country, then come back for a summer and strike lucky. That may sound harsh, but strike lucky is exactly what Pattinson has done. A quick glance at the first class bowling averages for this season will reveal that Matthew Hoggard (22 at 24.31), Simon Jones (32 at 16.03), Steve Harmison (40 at 23.10) and Jon Lewis (20 at 24.85) are right up there with England’s newest addition who has taken 29 at 20.86. These are proven international and domestic performers who for various reasons were sent back to county cricket to prove their fitness and their form. Not one of those can be accused of not having done that. All of the above, bar Harmison, are swing bowlers. Surely one of them should have been given the chance instead of Pattinson if swing was what England were truly after, rather than shock and awe. Even the likes of Sajid Mahmood, Liam Plunkett, Kabir Ali, and Tim Bresnan must be wondering what the hell is going on.
As for poor old Chris Tremlett, what can you say. If Anderson had been injured Pattinson would have played, if Sidebottom had been injured (which he was) Pattinson would have played. They were the two injury doubts from the end of the first test, so what was the point in dragging Tremlett around the country if he was never going to get a look in? I know that Moores as a Sussex man doesn’t like Hampshire but come on, the guy is missing out on form boosting cricket and is being consistently dealt mental setbacks! To make matters worse it was Morne Morkel, exactly the Tremlett type of bowler, who did best in this test match.
The batting woes were the most apparent problem however. Michael Vaughan has averaged 29.52 since the tour to Sri Lanka. His series averages are 35.83 (Sri Lanka (a)), 20.50 (New Zealand (a)), 50.00 (New Zealand (h)) and 11.00 (South Africa (h)). He is forever searching for form it seems and for every good series he has had recently he seems to have had two bad, which can not be sustained forever. His captaincy may be a major positive of his presence, but he needs to score the runs consistently as well. Alistair Cook seems to have forgotten what a hundred is meanwhile. The last four times that he has passed fifty he has been out before reaching 61. Given that he offered very little against the Australians last time round, England must be getting twitchy about how he will fair against them come this time next year. The current top three looks very samey and pretty weak. Tim Ambrose meanwhile is surely on the brink. It is quite comical to think that if you are out of form you should be stuck higher up the order, in a more pressurised position, against a newer ball. He has averaged just 18.78 in 9 test innings since making his maiden test hundred in his second test in New Zealand. His career average is 27.16 and falling after eleven test innings. Even worse, in ODI’s he has averaged 2.50 in five innings and one of those was a not out! Add in the fumbles and is this really the man to take England forward? You would have to say that England in attempting to find a balance between batting ability and keeping ability have found neither and indeed now have the worst of both worlds.
England’s problems are back to the fore it would seem and they need to act fast. If they are going to persist with a five man attack then quite simply Matt Prior has to play at number six. Otherwise the team looks unbalanced and bottom heavy. Only by playing four bowlers can England afford to play the best wicket keeper at number eight, which means either of Chris Read or James Foster. However, given Read’s little trip to the ICL over the close season I doubt India would welcome his inclusion come this winter’s tour. Foster seems to tick more of the boxes in terms of what England are looking for in their keeper, a batsman who can bat low down the order in limited overs cricket and a glove man who can snaffle all of the chances which come his way in test matches and who can offer a score with the bat. Prior on the other hand is not going to take all of those catches, but he will offer the chance to play five bowlers without embarrassment. What England need to decide is if they want less chances, but more takes, or more chances and less takes, I’m glad I don’t have to make that call.
Let’s end on a positive note however and the continued improvement of James Anderson in test match cricket. It will be Stuart Broad and Ryan Sidebottom who will be jittery about the next England team selection, with support growing for Jones and Harmison, but given recent events anything could happen.
Nevertheless, the message of consistency indeed vanished for this particular test match, well for the bowlers anyway, but then that always seems to have been the case with the England side of late. Batsmen have all the time in the world, bowlers do not. Darren Pattinson was on Thursday afternoon called up as a replacement for James Anderson should he not be fit for the game. Chris Tremlett, who has been following both the Test and ODI squad around all summer, was already on standby in case Ryan Sidebottom came up short on Friday morning. Friday morning came and Anderson was fit, but Sidebottom was not, in you step… Darren! Utter madness! Whilst the Australian roof tiler, albeit raised for six years in England, has had a good county season with Nottinghamshire so far, he has played just 13 first class games and only 6 of them this season in England. He doesn’t even play his cricket at Headingley, the location of the second test.
I have no problem with the fact that he is a self-confessed Aussie through and through, but the usual pattern is that you are born abroad, move to England, confess your love for the motherland and qualify, rather than move away for two decades, immerse yourself in the culture of another country, then come back for a summer and strike lucky. That may sound harsh, but strike lucky is exactly what Pattinson has done. A quick glance at the first class bowling averages for this season will reveal that Matthew Hoggard (22 at 24.31), Simon Jones (32 at 16.03), Steve Harmison (40 at 23.10) and Jon Lewis (20 at 24.85) are right up there with England’s newest addition who has taken 29 at 20.86. These are proven international and domestic performers who for various reasons were sent back to county cricket to prove their fitness and their form. Not one of those can be accused of not having done that. All of the above, bar Harmison, are swing bowlers. Surely one of them should have been given the chance instead of Pattinson if swing was what England were truly after, rather than shock and awe. Even the likes of Sajid Mahmood, Liam Plunkett, Kabir Ali, and Tim Bresnan must be wondering what the hell is going on.
As for poor old Chris Tremlett, what can you say. If Anderson had been injured Pattinson would have played, if Sidebottom had been injured (which he was) Pattinson would have played. They were the two injury doubts from the end of the first test, so what was the point in dragging Tremlett around the country if he was never going to get a look in? I know that Moores as a Sussex man doesn’t like Hampshire but come on, the guy is missing out on form boosting cricket and is being consistently dealt mental setbacks! To make matters worse it was Morne Morkel, exactly the Tremlett type of bowler, who did best in this test match.
The batting woes were the most apparent problem however. Michael Vaughan has averaged 29.52 since the tour to Sri Lanka. His series averages are 35.83 (Sri Lanka (a)), 20.50 (New Zealand (a)), 50.00 (New Zealand (h)) and 11.00 (South Africa (h)). He is forever searching for form it seems and for every good series he has had recently he seems to have had two bad, which can not be sustained forever. His captaincy may be a major positive of his presence, but he needs to score the runs consistently as well. Alistair Cook seems to have forgotten what a hundred is meanwhile. The last four times that he has passed fifty he has been out before reaching 61. Given that he offered very little against the Australians last time round, England must be getting twitchy about how he will fair against them come this time next year. The current top three looks very samey and pretty weak. Tim Ambrose meanwhile is surely on the brink. It is quite comical to think that if you are out of form you should be stuck higher up the order, in a more pressurised position, against a newer ball. He has averaged just 18.78 in 9 test innings since making his maiden test hundred in his second test in New Zealand. His career average is 27.16 and falling after eleven test innings. Even worse, in ODI’s he has averaged 2.50 in five innings and one of those was a not out! Add in the fumbles and is this really the man to take England forward? You would have to say that England in attempting to find a balance between batting ability and keeping ability have found neither and indeed now have the worst of both worlds.
England’s problems are back to the fore it would seem and they need to act fast. If they are going to persist with a five man attack then quite simply Matt Prior has to play at number six. Otherwise the team looks unbalanced and bottom heavy. Only by playing four bowlers can England afford to play the best wicket keeper at number eight, which means either of Chris Read or James Foster. However, given Read’s little trip to the ICL over the close season I doubt India would welcome his inclusion come this winter’s tour. Foster seems to tick more of the boxes in terms of what England are looking for in their keeper, a batsman who can bat low down the order in limited overs cricket and a glove man who can snaffle all of the chances which come his way in test matches and who can offer a score with the bat. Prior on the other hand is not going to take all of those catches, but he will offer the chance to play five bowlers without embarrassment. What England need to decide is if they want less chances, but more takes, or more chances and less takes, I’m glad I don’t have to make that call.
Let’s end on a positive note however and the continued improvement of James Anderson in test match cricket. It will be Stuart Broad and Ryan Sidebottom who will be jittery about the next England team selection, with support growing for Jones and Harmison, but given recent events anything could happen.
Monday, 21 July 2008
Time for Jones and Harmison?
As many had feared they would be in the first Test, England were comprehensively outplayed here. Once again, England avoided picking their strongest side. For those frustrated with the innate caution in their recent selection, the decision to select Darren Pattinson, out of nowhere, was utterly incongruous.
Pattinson did certainly not disgrace himself, and outbowled Stuart Broad. However, this will probably prove to be his sole Test, for he lacks pace, does too little with the ball and, while accurate, is not metronomic. England would have been better off selecting the in-form Simon Jones or Steve Harmison, both of whom have proved they possess the ability to get out the best batsmen, whilst Chris Tremlett, who performed so admirably against India last summer, must be bewildered as to why England seem so willing to pick him in squads, but so reluctant to pick him in the starting XI.
So the pressing question is: how can England take 20 South African wickets?
Andrew Flintoff should certainly help, and his parsimony with the ball allied to a good second- innings knock, were a reasonably satisfactory return. But, while he is probably amongst England's best four bowlers, the problem of where he should bat persists. Michael Vaughan says seven, with good reason: but Tim Ambrose is emphatically not a Test number six. The problem is compounded by Stuart Broad - while he soon could be, his bowling average after eight Tests is 49. For all his all-round promise, can England afford a man whose bowling is neither overly threatening nor consistently economical?
So the call must go out to Messrs Jones and Harmison. Jones has been back to near his best this campaign: his combination of speed and prodigious reverse swing cannot be ignored now he has gone a considerable way to allaying those inevitable fitness doubts. With Harmison, the problem has always perceived to be mental rather than physical. However, this may just be a case of journalistic over-simplification.
The disappointments of Harmison's performances over the last four years for England, with the odd exception, are well-known. Yet his failures have so often been characterised by a lack of preparation time - think of the South Africa tour in 2004/05; the '06/07 Ashes tour; and even his last Test match in New Zealand. He is a rhythmical bowler, and he has emphatically found that this season. He is the leading wicket-taker in the Championship, with 40 wickets, and has even proved frugal in limited-overs games and Twenty20. He appears confident in himself, having bowled impressively for several months. England cannot afford to ignore his pace, bounce and hostility any longer - especially in light of Morne Morkel's impressive showings - for all the fears over his waywardness.
There is also Ryan Sidebottom, England's best bowler in the last 12 months but seemingly a little jaded. Given his performances have been less impressive of late and he had to sit out the current Test through injury, England should not recall him before he produces some impressive displays for Notts.
The issue is further clouded by the fact none of Jones, Harmison, Anderson and Sidebottom are Test number eights - and are probably not even good nines - which is a major problem given the hopelessness of Monty Panesar's batting. Panesar has been disappointing this series, but England would be loathe to ditch the one clear superiority they enjoy over South Africa.
So there is much for England's selectors to consider in the bowling department. The picture is equally grim elsewhere, with the top three all provoking question marks - Strauss has scored two Test centuries in two years, both against New Zealand; Cook has scored one century in 27 innings and there are increasing doubts over his leaden-footed technique; whilst Vaughan has struggled against Dale Steyn and seems increasingly - and worryingly - vulnerable early on. Tim Ambrose, meanwhile, should be ditched now, especially if England wish to continue with five bowlers, as they probably should. Matt Prior, with reluctance given his keeping displays when in an England shirt, should be granted an extended run at number six.
All is not yet lost for England in this series. But the problems that have been apparent for some time have now come to a head. For six days solid, England have won barely a session - and it will take something special to stem the flow.
Pattinson did certainly not disgrace himself, and outbowled Stuart Broad. However, this will probably prove to be his sole Test, for he lacks pace, does too little with the ball and, while accurate, is not metronomic. England would have been better off selecting the in-form Simon Jones or Steve Harmison, both of whom have proved they possess the ability to get out the best batsmen, whilst Chris Tremlett, who performed so admirably against India last summer, must be bewildered as to why England seem so willing to pick him in squads, but so reluctant to pick him in the starting XI.
So the pressing question is: how can England take 20 South African wickets?
Andrew Flintoff should certainly help, and his parsimony with the ball allied to a good second- innings knock, were a reasonably satisfactory return. But, while he is probably amongst England's best four bowlers, the problem of where he should bat persists. Michael Vaughan says seven, with good reason: but Tim Ambrose is emphatically not a Test number six. The problem is compounded by Stuart Broad - while he soon could be, his bowling average after eight Tests is 49. For all his all-round promise, can England afford a man whose bowling is neither overly threatening nor consistently economical?
So the call must go out to Messrs Jones and Harmison. Jones has been back to near his best this campaign: his combination of speed and prodigious reverse swing cannot be ignored now he has gone a considerable way to allaying those inevitable fitness doubts. With Harmison, the problem has always perceived to be mental rather than physical. However, this may just be a case of journalistic over-simplification.
The disappointments of Harmison's performances over the last four years for England, with the odd exception, are well-known. Yet his failures have so often been characterised by a lack of preparation time - think of the South Africa tour in 2004/05; the '06/07 Ashes tour; and even his last Test match in New Zealand. He is a rhythmical bowler, and he has emphatically found that this season. He is the leading wicket-taker in the Championship, with 40 wickets, and has even proved frugal in limited-overs games and Twenty20. He appears confident in himself, having bowled impressively for several months. England cannot afford to ignore his pace, bounce and hostility any longer - especially in light of Morne Morkel's impressive showings - for all the fears over his waywardness.
There is also Ryan Sidebottom, England's best bowler in the last 12 months but seemingly a little jaded. Given his performances have been less impressive of late and he had to sit out the current Test through injury, England should not recall him before he produces some impressive displays for Notts.
The issue is further clouded by the fact none of Jones, Harmison, Anderson and Sidebottom are Test number eights - and are probably not even good nines - which is a major problem given the hopelessness of Monty Panesar's batting. Panesar has been disappointing this series, but England would be loathe to ditch the one clear superiority they enjoy over South Africa.
So there is much for England's selectors to consider in the bowling department. The picture is equally grim elsewhere, with the top three all provoking question marks - Strauss has scored two Test centuries in two years, both against New Zealand; Cook has scored one century in 27 innings and there are increasing doubts over his leaden-footed technique; whilst Vaughan has struggled against Dale Steyn and seems increasingly - and worryingly - vulnerable early on. Tim Ambrose, meanwhile, should be ditched now, especially if England wish to continue with five bowlers, as they probably should. Matt Prior, with reluctance given his keeping displays when in an England shirt, should be granted an extended run at number six.
All is not yet lost for England in this series. But the problems that have been apparent for some time have now come to a head. For six days solid, England have won barely a session - and it will take something special to stem the flow.
Monday, 14 July 2008
With Flintoff and Ambrose at six and seven, Bell can afford no let up
For all the frustration of the past two days, the first Test turned out better than many pundits had anticipated for England. South Africa began as the most hyped-up side to land on these shores since the 2005 Aussies, but patently failed to live up to their own billing.
Their bowling attack lacked any penetration, with the admirable Morne Morkel the sole exception. If the first Test was anything to go by, they have only half an attack: Paul Harris did not look Test class; and Makhaya Ntini could only muster a pitiful imitation of his brilliant showing at the same ground five years ago, one that was almost painful to watch. And with the bat, only Ashwell Prince displayed the required application and skill in the first innings, although England will be worried indeed that four of their top five have already made centuries in this series. And the exception? Jacques Kallis, Wisden Leading Cricketer in the World for 2007.
The resilience shown by South Africa's batting is compounded by England enduring three solid days in the field, especially given the modern norm of back-to-back Tests. Indeed, Graeme Smith may have had half a mind to bat on rather than accept the draw, extending England's misery further.
It is excellent news that Andrew Flintoff will be recalled for the Second Test: his return should reinvigorate the side, preventing South African momentum developing after their admirable efforts to salvage a draw. One would expect him to come in for the struggling Paul Collingwood at six, although the selectors originally planned to play him at seven, with Tim Ambrose at eight, before injury scuppered his hopes of a recall in the first Test of the summer. Flintoff has not played a Test match for 18 months, and, whatever his run and wicket tallies, he should serve to inspire England, while the South Africans, clearly would prefer not to see him in the side. It is telling that Lancashire have won three and drawn two of the five championship games he has played this season, whilst only managing two draws and a loss when he has been absent.
For all the positives of his Flintoff's return, however, there is no compelling evidence to suggest he merits batting at number six. He has struck some sort of form of late, although the cavalier nature of his recent knocks is not what is generally required from a top-order Test batsman. And it is three years since his last Test hundred.
With this in mind, have England erred on the side of selectorial caution - yet again - in refraining from recalling Matt Prior? Ambrose has an extremely limited batting technique; and against bowlers who do not feed his cut shot with regularity, it is hard to envisage him making important runs. Add his increasingly fallible glove-work and the selectors have had ample time to recognise he is not the man to end the keeping debate. Prior's keeping has many faults - just ask Ryan Sidebottom. But Ambrose's grim run of form - passing 11 just twice in 11 completed international innings - compounded by the uncertainty of Flintoff's batting, lends England's lower middle-order a real sense of vulnerability. All signs suggest Prior has a sufficiently developed game to average 10 more at number six than the 26 Collingwood has managed in his last eight Tests, while his keeping is also said to have improved markedly this season.
So England can be reasonably content with their endeavours in the opening Test, and should not be unduly disheartened by failing to force a victory, given that the previous five Tests at Lord's have also been draws. The Test will be remembered for Kevin Pietersen's superb 152 in a series that promises to be amongst the standouts of his career. Yet Ian Bell's 199 could be of more significance for the development of England as a side. He has always had a fine technique and a classy and extremely attractive game; here he showed he could play match-shaping innings against top-class opposition. With Flintoff and Ambrose directly below him, Bell will know England require more of the same.
Should England's selectors have made more than one change?
Their bowling attack lacked any penetration, with the admirable Morne Morkel the sole exception. If the first Test was anything to go by, they have only half an attack: Paul Harris did not look Test class; and Makhaya Ntini could only muster a pitiful imitation of his brilliant showing at the same ground five years ago, one that was almost painful to watch. And with the bat, only Ashwell Prince displayed the required application and skill in the first innings, although England will be worried indeed that four of their top five have already made centuries in this series. And the exception? Jacques Kallis, Wisden Leading Cricketer in the World for 2007.
The resilience shown by South Africa's batting is compounded by England enduring three solid days in the field, especially given the modern norm of back-to-back Tests. Indeed, Graeme Smith may have had half a mind to bat on rather than accept the draw, extending England's misery further.
It is excellent news that Andrew Flintoff will be recalled for the Second Test: his return should reinvigorate the side, preventing South African momentum developing after their admirable efforts to salvage a draw. One would expect him to come in for the struggling Paul Collingwood at six, although the selectors originally planned to play him at seven, with Tim Ambrose at eight, before injury scuppered his hopes of a recall in the first Test of the summer. Flintoff has not played a Test match for 18 months, and, whatever his run and wicket tallies, he should serve to inspire England, while the South Africans, clearly would prefer not to see him in the side. It is telling that Lancashire have won three and drawn two of the five championship games he has played this season, whilst only managing two draws and a loss when he has been absent.
For all the positives of his Flintoff's return, however, there is no compelling evidence to suggest he merits batting at number six. He has struck some sort of form of late, although the cavalier nature of his recent knocks is not what is generally required from a top-order Test batsman. And it is three years since his last Test hundred.
With this in mind, have England erred on the side of selectorial caution - yet again - in refraining from recalling Matt Prior? Ambrose has an extremely limited batting technique; and against bowlers who do not feed his cut shot with regularity, it is hard to envisage him making important runs. Add his increasingly fallible glove-work and the selectors have had ample time to recognise he is not the man to end the keeping debate. Prior's keeping has many faults - just ask Ryan Sidebottom. But Ambrose's grim run of form - passing 11 just twice in 11 completed international innings - compounded by the uncertainty of Flintoff's batting, lends England's lower middle-order a real sense of vulnerability. All signs suggest Prior has a sufficiently developed game to average 10 more at number six than the 26 Collingwood has managed in his last eight Tests, while his keeping is also said to have improved markedly this season.
So England can be reasonably content with their endeavours in the opening Test, and should not be unduly disheartened by failing to force a victory, given that the previous five Tests at Lord's have also been draws. The Test will be remembered for Kevin Pietersen's superb 152 in a series that promises to be amongst the standouts of his career. Yet Ian Bell's 199 could be of more significance for the development of England as a side. He has always had a fine technique and a classy and extremely attractive game; here he showed he could play match-shaping innings against top-class opposition. With Flintoff and Ambrose directly below him, Bell will know England require more of the same.
Should England's selectors have made more than one change?
Friday, 11 July 2008
Ambrose and Collingwood: why they have to go
It sounds more than a little callous, but for England's long-term development it is excellent news that the 'right men' failed today. Lavish praise is merited for Kevin Pietersen's exhilarating 152; Ian Bell's 199 - the innings that showed him as the classy, technically proficient and aesthetically-pleasing batsman we all know exists, but, unlike on so many other occasions, able to dominate an innings; and Stuart Broad's wonderfully mature 76, indicative of a man who may soon be a viable option at number seven. However, the twin failures for the two most vulnerable members of the side helped to clarify England's selection issues if, as expected, Andrew Flintoff returns for the second Test.
Paul Collingwood has looked desperately out-of-form in the Test side for some time, for all his scrapping qualities: he has averaged 33, 33, 41 and 11 and in his last four series. Whatever the evidence of a double-hundred against Australia, ultimately Collingwood may lack the technique to be a long-term success at Test level. Recently, he has not just failed but - in stark contrast to Bell's typically classy, but too often brief, knocks - appeared out of his depth, lacking the confidence to attack or even defend with authority, his innings characterised by a certain timidity. Even in CC cricket, he has been desperately short of runs. At 32, and with a pressing need for a shoulder operation, this could conceivably be his final Test. That would be a great shame for such a tenacious player, but his shortcomings have been painfully exposed of late.
Tim Ambrose barely had time to celebrate his superb, counter-attacking hundred in his second Test before the murmurings over his place began to appear. An inevitability of being any English keeper in the post-Stewart era? Perhaps. But, though this is only his seventh Test, the time is right to dispense with him: not only is he low on confidence but his batting technique seems fundamentally not up to the challenges of international cricket. His technique is fragile when denied the opportunity to feed his cut shot, as international bowlers have realised since his Test century: repeatedly, he has been dismissed playing half-heartedly, often with a closed face, to balls outside off-stump. In 12 international innings since that century, he has passed 11 only twice and 31 once - and even that when New Zealand's bowling was extremely loose. Add in the cracks that emerged in his keeping in the ODIs and it seems that Ambrose is the worst of both worlds. If you want someone who can score heavily for England, pick Matt Prior; if you want someone who can snaffle virtually every chance pick Chris Read or James Foster.
So a balanced side England could look to develop prior to first Ashes Test next summer is:
Strauss
Cook
Vaughan
Pietersen
Bell
Prior
Flintoff
Broad
Sidebottom
Jones
Panesar
Paul Collingwood has looked desperately out-of-form in the Test side for some time, for all his scrapping qualities: he has averaged 33, 33, 41 and 11 and in his last four series. Whatever the evidence of a double-hundred against Australia, ultimately Collingwood may lack the technique to be a long-term success at Test level. Recently, he has not just failed but - in stark contrast to Bell's typically classy, but too often brief, knocks - appeared out of his depth, lacking the confidence to attack or even defend with authority, his innings characterised by a certain timidity. Even in CC cricket, he has been desperately short of runs. At 32, and with a pressing need for a shoulder operation, this could conceivably be his final Test. That would be a great shame for such a tenacious player, but his shortcomings have been painfully exposed of late.
Tim Ambrose barely had time to celebrate his superb, counter-attacking hundred in his second Test before the murmurings over his place began to appear. An inevitability of being any English keeper in the post-Stewart era? Perhaps. But, though this is only his seventh Test, the time is right to dispense with him: not only is he low on confidence but his batting technique seems fundamentally not up to the challenges of international cricket. His technique is fragile when denied the opportunity to feed his cut shot, as international bowlers have realised since his Test century: repeatedly, he has been dismissed playing half-heartedly, often with a closed face, to balls outside off-stump. In 12 international innings since that century, he has passed 11 only twice and 31 once - and even that when New Zealand's bowling was extremely loose. Add in the cracks that emerged in his keeping in the ODIs and it seems that Ambrose is the worst of both worlds. If you want someone who can score heavily for England, pick Matt Prior; if you want someone who can snaffle virtually every chance pick Chris Read or James Foster.
So a balanced side England could look to develop prior to first Ashes Test next summer is:
Strauss
Cook
Vaughan
Pietersen
Bell
Prior
Flintoff
Broad
Sidebottom
Jones
Panesar
Monday, 30 June 2008
England ODI Ratings
Here is how England's players rated in their second consecutive 3-1 ODI series defeat to New Zealand:
Alastair Cook 4
A sedate 24 during the final ODI showed why Cook should not figure in England's ODI plans until he improves his one-day batting for Essex.
Luke Wright 4
Returning to the opening position he occupied so unsuccessfully in the World Twenty20 last September, Wright proved little more successful this time, lacking the skills to work the ball around. For all the promise of a quick 52 - not coincidentally, when the game reverted to virtually a Twenty20 - the stats - an average of 18 and a strike-rate of 71 - are damning. May, however, be worth perservering with at number seven.
Ian Bell 5
Made starts in virtually every innings, and showed glimpses of why he should be a very good one-day opener. The trouble is, 'glimpses' are no longer good enough and Key, Denly et al will be hopeful of getting a one-day chance soon.
Kevin Pietersen 6
Moving to number three, Pietersen began with a brilliant century, including the phenomenal switch-hitting, but faded terribly in the last four innings. Should England's best batsman be given more responsbility or return to the number five position from which he enjoyed stupendous success? He surely needs at least another series at three before a judgement can be made.
Ravi Bopara 5
Hyped up following a wonderful start to the season, but Bopara looked rather out of his depth at number four, clearly too high. He was also invariably a run-out hazard. He seems inhibited, or maybe is simply not quite skilful enough: he can neither score singles with regularity nor clear the ropes - and has never hit an international six. A series and career strike-rate in the 60s is 20th century, while his bowling, inferior to Wright's and Collingwood's, is almost an irrelevance at international level.
Paul Collingwood 7
Timely return to form with the bat, and some canny bowling underlined his worth to the side. However, the series will be remembered for his part in the run-out incident and his ban for slow-over rates. His captaincy does not always convince - does he have sufficient tactical acumen?
Owais Shah 8
A tremendous series. Shah played some wonderful knocks, from his two-run-a-ball 49 in the first ODI to a pair of classy 60s in the last two games, which could have come to so much more had he had adequate support. In finishing as top series run-scorer, and scoring at over a run-a-ball, he reaffirmed his one-day class. While there is an argument for retaining him at six, such a shrewd ODI operator should surely be given the chance to bat at four.
Tim Ambrose 1
Did almost nothing right, dropping catches and looking hapless with the bat. The England keeper debate rumbles on. It is certain, however, that Ambrose's limited range of shots do not make him the best one-day option.
Graeme Swann 7
Bowled excellently throughout to confirm himself as the number one ODI spinner. As a fine fielder and sometimes dangerous batsman, preferably at nine, he has cemented his place in the side.
Stuart Broad 8
A fine series, with seven cheap wickets and an economy rate of just 3.58. An automatic ODI pick.
Ryan Sidebottom 3
In his three appearances Sidebottom was uncharacteristically out-of-sorts. Still, as a canny left-arm operator, there should still be room for him in, or at least vey close to, the side.
James Anderson 2
There were some good moments, and his performances against McCullum were certainly impressive. Anderson seems to be an integral member of the ODI side but recent showings raise serious questions. In his last 15 ODIs, he averages 51 with an economy rate of over 5.5. Ultimately, he is just too inconsistent.
Dimitri Mascarenhas 6
One game produced a valiant 13-ball 23 and a solitary over, which went for 10. So the Mascarenhas conundrum continues.
Chris Tremlett 7
Is a better first-class than limited-overs bowler but will be very satisfied with his solitary appearance in the series, impressing with his consistency.
The Verdict
After the thrashing meted out to New Zealand in the first game, a comfortable series victory seemed inevitable, and England's one-day future appeared, fleetingly, to be reasonably bright. But brainless batting, above all, saw them lose easily. Players such as Key, Denly, Afzaal and Hildreth should be considered, especially if they can end England's opening woes. England, clearly, have a long, long way to go.
Alastair Cook 4
A sedate 24 during the final ODI showed why Cook should not figure in England's ODI plans until he improves his one-day batting for Essex.
Luke Wright 4
Returning to the opening position he occupied so unsuccessfully in the World Twenty20 last September, Wright proved little more successful this time, lacking the skills to work the ball around. For all the promise of a quick 52 - not coincidentally, when the game reverted to virtually a Twenty20 - the stats - an average of 18 and a strike-rate of 71 - are damning. May, however, be worth perservering with at number seven.
Ian Bell 5
Made starts in virtually every innings, and showed glimpses of why he should be a very good one-day opener. The trouble is, 'glimpses' are no longer good enough and Key, Denly et al will be hopeful of getting a one-day chance soon.
Kevin Pietersen 6
Moving to number three, Pietersen began with a brilliant century, including the phenomenal switch-hitting, but faded terribly in the last four innings. Should England's best batsman be given more responsbility or return to the number five position from which he enjoyed stupendous success? He surely needs at least another series at three before a judgement can be made.
Ravi Bopara 5
Hyped up following a wonderful start to the season, but Bopara looked rather out of his depth at number four, clearly too high. He was also invariably a run-out hazard. He seems inhibited, or maybe is simply not quite skilful enough: he can neither score singles with regularity nor clear the ropes - and has never hit an international six. A series and career strike-rate in the 60s is 20th century, while his bowling, inferior to Wright's and Collingwood's, is almost an irrelevance at international level.
Paul Collingwood 7
Timely return to form with the bat, and some canny bowling underlined his worth to the side. However, the series will be remembered for his part in the run-out incident and his ban for slow-over rates. His captaincy does not always convince - does he have sufficient tactical acumen?
Owais Shah 8
A tremendous series. Shah played some wonderful knocks, from his two-run-a-ball 49 in the first ODI to a pair of classy 60s in the last two games, which could have come to so much more had he had adequate support. In finishing as top series run-scorer, and scoring at over a run-a-ball, he reaffirmed his one-day class. While there is an argument for retaining him at six, such a shrewd ODI operator should surely be given the chance to bat at four.
Tim Ambrose 1
Did almost nothing right, dropping catches and looking hapless with the bat. The England keeper debate rumbles on. It is certain, however, that Ambrose's limited range of shots do not make him the best one-day option.
Graeme Swann 7
Bowled excellently throughout to confirm himself as the number one ODI spinner. As a fine fielder and sometimes dangerous batsman, preferably at nine, he has cemented his place in the side.
Stuart Broad 8
A fine series, with seven cheap wickets and an economy rate of just 3.58. An automatic ODI pick.
Ryan Sidebottom 3
In his three appearances Sidebottom was uncharacteristically out-of-sorts. Still, as a canny left-arm operator, there should still be room for him in, or at least vey close to, the side.
James Anderson 2
There were some good moments, and his performances against McCullum were certainly impressive. Anderson seems to be an integral member of the ODI side but recent showings raise serious questions. In his last 15 ODIs, he averages 51 with an economy rate of over 5.5. Ultimately, he is just too inconsistent.
Dimitri Mascarenhas 6
One game produced a valiant 13-ball 23 and a solitary over, which went for 10. So the Mascarenhas conundrum continues.
Chris Tremlett 7
Is a better first-class than limited-overs bowler but will be very satisfied with his solitary appearance in the series, impressing with his consistency.
The Verdict
After the thrashing meted out to New Zealand in the first game, a comfortable series victory seemed inevitable, and England's one-day future appeared, fleetingly, to be reasonably bright. But brainless batting, above all, saw them lose easily. Players such as Key, Denly, Afzaal and Hildreth should be considered, especially if they can end England's opening woes. England, clearly, have a long, long way to go.
Wednesday, 18 June 2008
Players moving up, England moving forward
For those of you who are regular readers you will be all too familiar with my musings over the years about the England One Day International side. Finally we seem to be making some progress.
Firstly, Alistair Cook is no longer opening the innings, fabulous. He is undoubtedly a fantastically talented Test match cricketer, albeit slightly out of form at present, but he is just not a modern day limited overs batsman. Ian Bell has at last been elevated to the role of opener, one he has enjoyed success in before. His innings against the Australians at the last World Cup demonstrated that he could score quickly, through a vast array of strokes. Notably he has the ability to use his feet and hit over the top, something Cook patently struggles with.
Secondly, and I want to scream hallelujah here, England’s best batsmen, Kevin Pietersen, has finally been elevated to number three! Many of us have only been looking for this change for the past two and a half years, but better late than never as they say. From number three Pietersen can dictate the innings for England and spend the maximum amount of time at the crease (other than if he opened of course!). The best player in a side regularly bats at number three and it is of major importance in limited overs cricket.
Luke Wright has been re-elevated to the role of opener, a role he has yet to really succeed in for England (though his brisk fifty today is a good start). He has enjoyed success down the order coming in against the old ball, should he be left down there to do what he does best? It is a difficult question to answer. Undoubtedly he should be given the rest of this series to readjust to opening. One thing for sure is that he should be in the side. His fielding and surprisingly effective death bowling certainly add to a developing unit. We must hope that he can succeed as an opener as the alternatives are limited and once Andrew Flintoff returns, there will still be plenty of power down the order.
The lack of an aggressive opener has been the failing of the England side over the last few years. Often the wicket keeper opens as the aggressor. However, it can’t be Tim Ambrose, as he has neither the technique nor the experience for the role. Whilst on the subject of Ambrose, I wonder how effective he will prove to be so low down the order, as he plays higher up for Warwickshire and does not seem to have the game to come in late and provide a brisk cameo. His performances will be under review no doubt. As Ambrose is the current incumbent keeper, it doesn’t appear as though the aggressive opener will be Phil Mustard, especially given his woeful recent form and limited stroke play at the highest level. Matt Prior, for all his runs, does not currently have the glove work to back them up and he is having to serve more time in county cricket for the time being. Steven Davies and Craig Kieswetter, two young wicket keepers, could yet be tried in the role, but their debuts are unlikely for a few years yet.
Other than Wright that leaves only specialist batsmen. Of them, Owais Shah, Jonathon Trott, Vikram Solanki, Michael Carberry, Joe Denly and James Benning are the main contenders. Shah is undoubtedly a great player of spin and a wonderful exponent of the limited overs batting art, who is currently batting too low for his talent at six. Elevating him to opener takes him away from the spinning ball though and exposes him to the new ball, which has at international level in the past seen his downfall. He is probably best left to bat at four. Of the remaining men, Solanki is a fantastic cricketer and agile fieldsmen. He has had many opportunities in an England shirt already though and has failed to convince, but he has rarely had a sustained run in one position. Trott is another candidate, who made it into Peter Moores’ first limited overs squad, playing two Twenty20 matches against the West Indies before being discarded. He often opens for Warwickshire in limited overs cricket, has a safe pair of hands and is a capable medium pace bowler. Meanwhile, Carberry is an electric fielder, blessed with Wesley Snipes’ Blade’s turn of pace. He has enjoyed success for the England Lions on a number of occasions, most notably in India over the winter, where he averaged 47 in three First Class games and 58.33 in three List A games. He scored two hundreds and two fifties. A lefty, he would compliment Bell and leave England with that all important right hand-left hand combination. Fellow Lion Denly is young and technically sound, but he is more likely to make his breakthrough in Test match cricket at the moment. Finally, Benning, whilst a fine striker of the ball, is not the most talented and is rather predictable with his constant search for leg side blows.
There is one further possible contender and that is Graeme Swann, who has often been the pinch hitter for Nottinghamshire in the past. He would not be capable of building an innings however and would be unlikely to average in excess of 20, which at international level is going to leave you in trouble. He is also far from a certainty in the side, with both Monty Panesar and Adil Rashid eager to take his place. If Wright is not successful in the role then I would seriously consider getting a wicket keeper into the team who can open once again, with Wright dropping down the order. There hasn’t been a problem so far with having two different captains, so I fail to see the difference in having two different wicket keepers. Prior, Mustard, Davies and Kieswetter could all fit the bill in my opinion. If not, then space would have to be found in the side for a specialist batsman to open. Ultimately, most of the other players mentioned, including Wright, can do well enough in the role to make England competitive again in One Day International cricket and that is down to the new formula which coach Moores and captain Paul Collingwood have devised. Exciting aggressive multi-dimensional cricketers now comprise the squad, with Test specialists left to do what they do best.
With Flintoff yet to return, the side is shaping up nicely and furthermore it seems as if only four specialist bowlers are required, with the likes of Collingwood, Wright, Ravi Bopara, Pietersen and Shah all capable of making up the fifth and final bowler. That will leave England with a nice dilemma when Flintoff does make his comeback in an England shirt. One of Stuart Broad, Ryan Sidebottom or James Anderson may have to make way. In the last 12 months Anderson has averaged 36.14 with the ball, at a strike rate of 40.1, with an economy of 5.39 in ODI’s against the West Indies, India, Sri Lanka and New Zealand. That is not good enough and is made worse by the fact that in that time England have not once played either of the two leading ODI sides. He is most under pressure, along with Sidebottom, who whilst economical, has not taken as many wickets against New Zealand as he would have liked.
Meanwhile, Dimitri Mascarenhas can consider himself unfortunate to miss out on a place in the first choice XI, but his place appears to have been taken by Bopara, who unlike him, can bat in the top seven, though he will need to curb his penchant for a run out. Mascarenhas is a certainty for the Twenty20 side however and will still probably get the odd game in place of the spinner, depending on conditions. He will hopefully make up the selection pool, which would also feature Cook, Trott, Panesar and Anderson.
A potential England side of:
Bell
Mustard / Prior (wk)
Pietersen
Shah
Collingwood (c)
Bopara
Wright
Flintoff
Swann
Broad
Sidebottom
will hopefully be taking to the field sooner rather than later and challenging the rest of the world for limited overs trophies once again.
Firstly, Alistair Cook is no longer opening the innings, fabulous. He is undoubtedly a fantastically talented Test match cricketer, albeit slightly out of form at present, but he is just not a modern day limited overs batsman. Ian Bell has at last been elevated to the role of opener, one he has enjoyed success in before. His innings against the Australians at the last World Cup demonstrated that he could score quickly, through a vast array of strokes. Notably he has the ability to use his feet and hit over the top, something Cook patently struggles with.
Secondly, and I want to scream hallelujah here, England’s best batsmen, Kevin Pietersen, has finally been elevated to number three! Many of us have only been looking for this change for the past two and a half years, but better late than never as they say. From number three Pietersen can dictate the innings for England and spend the maximum amount of time at the crease (other than if he opened of course!). The best player in a side regularly bats at number three and it is of major importance in limited overs cricket.
Luke Wright has been re-elevated to the role of opener, a role he has yet to really succeed in for England (though his brisk fifty today is a good start). He has enjoyed success down the order coming in against the old ball, should he be left down there to do what he does best? It is a difficult question to answer. Undoubtedly he should be given the rest of this series to readjust to opening. One thing for sure is that he should be in the side. His fielding and surprisingly effective death bowling certainly add to a developing unit. We must hope that he can succeed as an opener as the alternatives are limited and once Andrew Flintoff returns, there will still be plenty of power down the order.
The lack of an aggressive opener has been the failing of the England side over the last few years. Often the wicket keeper opens as the aggressor. However, it can’t be Tim Ambrose, as he has neither the technique nor the experience for the role. Whilst on the subject of Ambrose, I wonder how effective he will prove to be so low down the order, as he plays higher up for Warwickshire and does not seem to have the game to come in late and provide a brisk cameo. His performances will be under review no doubt. As Ambrose is the current incumbent keeper, it doesn’t appear as though the aggressive opener will be Phil Mustard, especially given his woeful recent form and limited stroke play at the highest level. Matt Prior, for all his runs, does not currently have the glove work to back them up and he is having to serve more time in county cricket for the time being. Steven Davies and Craig Kieswetter, two young wicket keepers, could yet be tried in the role, but their debuts are unlikely for a few years yet.
Other than Wright that leaves only specialist batsmen. Of them, Owais Shah, Jonathon Trott, Vikram Solanki, Michael Carberry, Joe Denly and James Benning are the main contenders. Shah is undoubtedly a great player of spin and a wonderful exponent of the limited overs batting art, who is currently batting too low for his talent at six. Elevating him to opener takes him away from the spinning ball though and exposes him to the new ball, which has at international level in the past seen his downfall. He is probably best left to bat at four. Of the remaining men, Solanki is a fantastic cricketer and agile fieldsmen. He has had many opportunities in an England shirt already though and has failed to convince, but he has rarely had a sustained run in one position. Trott is another candidate, who made it into Peter Moores’ first limited overs squad, playing two Twenty20 matches against the West Indies before being discarded. He often opens for Warwickshire in limited overs cricket, has a safe pair of hands and is a capable medium pace bowler. Meanwhile, Carberry is an electric fielder, blessed with Wesley Snipes’ Blade’s turn of pace. He has enjoyed success for the England Lions on a number of occasions, most notably in India over the winter, where he averaged 47 in three First Class games and 58.33 in three List A games. He scored two hundreds and two fifties. A lefty, he would compliment Bell and leave England with that all important right hand-left hand combination. Fellow Lion Denly is young and technically sound, but he is more likely to make his breakthrough in Test match cricket at the moment. Finally, Benning, whilst a fine striker of the ball, is not the most talented and is rather predictable with his constant search for leg side blows.
There is one further possible contender and that is Graeme Swann, who has often been the pinch hitter for Nottinghamshire in the past. He would not be capable of building an innings however and would be unlikely to average in excess of 20, which at international level is going to leave you in trouble. He is also far from a certainty in the side, with both Monty Panesar and Adil Rashid eager to take his place. If Wright is not successful in the role then I would seriously consider getting a wicket keeper into the team who can open once again, with Wright dropping down the order. There hasn’t been a problem so far with having two different captains, so I fail to see the difference in having two different wicket keepers. Prior, Mustard, Davies and Kieswetter could all fit the bill in my opinion. If not, then space would have to be found in the side for a specialist batsman to open. Ultimately, most of the other players mentioned, including Wright, can do well enough in the role to make England competitive again in One Day International cricket and that is down to the new formula which coach Moores and captain Paul Collingwood have devised. Exciting aggressive multi-dimensional cricketers now comprise the squad, with Test specialists left to do what they do best.
With Flintoff yet to return, the side is shaping up nicely and furthermore it seems as if only four specialist bowlers are required, with the likes of Collingwood, Wright, Ravi Bopara, Pietersen and Shah all capable of making up the fifth and final bowler. That will leave England with a nice dilemma when Flintoff does make his comeback in an England shirt. One of Stuart Broad, Ryan Sidebottom or James Anderson may have to make way. In the last 12 months Anderson has averaged 36.14 with the ball, at a strike rate of 40.1, with an economy of 5.39 in ODI’s against the West Indies, India, Sri Lanka and New Zealand. That is not good enough and is made worse by the fact that in that time England have not once played either of the two leading ODI sides. He is most under pressure, along with Sidebottom, who whilst economical, has not taken as many wickets against New Zealand as he would have liked.
Meanwhile, Dimitri Mascarenhas can consider himself unfortunate to miss out on a place in the first choice XI, but his place appears to have been taken by Bopara, who unlike him, can bat in the top seven, though he will need to curb his penchant for a run out. Mascarenhas is a certainty for the Twenty20 side however and will still probably get the odd game in place of the spinner, depending on conditions. He will hopefully make up the selection pool, which would also feature Cook, Trott, Panesar and Anderson.
A potential England side of:
Bell
Mustard / Prior (wk)
Pietersen
Shah
Collingwood (c)
Bopara
Wright
Flintoff
Swann
Broad
Sidebottom
will hopefully be taking to the field sooner rather than later and challenging the rest of the world for limited overs trophies once again.
Wednesday, 28 May 2008
How do you solve a problem like Matt Prior?
Regular readers will be aware of my interest in wicket keeping and my preference for “real” wicket keepers. However, with the effect that Alec Stewart and particularly Adam Gilchrist had on the position, being just a wicket-keeper is no longer good enough. Righly or wrongly, a keeper needs to be selected on the basis of his batting skills more than his keeping skills, otherwise Chris Read would have been the England keeper for the past 5-6 years.
The current group of wicket-keepers vying for places in the England test team range from the pure wicket-keeping, unorthodox batting of Chris Read to the poor wicket keeping but fine batting of Matt Prior with current incumbent Tim Ambrose and James Foster in between (Phil Mustard has been deliberately omitted as neither his matting nor his keeping are adequate for test cricket). This situation is reminiscent of the early 1990s, and the start of the career of England’s archetypal batsman-wicket keeper: Alec Stewart.
Stewart started out as a batsman in 1990 before replacing the specialist wicket keeper, Jack Russell, during the Ashes series of 1991 as England looked for a better balance to the team. This was in the days of Phil Defreitas and Chris Lewis as the England all rounder, who were essentially bowlers who could bat, so the need for an extra bowler or batsman was critical. The next few series then took a familiar pattern. Russell would start as the wicket keeper, with Stewart opening the batting. However, as the results became disappointing, Stewart would be moved to keep wicket to draft in an extra batsman or bowler. As Stewart’s wicket keeping improved, he spent more time as keeper, playing 82 of his 133 tests behind the stumps. This was also to the detriment of his batting average, which was 46.7 as a batsman, but only 35 when keeping wicket.
Despite these movements in his position, Stewart’s position in the team was never in doubt. He was one of England’s premier batsmen and the wicket keeping was good enough (and improving) while never in the same class as Russell. Indeed, he finished the 1990s as the top scorer in test cricket for the decade, taking over as captain of the side in 1998 with a series victory over South Africa, up to the disappointing World Cup in 1999.
So how does this help us with the England wicket keeping position? The closest that England have to Stewart is Matt Prior. Prior averages over 40 in test cricket and during his last series, away to Sri Lanka finished third in the England batting averages, behind Ian Bell and Ali Cook. The series saw a maturity in his batting, which had been previously reliant on scoring quickly. He scored 19 off 100 balls in saving the 3rd test, while he scored half-centuries during the first two tests, the second being a fine example of marshalling the tail. Despite Tim Ambrose’s fine century in the second test in New Zealand, it is difficult to imagine him playing such an innings for England in such circumstances.
Prior has started the season in blistering form. He is averaging 67 in the championship, in a Sussex team where Murray Goodwin is the only other player to average above 40 and has failed to reach fifty just once. With a test average above 40 (and 5 runs better than Stewart’s as a wicket keeper), he is clearly good enough to play for England as a specialist batsman. As with Stewart, once he is ensconced into the team, his presence will give the selectors the option of using his wicket keeping skills, and he will have the confidence to know that he is being judged mainly on his batting, with the keeping allowing other options in the team selection. He would need to improve his keeping, but the knowledge that this is not the be all and end all of his game should allow him to relax into his role
Alec Stewart was not a great wicket keeper, particularly standing up. He was however, a more than adequate keeper and one of the best batsmen in world cricket. Matt Prior could be the heir to Stewart in more ways than one.
The current group of wicket-keepers vying for places in the England test team range from the pure wicket-keeping, unorthodox batting of Chris Read to the poor wicket keeping but fine batting of Matt Prior with current incumbent Tim Ambrose and James Foster in between (Phil Mustard has been deliberately omitted as neither his matting nor his keeping are adequate for test cricket). This situation is reminiscent of the early 1990s, and the start of the career of England’s archetypal batsman-wicket keeper: Alec Stewart.
Stewart started out as a batsman in 1990 before replacing the specialist wicket keeper, Jack Russell, during the Ashes series of 1991 as England looked for a better balance to the team. This was in the days of Phil Defreitas and Chris Lewis as the England all rounder, who were essentially bowlers who could bat, so the need for an extra bowler or batsman was critical. The next few series then took a familiar pattern. Russell would start as the wicket keeper, with Stewart opening the batting. However, as the results became disappointing, Stewart would be moved to keep wicket to draft in an extra batsman or bowler. As Stewart’s wicket keeping improved, he spent more time as keeper, playing 82 of his 133 tests behind the stumps. This was also to the detriment of his batting average, which was 46.7 as a batsman, but only 35 when keeping wicket.
Despite these movements in his position, Stewart’s position in the team was never in doubt. He was one of England’s premier batsmen and the wicket keeping was good enough (and improving) while never in the same class as Russell. Indeed, he finished the 1990s as the top scorer in test cricket for the decade, taking over as captain of the side in 1998 with a series victory over South Africa, up to the disappointing World Cup in 1999.
So how does this help us with the England wicket keeping position? The closest that England have to Stewart is Matt Prior. Prior averages over 40 in test cricket and during his last series, away to Sri Lanka finished third in the England batting averages, behind Ian Bell and Ali Cook. The series saw a maturity in his batting, which had been previously reliant on scoring quickly. He scored 19 off 100 balls in saving the 3rd test, while he scored half-centuries during the first two tests, the second being a fine example of marshalling the tail. Despite Tim Ambrose’s fine century in the second test in New Zealand, it is difficult to imagine him playing such an innings for England in such circumstances.
Prior has started the season in blistering form. He is averaging 67 in the championship, in a Sussex team where Murray Goodwin is the only other player to average above 40 and has failed to reach fifty just once. With a test average above 40 (and 5 runs better than Stewart’s as a wicket keeper), he is clearly good enough to play for England as a specialist batsman. As with Stewart, once he is ensconced into the team, his presence will give the selectors the option of using his wicket keeping skills, and he will have the confidence to know that he is being judged mainly on his batting, with the keeping allowing other options in the team selection. He would need to improve his keeping, but the knowledge that this is not the be all and end all of his game should allow him to relax into his role
Alec Stewart was not a great wicket keeper, particularly standing up. He was however, a more than adequate keeper and one of the best batsmen in world cricket. Matt Prior could be the heir to Stewart in more ways than one.
Wednesday, 7 May 2008
Championship - Week 3
More damp weather meant just the one positive result this week. However, it was a good week for England wicket-keepers past and present.
Div 1
Starting at Headingley where despite the overcast conditions, Darren Gough decided that Yorkshire should bat first against Nottinghamshire. Scoring was slow and Ryan Sidebottom started with a run of seven maidens, although no wickets. A century from Jacques Rudolph helped to rescue the Yorkshire innings from 111 for 5 to 299 all out. The Notts innings followed a similar path and they looked to be in trouble at 115 for 5. However, a stands of 136 between Chris Read (142) and Graeme Swann (68) and 113 between Read and Stuart Broad (53) took Notts past 400 and meant that Yorkshire had to bat out 69 overs for a draw, which they managed with 2 wickets to spare, making 187 for 8. Notts take all of the credit though.
Rain meant that the game at Hove turned into a battle for bonus points, with Sussex making 475. Carl Hopkinson fell 3 runs short of his century, with Murray Goodwin going one run better with 98. In reply Surrey declared on 400 for 5 (century 99 for Mark Ramprakash). Sussex made 13 in 13 overs in their second innings against the testing bowling of Usman Afzaal and Ali Brown as the game petered out.
Div 2
Glamorgan batted first against Gloucestershire, scoring 277. Gloucester then declared on 141 for 4 in an effort to set up a positive result. Some declaration bowling took Glamorgan to 178 for 1 leaving Gloucester a challenging 315 to win. Gloucester lost their first 5 wickets for just 76 runs. A stand of 114 between Hamish Marshall (105) and Stephen Snell (53) gave some hope of securing a draw. However, the veterans of the Glamorgan team, Robert Croft and Jason Gillespie broke through and took the last five wickets for just ten runs and Glamorgan have as many victories in this season’s championship as they managed last time round.
Warwickshire were indebted to two stands of over 150 in their total of 433 for 8 with Tim Ambrose (156*) and Jonathan Trott (82) putting on 152 for the 5th wicket and Ambrose and Neil Carter (84) putting on 157 for the 8th wicket. In reply Leicestershire had a large stand of their own, with Matthew Boyce (106) and HD Ackerman (104) putting on 182 for the second wicket. However, from that promising position, Leicester fell away to 357 all out, with Ian Salisbury taking five wickets. Unfortunately the weather meant that the second innings wasn’t started.
Finally to Northampton, where Northamptonshire capitulated to just 168 all out having decided to bat first. The pitch then seemed to even out somewhat as Worcestershire declared on 400 for 8, with Stephen Moore continuing his fine start to the season with 109. Needing 233 to make Worcester bat again, Nicky Boje set about trying to get the runs on his own, scoring an unbeaten 226. he had plenty of support though, and the game closed with Northants on 514 for 5.
England Player watch
Michael Vaughan wouldn’t have enjoyed Darren Gough’s decision to bat first on a damp Headingley pitch, but his battling 42 and 34 show that he’s in reasonable nick, particularly as the Notts bowling attack is substantially more threatening than the Kiwi attack. Ian Bell scored 45 for Warwickshire, while Matt Prior scored 51, which is his lowest first class score of the season. Prior was outshone by his successor, as Tim Ambrose scored an unbeaten 156, and one of his predecessors as Chris Read hit 142.
For Notts, in the first innings Ryan Sidebottom was very tight, starting with seven consecutive maidens but wicketless, while Stuart Broad was more expensive, but took three wickets, including Vaughan. Both took wickets in the second innings, while their likely partner in the England team, Matthew Hoggard took two wickets in the Notts innings, but also started with four consecutive maidens. Monty Panesar went wicketless for Northants.
Player of the Week
Nicky Boje has had a good couple of weeks for Northants. However, the stars of the show this week were both wicketkeepers. Tim Ambrose is almost certain to be in the test team next week and in good form. However, for taking Notts from a position of potential defeat to a position of strength and almost forcing an unlikely victory, the player of the week is the man who should have been the England wicketkeeper since Alec Stewart retired, Chris Read
Div 1
Starting at Headingley where despite the overcast conditions, Darren Gough decided that Yorkshire should bat first against Nottinghamshire. Scoring was slow and Ryan Sidebottom started with a run of seven maidens, although no wickets. A century from Jacques Rudolph helped to rescue the Yorkshire innings from 111 for 5 to 299 all out. The Notts innings followed a similar path and they looked to be in trouble at 115 for 5. However, a stands of 136 between Chris Read (142) and Graeme Swann (68) and 113 between Read and Stuart Broad (53) took Notts past 400 and meant that Yorkshire had to bat out 69 overs for a draw, which they managed with 2 wickets to spare, making 187 for 8. Notts take all of the credit though.
Rain meant that the game at Hove turned into a battle for bonus points, with Sussex making 475. Carl Hopkinson fell 3 runs short of his century, with Murray Goodwin going one run better with 98. In reply Surrey declared on 400 for 5 (century 99 for Mark Ramprakash). Sussex made 13 in 13 overs in their second innings against the testing bowling of Usman Afzaal and Ali Brown as the game petered out.
Div 2
Glamorgan batted first against Gloucestershire, scoring 277. Gloucester then declared on 141 for 4 in an effort to set up a positive result. Some declaration bowling took Glamorgan to 178 for 1 leaving Gloucester a challenging 315 to win. Gloucester lost their first 5 wickets for just 76 runs. A stand of 114 between Hamish Marshall (105) and Stephen Snell (53) gave some hope of securing a draw. However, the veterans of the Glamorgan team, Robert Croft and Jason Gillespie broke through and took the last five wickets for just ten runs and Glamorgan have as many victories in this season’s championship as they managed last time round.
Warwickshire were indebted to two stands of over 150 in their total of 433 for 8 with Tim Ambrose (156*) and Jonathan Trott (82) putting on 152 for the 5th wicket and Ambrose and Neil Carter (84) putting on 157 for the 8th wicket. In reply Leicestershire had a large stand of their own, with Matthew Boyce (106) and HD Ackerman (104) putting on 182 for the second wicket. However, from that promising position, Leicester fell away to 357 all out, with Ian Salisbury taking five wickets. Unfortunately the weather meant that the second innings wasn’t started.
Finally to Northampton, where Northamptonshire capitulated to just 168 all out having decided to bat first. The pitch then seemed to even out somewhat as Worcestershire declared on 400 for 8, with Stephen Moore continuing his fine start to the season with 109. Needing 233 to make Worcester bat again, Nicky Boje set about trying to get the runs on his own, scoring an unbeaten 226. he had plenty of support though, and the game closed with Northants on 514 for 5.
England Player watch
Michael Vaughan wouldn’t have enjoyed Darren Gough’s decision to bat first on a damp Headingley pitch, but his battling 42 and 34 show that he’s in reasonable nick, particularly as the Notts bowling attack is substantially more threatening than the Kiwi attack. Ian Bell scored 45 for Warwickshire, while Matt Prior scored 51, which is his lowest first class score of the season. Prior was outshone by his successor, as Tim Ambrose scored an unbeaten 156, and one of his predecessors as Chris Read hit 142.
For Notts, in the first innings Ryan Sidebottom was very tight, starting with seven consecutive maidens but wicketless, while Stuart Broad was more expensive, but took three wickets, including Vaughan. Both took wickets in the second innings, while their likely partner in the England team, Matthew Hoggard took two wickets in the Notts innings, but also started with four consecutive maidens. Monty Panesar went wicketless for Northants.
Player of the Week
Nicky Boje has had a good couple of weeks for Northants. However, the stars of the show this week were both wicketkeepers. Tim Ambrose is almost certain to be in the test team next week and in good form. However, for taking Notts from a position of potential defeat to a position of strength and almost forcing an unlikely victory, the player of the week is the man who should have been the England wicketkeeper since Alec Stewart retired, Chris Read
Monday, 17 March 2008
New-look atack - but too soon to declare a new era
So it seems England can play cricket after all. They performed commendably to square the series, but we should not lose sight of the fact this is a side England were expected to beat.
Nonetheless, there are real causes for optimism - at last. Tim Ambrose played a pugnacious and decisive counter-attacking innings of 102, displaying the temperament to thrive at international level. His keeping, typically and infuriatingly, did not match the standards he displayed in the first Test, however.
England's bowling was reinvigorated after dispensing with Messrs Hoggard and Harmison. Ryan Sidebottom gave another exemplary display, indefatigable, relentlessly consistent and truly incisive with the new ball. But he has performed so well since his comeback that such displays are now expected.
Of greater cheer were the showings of James Anderson and Stuart Broad. When conditions offered swing, as they did at Lord's against India last summer, Anderson was superb. But only for so long can he can get by on the occasional fine showing. On the flatter pitch that we will see at Napier, he needs to display improved control, so batsmen do not run away when wickets are hard to come by. Stuart Broad was not flattered by his figures but provided another sign of his readiness for international cricket, probing away and delivering the key wicket of Stephen Fleming.
Yet this was far from the perfect performance: for one, the fielding deteriorated alarmingly from the phenomenal catching on-show at Hamilton. And, yet again, the top-order displayed their depressing propensity for getting in then out - alarmingly, none of the top six have even hit 70 all series. Andrew Strauss probably did 'just enough' to remain in the side, but it is an indictement of the current set-up that a scratchy 40 every game, together with fast-fading memories of innings from the past, are sufficient for a man to retain his place.
One suspects England will not take the clear-sighted view that he patently looks no more like succeeding than he did when he was dropped. When he does go, the belated inclusion of Owais Shah may act as the catalyst for other batsmen to get out of the 'comfort zone' that seems to be afflicting them.
For England to seal the series on a pitch that will be less conducive to seam-bowling than this, more is needed from Monty Panesar, who averages 48 over his last eight Tests. It is now time for him to regain the vivaciousness and sheer joy he brought to his early Tests.
Nonetheless, there are real causes for optimism - at last. Tim Ambrose played a pugnacious and decisive counter-attacking innings of 102, displaying the temperament to thrive at international level. His keeping, typically and infuriatingly, did not match the standards he displayed in the first Test, however.
England's bowling was reinvigorated after dispensing with Messrs Hoggard and Harmison. Ryan Sidebottom gave another exemplary display, indefatigable, relentlessly consistent and truly incisive with the new ball. But he has performed so well since his comeback that such displays are now expected.
Of greater cheer were the showings of James Anderson and Stuart Broad. When conditions offered swing, as they did at Lord's against India last summer, Anderson was superb. But only for so long can he can get by on the occasional fine showing. On the flatter pitch that we will see at Napier, he needs to display improved control, so batsmen do not run away when wickets are hard to come by. Stuart Broad was not flattered by his figures but provided another sign of his readiness for international cricket, probing away and delivering the key wicket of Stephen Fleming.
Yet this was far from the perfect performance: for one, the fielding deteriorated alarmingly from the phenomenal catching on-show at Hamilton. And, yet again, the top-order displayed their depressing propensity for getting in then out - alarmingly, none of the top six have even hit 70 all series. Andrew Strauss probably did 'just enough' to remain in the side, but it is an indictement of the current set-up that a scratchy 40 every game, together with fast-fading memories of innings from the past, are sufficient for a man to retain his place.
One suspects England will not take the clear-sighted view that he patently looks no more like succeeding than he did when he was dropped. When he does go, the belated inclusion of Owais Shah may act as the catalyst for other batsmen to get out of the 'comfort zone' that seems to be afflicting them.
For England to seal the series on a pitch that will be less conducive to seam-bowling than this, more is needed from Monty Panesar, who averages 48 over his last eight Tests. It is now time for him to regain the vivaciousness and sheer joy he brought to his early Tests.
Sunday, 2 March 2008
Only victory is acceptable for England
England have the nucleus of a pretty good Test side, but the time for excuses has long gone. New Zealand were twice thrashed when they toured South Africa recently, and are much worse at Tests than one-day internationals, suffering from a lack of potency - magnified by the departure of Shane Bond - and from a brittle middle-order. If England are to have any hope of regaining their number two ranking any time soon, they should win this series by at least a 2-0 margin.
In theory, England’s pace attack should prove decisive. Matthew Hoggard and Ryan Sidebottom, in conditions that should be very conducive to their brand of swing, will be eager to attack a line-up in which there are major deficiencies. Their canny swing, subtle variations and consistency will test the techniques of the Kiwi batsmen to the hilt. And, if Steve Harmison can find his groove on pitches that are expected to offer some bounce, New Zealand’s scorecards could resemble those in South Africa, when they failed to pass 200 in four innings, in which case Monty Panesar, who needs a good series, may be marginalised.
With the bat, the controversial selection of Andrew Strauss, who had done nothing whatsoever to merit a recall, means there will be a re-jigging of the batting order. The promising Vaughan-Cook opening pair will be persisted with, and Strauss will bat at three, for the first time in his Test career. He could be a bad series away from being dropped on a more permanent basis although he played reassuringly well in making 104 in the last warm-up game and his technical flaws should not be over-exposed by a fairly toothless attack. It is led by Chris Martin, a worthy and experienced bowler but averaging over 35 if Bangladesh and Zimbabwe are excluded. Daniel Vettori is a brilliant ODI bowler, but is perhaps a little over-rated in Tests, and claimed just three wickets in South Africa.
Ian Bell will, correctly, bat above Paul Collingwood. It is a wise move because, ultimately, Bell should be a better Test batsman than Collingwood, while, as his one-day pyrotechnics showed, Collingwood may be the better man to bat with the tail. Either way, against moderate opposition Bell should be looking to make a hundred – and a big one at that. Kevin Pietersen should enjoy the bowling providing he manages to keep his ego in check, particularly against Vettori.
As so often, however, all eyes will be on England’s number seven. Tim Ambrose will be making his debut in almost as low-key a setting as Test cricket allows. It is almost unanimously agreed that his keeping is a significant improvement upon that of Matt Prior. His batting, previously his weak suit, improved to the point that he averaged 45 in Division One of the championship, as well as 70 in the Friends Provident Trophy, last season. From what I know, Ambrose appears to be the best man for the gloves in the Test side. He has an important role to play as England begin the road to recovery after a dire run of Test form that has seen them win just two of their last eight series.
In theory, England’s pace attack should prove decisive. Matthew Hoggard and Ryan Sidebottom, in conditions that should be very conducive to their brand of swing, will be eager to attack a line-up in which there are major deficiencies. Their canny swing, subtle variations and consistency will test the techniques of the Kiwi batsmen to the hilt. And, if Steve Harmison can find his groove on pitches that are expected to offer some bounce, New Zealand’s scorecards could resemble those in South Africa, when they failed to pass 200 in four innings, in which case Monty Panesar, who needs a good series, may be marginalised.
With the bat, the controversial selection of Andrew Strauss, who had done nothing whatsoever to merit a recall, means there will be a re-jigging of the batting order. The promising Vaughan-Cook opening pair will be persisted with, and Strauss will bat at three, for the first time in his Test career. He could be a bad series away from being dropped on a more permanent basis although he played reassuringly well in making 104 in the last warm-up game and his technical flaws should not be over-exposed by a fairly toothless attack. It is led by Chris Martin, a worthy and experienced bowler but averaging over 35 if Bangladesh and Zimbabwe are excluded. Daniel Vettori is a brilliant ODI bowler, but is perhaps a little over-rated in Tests, and claimed just three wickets in South Africa.
Ian Bell will, correctly, bat above Paul Collingwood. It is a wise move because, ultimately, Bell should be a better Test batsman than Collingwood, while, as his one-day pyrotechnics showed, Collingwood may be the better man to bat with the tail. Either way, against moderate opposition Bell should be looking to make a hundred – and a big one at that. Kevin Pietersen should enjoy the bowling providing he manages to keep his ego in check, particularly against Vettori.
As so often, however, all eyes will be on England’s number seven. Tim Ambrose will be making his debut in almost as low-key a setting as Test cricket allows. It is almost unanimously agreed that his keeping is a significant improvement upon that of Matt Prior. His batting, previously his weak suit, improved to the point that he averaged 45 in Division One of the championship, as well as 70 in the Friends Provident Trophy, last season. From what I know, Ambrose appears to be the best man for the gloves in the Test side. He has an important role to play as England begin the road to recovery after a dire run of Test form that has seen them win just two of their last eight series.
Friday, 8 February 2008
Mustard and Mascarenhas offer much encouragement
England's tour to New Zealand has begun in the best possible way, with consecutive thrashings - in Twenty20 terms, at least - of the hosts. They will now be confident of winning the two more significant series that await.
There is only so much one can read into two Twenty20 victories against a depleted side, but they were further proof of the fine effect Paul Collingwood is having as skipper of the limited-overs side. They illustrated the extent to which Ryan Sidebottom was missed in the Twenty20 World Cup; he continues to impress, even when, as in the second game, there is no swing. Phil Mustard's 61 runs off 37 balls over the two games showed he can score at the rate required of a pinch-hitter, which Matt Prior never did. However, he still needs some substantial scores in the ODI series to justify England's obsession with trying to replicate Australia in opening with their wicket-keeper. Last domestic season, Mustard averaged 49 opening the batting in 40 and 50-over cricket, which shows he deserves a run in the side there. But Tim Ambrose, batting in the middle-order, was explosive for Warwickshire, averaging almost 70, with two centuries.
The exploits of Dimitri Mascarenhas, who mixed frugal bowling with some characteristically brutal hitting, mean he deserves to retain his place, at seven, for the ODI series, meaning 'golden boys' Ravi Bopara and Luke Wright will have to watch from the sidelines. Alongside Mascarenhas, England's line up should include Collingwood, Swann and Broad, a quartet of three-dimensional cricketers who give England real depth with both bat and ball. These are encouraging times for England's limited-overs side, at least: a third consecutive ODI series win is very much expected, even if Messrs Oram and Vettori return.
There is only so much one can read into two Twenty20 victories against a depleted side, but they were further proof of the fine effect Paul Collingwood is having as skipper of the limited-overs side. They illustrated the extent to which Ryan Sidebottom was missed in the Twenty20 World Cup; he continues to impress, even when, as in the second game, there is no swing. Phil Mustard's 61 runs off 37 balls over the two games showed he can score at the rate required of a pinch-hitter, which Matt Prior never did. However, he still needs some substantial scores in the ODI series to justify England's obsession with trying to replicate Australia in opening with their wicket-keeper. Last domestic season, Mustard averaged 49 opening the batting in 40 and 50-over cricket, which shows he deserves a run in the side there. But Tim Ambrose, batting in the middle-order, was explosive for Warwickshire, averaging almost 70, with two centuries.
The exploits of Dimitri Mascarenhas, who mixed frugal bowling with some characteristically brutal hitting, mean he deserves to retain his place, at seven, for the ODI series, meaning 'golden boys' Ravi Bopara and Luke Wright will have to watch from the sidelines. Alongside Mascarenhas, England's line up should include Collingwood, Swann and Broad, a quartet of three-dimensional cricketers who give England real depth with both bat and ball. These are encouraging times for England's limited-overs side, at least: a third consecutive ODI series win is very much expected, even if Messrs Oram and Vettori return.
Saturday, 5 January 2008
Will you be staying long Colonel?!
The outright exclusion from England’s Test, One Day and Lions squads of Matt Prior was this weeks’ big news. Whilst Prior has shown an aptitude for scoring runs at the highest level, against the highest calibre of bowler, the bread and butter business of taking catches has let him down. Many people worried when Prior was first given the gloves that England had another Geraint Jones on their hands, neither good enough with the bat or the gloves to hold the position of England’s wicket keeper. I personally never doubted his ability to deliver the runs. His showings for the ODI side in Pakistan and India were never a true reflection of his ability. Unfortunately though, Prior is not the best wicket keeper in the country and further more he is not even currently in the top five when it comes to catching the ball.
To begin with though, it seemed as though exposure to International Cricket would bring the best from Prior and it served as a boost to his glove work. His performances in the crucial ODI series victory over India were faultless and a few mistakes in the preceding Test matches were seemingly forgotten and forgiven. However, then injury struck. Phil Mustard took over, but he simply proved the fact that brilliant county form means nothing at International level. Whilst he got starts with the bat against Sri Lanka he was far from the player he is for Durham and that was to be expected. So Prior soon returned for the Test match series in Sri Lanka and performed admirably, along with Ian Bell, in the first Test match, prompting the likes of Sam Lyon, Alec Stewart and Jack Russell, amongst others, to declare the arrival of England’s wicket keeper for the next decade.
Oh how the mighty fall though. Less than one month later and Prior has been jettisoned. Eight drops off of Ryan Sidebottom and crucial misses off of Mahela Jayawardene proved to be too much for England’s selectors. Yet his demotion need not be for good according to David Graveney, who has stated that if Prior can improve his glove work away from the media spotlight, then he can reclaim his place and fulfil his undoubted potential as England’s future wicket keeper batsman. It is unlikely that Prior’s replacement will average 40.14 from 17 Test Innings against West Indies, India and Sri Lanka away. However, they will hopefully hold on to more catches, which is the primary job of the wicket keeper. If they do not make runs though, you can guarantee that England will struggle because of their brittle tail and the wicket keeping debate will return to the discussions between cricket lovers up and down the Land once again.
So Colonel Mustard finds himself able to make the first move on Prior’s old job. He will keep wicket in the ODI’s in New Zealand and should he succeed he should in theory be given a chance in the Test series which follows. If not, then Tim Ambrose, once Prior’s deputy at Sussex, will step into the void and become England’s sixth wicket keeper in the space of a year. Whilst all this is ongoing and the likes of Geraint Jones, Chris Read, Paul Nixon, Prior, Mustard and Ambrose are mulling over their International careers, whether past, present or future, there is one player who goes quietly about his work at Essex, continuing to excel with the gloves and perform well with the bat. He is of course James Foster, once the man in possession, discarded because of injury and now seemingly forgotten about. With every passing wicket keeper, his stock grows. However, until he averages more with the bat on a home ground which is often one of the most conducive to batting in the country, he will it seems remain on the periphery of the England set-ups' radar. One further candidate exists, Steven Davies of Worcestershire. Demotion to Division Two will not help his cause, but the young man will be expected to come of age in the next year or so. Let the merry-go-round continue…
To begin with though, it seemed as though exposure to International Cricket would bring the best from Prior and it served as a boost to his glove work. His performances in the crucial ODI series victory over India were faultless and a few mistakes in the preceding Test matches were seemingly forgotten and forgiven. However, then injury struck. Phil Mustard took over, but he simply proved the fact that brilliant county form means nothing at International level. Whilst he got starts with the bat against Sri Lanka he was far from the player he is for Durham and that was to be expected. So Prior soon returned for the Test match series in Sri Lanka and performed admirably, along with Ian Bell, in the first Test match, prompting the likes of Sam Lyon, Alec Stewart and Jack Russell, amongst others, to declare the arrival of England’s wicket keeper for the next decade.
Oh how the mighty fall though. Less than one month later and Prior has been jettisoned. Eight drops off of Ryan Sidebottom and crucial misses off of Mahela Jayawardene proved to be too much for England’s selectors. Yet his demotion need not be for good according to David Graveney, who has stated that if Prior can improve his glove work away from the media spotlight, then he can reclaim his place and fulfil his undoubted potential as England’s future wicket keeper batsman. It is unlikely that Prior’s replacement will average 40.14 from 17 Test Innings against West Indies, India and Sri Lanka away. However, they will hopefully hold on to more catches, which is the primary job of the wicket keeper. If they do not make runs though, you can guarantee that England will struggle because of their brittle tail and the wicket keeping debate will return to the discussions between cricket lovers up and down the Land once again.
So Colonel Mustard finds himself able to make the first move on Prior’s old job. He will keep wicket in the ODI’s in New Zealand and should he succeed he should in theory be given a chance in the Test series which follows. If not, then Tim Ambrose, once Prior’s deputy at Sussex, will step into the void and become England’s sixth wicket keeper in the space of a year. Whilst all this is ongoing and the likes of Geraint Jones, Chris Read, Paul Nixon, Prior, Mustard and Ambrose are mulling over their International careers, whether past, present or future, there is one player who goes quietly about his work at Essex, continuing to excel with the gloves and perform well with the bat. He is of course James Foster, once the man in possession, discarded because of injury and now seemingly forgotten about. With every passing wicket keeper, his stock grows. However, until he averages more with the bat on a home ground which is often one of the most conducive to batting in the country, he will it seems remain on the periphery of the England set-ups' radar. One further candidate exists, Steven Davies of Worcestershire. Demotion to Division Two will not help his cause, but the young man will be expected to come of age in the next year or so. Let the merry-go-round continue…
Thursday, 18 October 2007
Tonight Matthew - I'm going to be David Graveney
As the Rugby World Cup Final approaches, the minds of those who deal with all things sporting could be forgiven for wandering away from the job in hand. With this in mind, I will save David Graveney and co a hard day at the office by picking the squad for Sri Lanka for them. No need for thanks, David, although tickets for Lords next year wouldn’t go amiss.
I have picked a squad of fifteen. It’s a short tour and players shouldn’t go on tour just to carry the drinks.
Batsmen
Seven batsmen to fill the top six spots in the order. Five of them are no-brainers and have contributed to the most stable middle order that England have had since the days of Gatting, Gower, Lamb and Botham. This means no place for International underachiever Mark Ramprakash. Owais Shah’s performances in One Day cricket indicate that he is becoming comfortable at International level. Andrew Strauss has gone potential England captain to under threat for his place in the squad. He edges out Rob Key on the basis that Strauss has just had his longest break from cricket since joining the England ranks. Mental fatigue looked to be one of Strauss’s problems last season and he has enough behind him to encourage patience from the selectors for one more series.
Wicket-keepers
Matt Prior is the player in possession and despite worries about his abilities with the gloves, he is also the best batsman of England’s wicket-keepers. In the absence of Andrew Flintoff this will be crucial as he may need to bat at 6, if England go with five bowlers. On a short tour, the reserve wicket-keeper is around for cover in case of injury. Therefore, a like-for-like replacement in Tim Ambrose will be taken. This means no place for England’s best wicket-keeper, Chris Read, but having made the decision about running with Prior, he should be given a fair chance.
All-rounders
In the past, bits and pieces players have been picked as pseudo all-rounders. However, in this part no all-rounders have been chosen as there are none, other than Flintoff, who are International class. The rest of the squad has been chose to reflect this. It is likely that England will play with six batsmen and four bowlers. However, Vaughan, Pietersen and Collingwood can expect a fair amount of bowling as support to the main four bowlers. If the team moves to five and five, then Graeme Swann or Stuart Broad will bat at number 7.
Spin Bowlers
As only two will be taken, they pick themselves. This means no place for Adil Rashid, who will spend a more useful time playing cricket with England Lions rather than watching the test team
Pace Bowlers
Only four pace bowlers will be taken and with three likely to play in the test team, all will play at some point during the series. When fit, Matthew Hoggard has been England’s best bowler for the past two years. Ryan Sidebottom and James Anderson showed their progression during the summer and with their experience of the One Day series should give control. The fourth bowler is Stuart Broad who is a different type of bowler and has the ability to bat higher up the order than Chris Tremlett or Steve Harmison, which will be critical in the absence of Flintoff.
Therefore the full squad for the Sri Lanka series is:
Michael Vaughan (Capt)
Alistair Cook
Andrew Strauss
Kevin Pietersen
Ian Bell
Paul Collingwood
Owais Shah
Matthew Prior
Tim Ambrose
Monty Panesar
Graeme Swann
Stuart Broad
Matthew Hoggard
Ryan Sidebottom
James Anderson
I have picked a squad of fifteen. It’s a short tour and players shouldn’t go on tour just to carry the drinks.
Batsmen
Seven batsmen to fill the top six spots in the order. Five of them are no-brainers and have contributed to the most stable middle order that England have had since the days of Gatting, Gower, Lamb and Botham. This means no place for International underachiever Mark Ramprakash. Owais Shah’s performances in One Day cricket indicate that he is becoming comfortable at International level. Andrew Strauss has gone potential England captain to under threat for his place in the squad. He edges out Rob Key on the basis that Strauss has just had his longest break from cricket since joining the England ranks. Mental fatigue looked to be one of Strauss’s problems last season and he has enough behind him to encourage patience from the selectors for one more series.
Wicket-keepers
Matt Prior is the player in possession and despite worries about his abilities with the gloves, he is also the best batsman of England’s wicket-keepers. In the absence of Andrew Flintoff this will be crucial as he may need to bat at 6, if England go with five bowlers. On a short tour, the reserve wicket-keeper is around for cover in case of injury. Therefore, a like-for-like replacement in Tim Ambrose will be taken. This means no place for England’s best wicket-keeper, Chris Read, but having made the decision about running with Prior, he should be given a fair chance.
All-rounders
In the past, bits and pieces players have been picked as pseudo all-rounders. However, in this part no all-rounders have been chosen as there are none, other than Flintoff, who are International class. The rest of the squad has been chose to reflect this. It is likely that England will play with six batsmen and four bowlers. However, Vaughan, Pietersen and Collingwood can expect a fair amount of bowling as support to the main four bowlers. If the team moves to five and five, then Graeme Swann or Stuart Broad will bat at number 7.
Spin Bowlers
As only two will be taken, they pick themselves. This means no place for Adil Rashid, who will spend a more useful time playing cricket with England Lions rather than watching the test team
Pace Bowlers
Only four pace bowlers will be taken and with three likely to play in the test team, all will play at some point during the series. When fit, Matthew Hoggard has been England’s best bowler for the past two years. Ryan Sidebottom and James Anderson showed their progression during the summer and with their experience of the One Day series should give control. The fourth bowler is Stuart Broad who is a different type of bowler and has the ability to bat higher up the order than Chris Tremlett or Steve Harmison, which will be critical in the absence of Flintoff.
Therefore the full squad for the Sri Lanka series is:
Michael Vaughan (Capt)
Alistair Cook
Andrew Strauss
Kevin Pietersen
Ian Bell
Paul Collingwood
Owais Shah
Matthew Prior
Tim Ambrose
Monty Panesar
Graeme Swann
Stuart Broad
Matthew Hoggard
Ryan Sidebottom
James Anderson
Wednesday, 29 August 2007
Prior's big month
These are a crucial few weeks for Matt Prior. After a harrowing two Tests, in which his stock regressed alarmingly, he has had a reasonable start to the one-day series with bat and gloves, taking several fine catches. The trouble is, his impact at the top of the order has been limited to a few breezy cameos ended by rash, injudicious shots.
After 18 ODIs batting in the top order – normally opening – Prior’s average is a meagre 23. Worse, his strike-rate is just 71, hardly Gilchrist-esuqe. On 11 occasions, he has reached 19 but, unlike other aggressive openers, he has yet to play anything like a match-defining innings. Against high-class swing bowling, Prior appears to have problems, as illustrated by a pair of torturous innings against the second new-ball in the Tests.
This, compounded by wicket-keeping that many feel is the wrong side of acceptable at international level, regardless of his batting aptitude, means his place is under real pressure. Tim Ambrose was released from Sussex because, although his wicket-keeping was perceived to be superior to Prior’s, his batting was not as good, yet he has been in brilliant form in all cricket this campaign; in ODIs, he would be an excellent option in the middle order for ODIs and Tests alike. Flavour of the month Phil Mustard’s belligerent hitting for Durham opening the innings would surely be a better option to Prior if the selectors were keen for their keeper to open in limited-overs cricket, while James Foster and Chris Read also have good cases for selection.
But Prior will be granted the next four one-dayers and the Twenty20 World Cup with which to prove he has the batting and keeping ability to thrive at international level. If he fails, his Test place could go too – and he will go down as a man who impressed fleetingly then, like Geraint Jones before him but at a much faster rate, did not deliver sufficiently with bat or gloves.
After 18 ODIs batting in the top order – normally opening – Prior’s average is a meagre 23. Worse, his strike-rate is just 71, hardly Gilchrist-esuqe. On 11 occasions, he has reached 19 but, unlike other aggressive openers, he has yet to play anything like a match-defining innings. Against high-class swing bowling, Prior appears to have problems, as illustrated by a pair of torturous innings against the second new-ball in the Tests.
This, compounded by wicket-keeping that many feel is the wrong side of acceptable at international level, regardless of his batting aptitude, means his place is under real pressure. Tim Ambrose was released from Sussex because, although his wicket-keeping was perceived to be superior to Prior’s, his batting was not as good, yet he has been in brilliant form in all cricket this campaign; in ODIs, he would be an excellent option in the middle order for ODIs and Tests alike. Flavour of the month Phil Mustard’s belligerent hitting for Durham opening the innings would surely be a better option to Prior if the selectors were keen for their keeper to open in limited-overs cricket, while James Foster and Chris Read also have good cases for selection.
But Prior will be granted the next four one-dayers and the Twenty20 World Cup with which to prove he has the batting and keeping ability to thrive at international level. If he fails, his Test place could go too – and he will go down as a man who impressed fleetingly then, like Geraint Jones before him but at a much faster rate, did not deliver sufficiently with bat or gloves.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)