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.
Showing posts with label Alistair Cook. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Alistair Cook. Show all posts
Friday, 1 August 2008
Friday, 30 May 2008
Prior Knowledge
The England ODI side to face New Zealand in one Twenty20 International and five ODI’s is announced later on today. It is rumoured that there is to be a surprise or two. After reviewing the Friends Provident Trophy matches so far this season, I have tried to identify who is deserving of a place in the side.
The first surprise is that Andrew Strauss is being considered for a recall. Whilst Strauss has clearly worked hard to reinvent himself and is deservedly reaping the benefits, there is no doubt that he is not what England need in the ODI arena, especially given the rise of whiz bang cricket and ever higher run rates. Strauss would be best left to focus on Test cricket and constructing solid innings as in the last Test match. He plays best when he isn’t under pressure to score. From this readers could be forgiven for assuming that Alistair Cook would be my pick at the top. Sorry again. Whilst Strauss isn’t going to be taking Cook’s place, somebody else will! Alistair Cook, very much like Strauss, plays best when not under pressure to score. Neither are Marcus Trescothick and playing them in the hope that they one day will be is sheer foolishness. And a Trescothick is exactly what England need up at the top of the order. Cook tried initially, but looked unnatural and kept on getting out attempting to hit over the top. Then he played his way, which brought more runs, but did nothing for the run rate in comparative terms. His first ODI hundred against India at The Rose Bowl was indicative of Cook’s problem. Whilst he did compile a brilliant innings, England could have unleashed the fury much earlier in the match, but Cook was seemingly unable to do so. Indeed, Ian Bell, his partner in crime, was able to do so to a greater extent. Once again England fell short of the mammoth score which they should have made. Of course, it wasn’t a problem in that particular game, but it could well be in the future.
England have also tried to replace Trescothick, most recently with Phil Mustard, who has also taken over the wicket keeping duties, with limited success. Mustard came to prominence during Durham’s run to the Friends Provident Final last season, which ultimately culminated in them winning their first trophy. His exciting brand of cricket was compared to Adam Gilchrist, always the bench mark for a wicket keeper it seems, no matter how unfair. At international level though, and I say this after his limited appearances, he doesn’t appear to be able to convert starts in to the bigger fifties and hundreds which win matches and are the backbone of any limited overs side. His form in domestic cricket this year has also been far from impressive, as those of us with him in our fantasy sides can testify! Jeremy Coney, after his first sighting of Mustard, described him as a leg side bully. It is hard to disagree at times, although he clearly has more to his game than this. Ultimately though, after ten matches, he is averaging 23.30, with only a solitary fifty to his name.
The change which I therefore wish to see and which looks increasingly likely, is the recall of Matt Prior to the ODI side. Whether this be as wicket keeper or not doesn’t really bother me. He clearly has the ability with the bat to cope as a top six batsmen. Whilst he too only averages 22.90 after his return to the side last year, scoring the one fifty, he is without doubt a better batsman than Mustard. He averages 40.14 in Test cricket and is so far the leading scorer in First Class cricket this season, with 473 runs at an average of 67. He has only failed to pass fifty once in fact and in Sussex’s most recent game scored both a hundred and fifty, whilst nobody else was able to even get past forty. His efforts won the game. That record clearly deserves rewarding. What of his wicket keeping though? Well, it is often the unreported facet of the game. Without being there it is hard to judge. Some reports suggest improvement and this would be understandable, away from the scrutiny and pressure of the international arena. In his favour is that he played well as the keeper for England in limited overs cricket and did not make the same volume of mistakes as in Test match cricket, mistakes for which he was rightly dropped. His keeping will need to be at a much higher level before he returns to Test cricket. However, a return to the ODI side will enable him to ease his way back in, set about keeping successfully through fifty overs, rather than two hundred or more over five days.
If Prior is to come in for Mustard, then I may well bat him down the order, where he operates so well for Sussex. He could also open of course, a position he has yet to convince in at international level. Vikram Solanki is the only other real candidate for the opening role, yet he has been in and out of the side over so many years that I doubt he will be selected, despite his excellent limited overs form. My definite opener would be Ian Bell as I feel he is the player England should look to, to bat through the innings. His best ODI innings for my mind was against Australia when he opened. His promotion would allow Kevin Pietersen to bat at number three, where he could better dictate the game for England. This could be the fresh change with Pietersen needs in order to reinvigorate his own game and focus on his strength, being positive. At four would come Owais Shah, as I believe that too much of his ability against spin is lost down at number six, plus England now have better options down the order. Usman Afzaal and Samit Patel could also be in contention for this position in the future, given their impressive allround performances for their counties in the FP Trophy thus far this season.
Five would be the captain, Paul Collingwood, in his familiar role. At six I would have Ravi Bopara who is enjoying a good start to the season. At seven would be Luke Wright (if Prior were to open, it may be worth swapping the two around at some point), as he has so far played his best cricket for England at the death. Eight would be Andrew Flintoff when he returns, until then Dimi Mascarenhas would be a sound choice and the only near replacement which England really have. Nine would be the ever improving Stuart Broad, who looks more at home in the ODI side than the Test team. Ten would be the ever reliable Ryan Sidebottom.
The batting depth of this side would allow England to play Monty Panesar at number eleven should he develop more variety. It can be argued though that he needs the experience of playing in order to develop that variety. His rivals are Graeme Swann, Adil Rahsid and James Tredwell, all of whom could comfortably bat at number nine, or possibly higher if required. For me, building for the next World Cup and given his success against New Zealand thus far, I would choose Panesar, with Rashid as the second spinner.
James Anderson would be the standby seamer and could also play instead of Mascarenhas until Flintoff’s return if deemed necessary. He is still far too inconsistent though and that is why he does not make the final XI. Even in Test match cricket he still bowls a lot of four balls and doesn’t seem to be able to maintain consistent pressure on the batsmen.
I believe that England are working their way towards building a successful and positive limited overs side. The introduction of more positive players has led to an improvement and will continue to do so.
THE XI:
Ian Bell
Matt Prior (wk)
Kevin Pietersen
Owais Shah
Paul Collingwood (c)
Ravi Bopara
Luke Wright
Andrew Flintoff (Mascarenhas)
Stuart Broad
Ryan Sidebottom (Anderson)
Monty Panesar
The Reserves:
James Anderson
Adil Rashid
Dimitri Mascarenhas
Alistair Cook
The first surprise is that Andrew Strauss is being considered for a recall. Whilst Strauss has clearly worked hard to reinvent himself and is deservedly reaping the benefits, there is no doubt that he is not what England need in the ODI arena, especially given the rise of whiz bang cricket and ever higher run rates. Strauss would be best left to focus on Test cricket and constructing solid innings as in the last Test match. He plays best when he isn’t under pressure to score. From this readers could be forgiven for assuming that Alistair Cook would be my pick at the top. Sorry again. Whilst Strauss isn’t going to be taking Cook’s place, somebody else will! Alistair Cook, very much like Strauss, plays best when not under pressure to score. Neither are Marcus Trescothick and playing them in the hope that they one day will be is sheer foolishness. And a Trescothick is exactly what England need up at the top of the order. Cook tried initially, but looked unnatural and kept on getting out attempting to hit over the top. Then he played his way, which brought more runs, but did nothing for the run rate in comparative terms. His first ODI hundred against India at The Rose Bowl was indicative of Cook’s problem. Whilst he did compile a brilliant innings, England could have unleashed the fury much earlier in the match, but Cook was seemingly unable to do so. Indeed, Ian Bell, his partner in crime, was able to do so to a greater extent. Once again England fell short of the mammoth score which they should have made. Of course, it wasn’t a problem in that particular game, but it could well be in the future.
England have also tried to replace Trescothick, most recently with Phil Mustard, who has also taken over the wicket keeping duties, with limited success. Mustard came to prominence during Durham’s run to the Friends Provident Final last season, which ultimately culminated in them winning their first trophy. His exciting brand of cricket was compared to Adam Gilchrist, always the bench mark for a wicket keeper it seems, no matter how unfair. At international level though, and I say this after his limited appearances, he doesn’t appear to be able to convert starts in to the bigger fifties and hundreds which win matches and are the backbone of any limited overs side. His form in domestic cricket this year has also been far from impressive, as those of us with him in our fantasy sides can testify! Jeremy Coney, after his first sighting of Mustard, described him as a leg side bully. It is hard to disagree at times, although he clearly has more to his game than this. Ultimately though, after ten matches, he is averaging 23.30, with only a solitary fifty to his name.
The change which I therefore wish to see and which looks increasingly likely, is the recall of Matt Prior to the ODI side. Whether this be as wicket keeper or not doesn’t really bother me. He clearly has the ability with the bat to cope as a top six batsmen. Whilst he too only averages 22.90 after his return to the side last year, scoring the one fifty, he is without doubt a better batsman than Mustard. He averages 40.14 in Test cricket and is so far the leading scorer in First Class cricket this season, with 473 runs at an average of 67. He has only failed to pass fifty once in fact and in Sussex’s most recent game scored both a hundred and fifty, whilst nobody else was able to even get past forty. His efforts won the game. That record clearly deserves rewarding. What of his wicket keeping though? Well, it is often the unreported facet of the game. Without being there it is hard to judge. Some reports suggest improvement and this would be understandable, away from the scrutiny and pressure of the international arena. In his favour is that he played well as the keeper for England in limited overs cricket and did not make the same volume of mistakes as in Test match cricket, mistakes for which he was rightly dropped. His keeping will need to be at a much higher level before he returns to Test cricket. However, a return to the ODI side will enable him to ease his way back in, set about keeping successfully through fifty overs, rather than two hundred or more over five days.
If Prior is to come in for Mustard, then I may well bat him down the order, where he operates so well for Sussex. He could also open of course, a position he has yet to convince in at international level. Vikram Solanki is the only other real candidate for the opening role, yet he has been in and out of the side over so many years that I doubt he will be selected, despite his excellent limited overs form. My definite opener would be Ian Bell as I feel he is the player England should look to, to bat through the innings. His best ODI innings for my mind was against Australia when he opened. His promotion would allow Kevin Pietersen to bat at number three, where he could better dictate the game for England. This could be the fresh change with Pietersen needs in order to reinvigorate his own game and focus on his strength, being positive. At four would come Owais Shah, as I believe that too much of his ability against spin is lost down at number six, plus England now have better options down the order. Usman Afzaal and Samit Patel could also be in contention for this position in the future, given their impressive allround performances for their counties in the FP Trophy thus far this season.
Five would be the captain, Paul Collingwood, in his familiar role. At six I would have Ravi Bopara who is enjoying a good start to the season. At seven would be Luke Wright (if Prior were to open, it may be worth swapping the two around at some point), as he has so far played his best cricket for England at the death. Eight would be Andrew Flintoff when he returns, until then Dimi Mascarenhas would be a sound choice and the only near replacement which England really have. Nine would be the ever improving Stuart Broad, who looks more at home in the ODI side than the Test team. Ten would be the ever reliable Ryan Sidebottom.
The batting depth of this side would allow England to play Monty Panesar at number eleven should he develop more variety. It can be argued though that he needs the experience of playing in order to develop that variety. His rivals are Graeme Swann, Adil Rahsid and James Tredwell, all of whom could comfortably bat at number nine, or possibly higher if required. For me, building for the next World Cup and given his success against New Zealand thus far, I would choose Panesar, with Rashid as the second spinner.
James Anderson would be the standby seamer and could also play instead of Mascarenhas until Flintoff’s return if deemed necessary. He is still far too inconsistent though and that is why he does not make the final XI. Even in Test match cricket he still bowls a lot of four balls and doesn’t seem to be able to maintain consistent pressure on the batsmen.
I believe that England are working their way towards building a successful and positive limited overs side. The introduction of more positive players has led to an improvement and will continue to do so.
THE XI:
Ian Bell
Matt Prior (wk)
Kevin Pietersen
Owais Shah
Paul Collingwood (c)
Ravi Bopara
Luke Wright
Andrew Flintoff (Mascarenhas)
Stuart Broad
Ryan Sidebottom (Anderson)
Monty Panesar
The Reserves:
James Anderson
Adil Rashid
Dimitri Mascarenhas
Alistair Cook
Tuesday, 15 April 2008
Test XI of 2007-2008
With the batting order already set out, the bowling line up for the statistical side of the year is revealed...
Top 6 Opening Bowlers (Last 12 Months – Minimum 5 Games)
Steyn (SAF) - ave 16.24 / s/r 28.90 / eco 3.36
Lee (AUS) - ave 20.57 / s/r 42.2 / eco 2.92
Sidebottom (ENG) - ave 25.39 / s/r 54.10 / eco 2.81
Vaas (SRL) - ave 25.50 / s/r 54.10 / eco 2.82
Zhan (IND) - ave 25.52 / s/r 48.50 / eco 3.15
Martin (NZL) - ave 26.90 / s/r 51.80 / eco 3.11
Top 3 First Change Bowlers (Last 12 Months – Minimum 5 Games)
Clark (AUS) - ave 31.00 / s/r 64.00 / eco 2.90
M. Morkel (SAF) - ave 31.35 / s/r 50.90 / eco 3.69
R.P. Singh (IND) - ave 39.32 / s/r 58.30 / eco 4.04
(Chris Tremlett (ENG) (ave 29.69 / s/r 66.00 / eco 2.69) was the best performing first change bowler of the year, but only played three matches versus India)
Top 3 Spinners (Last 12 Months – Minimum 5 Games)
Muralitharan (SRL) - ave 24.39 / s/r 54.50 / eco 2.68
Panesar (ENG) - ave 31.40 / s/r 63.80 / eco 2.95
Harris (SAF) - ave 31.66 / s/r 54.5 / eco 2.62
So the Test XI of 2007-2008, as indicated by the statistics, is as follows:
Virender Sehwag (IND)
Neil McKenzie (SAF)
Kumar Sangakkara (SRL)
Mahela Jayawardene (c) (SRL)
Shivnarine Chanderpaul (WIN)
Andrew Symonds (AUS)
Kamran Akmal (wk) (PAK)
Brett Lee (AUS)
Stuart Clark (AUS)
Dale Steyn (SAF)
Muttiah Muralitharan (SRL)
Some Thoughts...
The immediately striking feature of this list is that it contains not one single England player. Furthermore, only Alistair Cook made it into the top three for any one position in the batting line up. On the bowling front both Ryan Sidebottom (who but for many a dropped catch would have been in the XI) and Monty Panesar put in good showings. Furthermore, both Chris Tremlett and Stuart Broad would have figured were it not for their lack of games over the past twelve months. This indicates well where England's problems, the batting line up should be under careful scrutiny over the coming months.
The wicket keeping situation is of particular interest also. The three leading run scoring wicket keepers are not the three best wicket keepers in terms of dismissals. Whilst the number of chances created, types of chances created and type of bowler kept to obviously effect these statistics, it is still an interesting point. Most cricket fans would take Gilchrist or McCullum over Akmal, Prior or Dhoni.
Neil McKenzie and Virender Sehwag have obviously benefitted from flat tracks this past year, with a double hundred and triple hundred scored by each respecitively on the same placid wicket. However, this is a statistical XI and to have compiled such vast innings takes huge amounts of concentration, desire and skill. Matthew Hayden and Younus Khan meanwhile would have pipped McKenzie and Kumar Sangakkara, were it not for the latter two's cash-in games against Bangladesh.
Mahela Jayawardene (even discounting games against Bangladesh) and Shivnarine Chanderpaul were the stand out batsmen of the year. Both of them taumented England at different stages in the year and have shown an aptitude for not giving their wickets away. They are two batsmen deserving of the utmost respect and it would have beeen interesting to see how they would have performed in the Australian side over the past decade.
Andrew Symonds has emerged as an integral cog in the Australian middle order. For the purposes of this review only his batting was considered, but he did also boast an average of 25.27 and strike rate of 55.60 with the ball in the last twelve months. When put together with his superbly athletic fielding, he is a formidable package indeed, being able to bowl both accurate and swinging medium pace and off-spinners as well.
Dale Steyn's figures meanwhile deserve a remark. To take 78 wickets in 12 months is remarkable, even if 14 of those came in Bangladesh. He is a frightening prospect who appears to be realising his potential and the upcoming tours of England and Australia will show just how good he, and team mate Morne Morkel, are.
The final comment must be about the spin bowling department. There is no surprise about the leader here, but some concerning second and third. Both England and South Africa have notoriously been missing a quality spinner for well in excess of a decade. Monty Panesar and Paul Harris share much in common. They are out and out spin bowlers and do not pretend to be multi-faceted cricketers, although they do work hard. They have both done well to come in well ahead of Daniel Vettori, Harbajhan Singh and Danish Kaneria, although Anil Kumble was close (ave 32.68 / s/r 61.50/ eco 3.18). Meanwhile, the Australian spin bowling duo of Stuart MacGill and Brad Hogg, did not manage to average below 60 with the ball. The Australian seamers have so far been good enough to make up for this failing, but will that continue? We shall have to wait and see.
Top 6 Opening Bowlers (Last 12 Months – Minimum 5 Games)
Steyn (SAF) - ave 16.24 / s/r 28.90 / eco 3.36
Lee (AUS) - ave 20.57 / s/r 42.2 / eco 2.92
Sidebottom (ENG) - ave 25.39 / s/r 54.10 / eco 2.81
Vaas (SRL) - ave 25.50 / s/r 54.10 / eco 2.82
Zhan (IND) - ave 25.52 / s/r 48.50 / eco 3.15
Martin (NZL) - ave 26.90 / s/r 51.80 / eco 3.11
Top 3 First Change Bowlers (Last 12 Months – Minimum 5 Games)
Clark (AUS) - ave 31.00 / s/r 64.00 / eco 2.90
M. Morkel (SAF) - ave 31.35 / s/r 50.90 / eco 3.69
R.P. Singh (IND) - ave 39.32 / s/r 58.30 / eco 4.04
(Chris Tremlett (ENG) (ave 29.69 / s/r 66.00 / eco 2.69) was the best performing first change bowler of the year, but only played three matches versus India)
Top 3 Spinners (Last 12 Months – Minimum 5 Games)
Muralitharan (SRL) - ave 24.39 / s/r 54.50 / eco 2.68
Panesar (ENG) - ave 31.40 / s/r 63.80 / eco 2.95
Harris (SAF) - ave 31.66 / s/r 54.5 / eco 2.62
So the Test XI of 2007-2008, as indicated by the statistics, is as follows:
Virender Sehwag (IND)
Neil McKenzie (SAF)
Kumar Sangakkara (SRL)
Mahela Jayawardene (c) (SRL)
Shivnarine Chanderpaul (WIN)
Andrew Symonds (AUS)
Kamran Akmal (wk) (PAK)
Brett Lee (AUS)
Stuart Clark (AUS)
Dale Steyn (SAF)
Muttiah Muralitharan (SRL)
Some Thoughts...
The immediately striking feature of this list is that it contains not one single England player. Furthermore, only Alistair Cook made it into the top three for any one position in the batting line up. On the bowling front both Ryan Sidebottom (who but for many a dropped catch would have been in the XI) and Monty Panesar put in good showings. Furthermore, both Chris Tremlett and Stuart Broad would have figured were it not for their lack of games over the past twelve months. This indicates well where England's problems, the batting line up should be under careful scrutiny over the coming months.
The wicket keeping situation is of particular interest also. The three leading run scoring wicket keepers are not the three best wicket keepers in terms of dismissals. Whilst the number of chances created, types of chances created and type of bowler kept to obviously effect these statistics, it is still an interesting point. Most cricket fans would take Gilchrist or McCullum over Akmal, Prior or Dhoni.
Neil McKenzie and Virender Sehwag have obviously benefitted from flat tracks this past year, with a double hundred and triple hundred scored by each respecitively on the same placid wicket. However, this is a statistical XI and to have compiled such vast innings takes huge amounts of concentration, desire and skill. Matthew Hayden and Younus Khan meanwhile would have pipped McKenzie and Kumar Sangakkara, were it not for the latter two's cash-in games against Bangladesh.
Mahela Jayawardene (even discounting games against Bangladesh) and Shivnarine Chanderpaul were the stand out batsmen of the year. Both of them taumented England at different stages in the year and have shown an aptitude for not giving their wickets away. They are two batsmen deserving of the utmost respect and it would have beeen interesting to see how they would have performed in the Australian side over the past decade.
Andrew Symonds has emerged as an integral cog in the Australian middle order. For the purposes of this review only his batting was considered, but he did also boast an average of 25.27 and strike rate of 55.60 with the ball in the last twelve months. When put together with his superbly athletic fielding, he is a formidable package indeed, being able to bowl both accurate and swinging medium pace and off-spinners as well.
Dale Steyn's figures meanwhile deserve a remark. To take 78 wickets in 12 months is remarkable, even if 14 of those came in Bangladesh. He is a frightening prospect who appears to be realising his potential and the upcoming tours of England and Australia will show just how good he, and team mate Morne Morkel, are.
The final comment must be about the spin bowling department. There is no surprise about the leader here, but some concerning second and third. Both England and South Africa have notoriously been missing a quality spinner for well in excess of a decade. Monty Panesar and Paul Harris share much in common. They are out and out spin bowlers and do not pretend to be multi-faceted cricketers, although they do work hard. They have both done well to come in well ahead of Daniel Vettori, Harbajhan Singh and Danish Kaneria, although Anil Kumble was close (ave 32.68 / s/r 61.50/ eco 3.18). Meanwhile, the Australian spin bowling duo of Stuart MacGill and Brad Hogg, did not manage to average below 60 with the ball. The Australian seamers have so far been good enough to make up for this failing, but will that continue? We shall have to wait and see.
Tuesday, 22 May 2007
What next for topsy-turvy England?
Rarely can an England team have given such an uneven performance. Six players made it onto the Lords honours board, five are probably now wishing they hadn't bothered. As the team is selected for the next test today, what are the options ahead of the Selectors, and should they be held responsible for the previous selection?
The Successful six
Alistair Cook - He has started the season on form and scoring runs for fun. A brilliant century given the bowler friendly conditions in which he started, albeit against some pretty wayward bowling. Safe from the impact of the returning stars now and will look to make up for his disappointing Ashes series
Kevin Pietersen - Admitted to still being in One Day mode in the first innings, his second inning century was a masterclass in accelarating an innings. He seemed to slip back into One Day mode towards the end of the innings, getting out to an ugly reverse sweep. His "confrontation" with Chris Gayle was another highlight!
Paul Collingwood - They say there's no such thing as a bad century, but this got pretty close to it. Being dropped twice is one thing. The fact that they were both absolute sitters is another. He should also have been given out early in the innings, when umpire Rauf gave his one bad decision of the game. Still, if you're given a chance, then you have to capitalise, and he did that. One blinding catch in the slips and probably England's best seam bowler.
Ian Bell - Another match in England and another ton. That's four in the last five home games, the missing match being the abandoned game against Pakistan. As steady and chanceless as always, he allowed Prior to play his shots, while he just calmly moved along. He is still touted as the one to make way should Flintoff come back.
Matt Prior - What a debut! The batting was brutal, although the other batsmen had taken the pressure off somewhat. In particular, 21 off 9 balls int he second innings gave some impetus that only hte weather could take away. However, it was the keeping that was most impressive. Certainly tested by Harmison and Plunkett, he was tidy and in the end unlucky to concede the four byes that he did, as Monty fired one down the leg side and through the rough. My Man of the Match, and we won't be talking about the wicket-keeping position again for a little while.
Monty Panesar - His best bowling figures, thanks largely to some decent umpiring and wonderful control rather than outrageous turn. It's a good job he showed up otherwise the West Indies innings could have gone on until Christmas.
The Flawed Five
Andrew Strauss - This is beginning to get worrying for Strauss. Two starts and two loose shots while nicely set. This started in the winter, with freak dismissals and unfortunate umpiring decisions. However, it is now becoming a habit and he needs a big score and soon.
Owais Shah - Back to county crisket for a bit I fear. He didn't look comfortable in either of his brief innings, one glorious cover drive apart, despite having played at Lords all his life. He should now be left out to accomodate Michael Vaughan. He'll be back, hopefully via the One Day team where he should cement his place and gain some confidence at International cricket.
Matthew Hoggard - If ever we needed a fit firing Hoggy, this was the game. Unfortuantely injured after ten overs and that was it. The world's best bowler at left handers, if he'd have stayed fit, the chances of the West Indies avoiding the follow on would have been greatly reduced.
Liam Plunkett - In his defence, he's probably not played at Lords much and he seemed to struggle with the slope. Howeve, for someone who periodically shows himself to be an International class bowler, this was another huge step backwards. England have to understand what they need from him. Plunkett needs to understand discipline.
Steve Harmison - The top wicket taker in county cricket this season, bowling at a place where he takes wickets regularly (Lords was his only Five-fer in the Ashes series 2005) against the team that he made his reputation. What could possibly go wrong? And who could blame the selectors for picking him? Unfortunately, pretty much everything and everyone. He doesn't do himself any favours either by claiming he "has nothing to prove" or that he was pretty pleased with the way he bowled on Saturday. Hoggard's injury could give Harmison and Plunkett another chance, but the selectors must be praying that Simon Jones, Stuart Broad and Freddie are available sooner rather than later.
The second test
Michael Vaughan should rightly return as captain. He looked in pretty good nick for Yorkshire against Hampshire before breaking his finger and Owais Shah's scratchy performance shouldn't give the selectors a head-ache.
Andrew Flintoff should only return if able to replace a bowler. Paul Collingwood's performance with the ball shows that he can be trusted in the fifth bowler role and Flintoff's batting of late shows that he can only be seen as a bowler who can bat rather than the true all-rounder he was a couple of years ago. If he is fit, he would replace Plunkett in my team. Harmison survives on the basis of his county form this season, but he is certainly drinking in the last chance saloon.
James Anderson should come in as a direct replacement for Matthew Hoggard. He bowled well with little support in the World Cup and deserves another chance.
The Successful six
Alistair Cook - He has started the season on form and scoring runs for fun. A brilliant century given the bowler friendly conditions in which he started, albeit against some pretty wayward bowling. Safe from the impact of the returning stars now and will look to make up for his disappointing Ashes series
Kevin Pietersen - Admitted to still being in One Day mode in the first innings, his second inning century was a masterclass in accelarating an innings. He seemed to slip back into One Day mode towards the end of the innings, getting out to an ugly reverse sweep. His "confrontation" with Chris Gayle was another highlight!
Paul Collingwood - They say there's no such thing as a bad century, but this got pretty close to it. Being dropped twice is one thing. The fact that they were both absolute sitters is another. He should also have been given out early in the innings, when umpire Rauf gave his one bad decision of the game. Still, if you're given a chance, then you have to capitalise, and he did that. One blinding catch in the slips and probably England's best seam bowler.
Ian Bell - Another match in England and another ton. That's four in the last five home games, the missing match being the abandoned game against Pakistan. As steady and chanceless as always, he allowed Prior to play his shots, while he just calmly moved along. He is still touted as the one to make way should Flintoff come back.
Matt Prior - What a debut! The batting was brutal, although the other batsmen had taken the pressure off somewhat. In particular, 21 off 9 balls int he second innings gave some impetus that only hte weather could take away. However, it was the keeping that was most impressive. Certainly tested by Harmison and Plunkett, he was tidy and in the end unlucky to concede the four byes that he did, as Monty fired one down the leg side and through the rough. My Man of the Match, and we won't be talking about the wicket-keeping position again for a little while.
Monty Panesar - His best bowling figures, thanks largely to some decent umpiring and wonderful control rather than outrageous turn. It's a good job he showed up otherwise the West Indies innings could have gone on until Christmas.
The Flawed Five
Andrew Strauss - This is beginning to get worrying for Strauss. Two starts and two loose shots while nicely set. This started in the winter, with freak dismissals and unfortunate umpiring decisions. However, it is now becoming a habit and he needs a big score and soon.
Owais Shah - Back to county crisket for a bit I fear. He didn't look comfortable in either of his brief innings, one glorious cover drive apart, despite having played at Lords all his life. He should now be left out to accomodate Michael Vaughan. He'll be back, hopefully via the One Day team where he should cement his place and gain some confidence at International cricket.
Matthew Hoggard - If ever we needed a fit firing Hoggy, this was the game. Unfortuantely injured after ten overs and that was it. The world's best bowler at left handers, if he'd have stayed fit, the chances of the West Indies avoiding the follow on would have been greatly reduced.
Liam Plunkett - In his defence, he's probably not played at Lords much and he seemed to struggle with the slope. Howeve, for someone who periodically shows himself to be an International class bowler, this was another huge step backwards. England have to understand what they need from him. Plunkett needs to understand discipline.
Steve Harmison - The top wicket taker in county cricket this season, bowling at a place where he takes wickets regularly (Lords was his only Five-fer in the Ashes series 2005) against the team that he made his reputation. What could possibly go wrong? And who could blame the selectors for picking him? Unfortunately, pretty much everything and everyone. He doesn't do himself any favours either by claiming he "has nothing to prove" or that he was pretty pleased with the way he bowled on Saturday. Hoggard's injury could give Harmison and Plunkett another chance, but the selectors must be praying that Simon Jones, Stuart Broad and Freddie are available sooner rather than later.
The second test
Michael Vaughan should rightly return as captain. He looked in pretty good nick for Yorkshire against Hampshire before breaking his finger and Owais Shah's scratchy performance shouldn't give the selectors a head-ache.
Andrew Flintoff should only return if able to replace a bowler. Paul Collingwood's performance with the ball shows that he can be trusted in the fifth bowler role and Flintoff's batting of late shows that he can only be seen as a bowler who can bat rather than the true all-rounder he was a couple of years ago. If he is fit, he would replace Plunkett in my team. Harmison survives on the basis of his county form this season, but he is certainly drinking in the last chance saloon.
James Anderson should come in as a direct replacement for Matthew Hoggard. He bowled well with little support in the World Cup and deserves another chance.
Monday, 23 April 2007
Championship Tails – Week 1
While England finally show some decent form in the World Cup, albeit a match too late, the domestic season has got off to a bang. In unusually warm weather for the start of the season, there were runs galore and some highly impressive performances.
Division 1
Parochial, I know, but I’m going to start with Yorkshire’s win over Surrey. Runs galore in the first three innings, with Rudolph, Bresnan, Gillespie, Newman, Ramprakash (of course!) and White all hitting tons. However, Yorkshire’s bowling was the difference, with Rashid, Gough and Hoggard proving too much for Surrey to handle and the Tykes ran out comfortable winners.
Sussex also took maximum points as Mushtaq started where he left off last season with ten wickets against Kent. The Sussex batting relied heavily on Richard Montgomerie’s 175, with Naved and Kirtley also chipping in with useful 50s.
The other winners were Durham, where Steve Harmison took eight wickets as Worcester were put to the sword. Hundreds for Di Venuto in the first innings and Blenkenstein in the second, whereas the Worcester batting was disappointing, with only Jacques showing much resistance.
The match between Warwickshire and Lancashire ended in a draw. Warwicks started on top, with Loudon and Troughton scoring hundreds, Sutton doing the same in reply as Lancs were 150 runs behind on first innings. Tight bowing in the Warwicks second inning meant that the didn’t leave enough time to worry Lance, for whom Mal Loye hit a hundred as the match petered out.
Division 2
Notts were the only winners, against Leicestershire, on the back of a great all round bowling performance and centuries for Gallian and Hussey. Only Ackerman offered much resistance as Notts got home by nine wickets.
Runs galore at Taunton, with Middlesex declaring on 600 for 4 (hundreds for Shah, Godleman and Nash). Somerset then made 850 for 7 (another triple hundred for Langer, with tons for Hildeth, White and Trego). Middlesex saw the game out with little fuss (and a hundred for Ed Smith). It could be a hard year for the Somerset bowlers at home, for whom Andy Caddick has signed a contract extension – he may be regretting that if they don’t get a bit more life into the pitch.
A high scoring draw at Chelmsford too, where Derbyshire were on top for most of the game. Hundreds for Harvey, Pipe and Cook, but the declaration didn’t leave enough time for a result and Essex secured a comfortable draw.
England Players
With the World Cup on, there are a few England contenders on show.
On the batting side, Ali Cook hit another century for Essex, while Owais Shah scored had two good innings, 193 and 72 not out on a batsman’s paradise at Taunton. Relatively speaking, Marcus Trescothick should be disappointed in “only” getting 70.
On the wicket-keeping side, Chris Read was run out in the 30s in his only innings, gaining ground on Matt Prior, who scored 14 and Steve Davies who got 14 and 6, but losing out to James Foster who scored 61. Geraint Jones (if he is still a contender) was out in single figures in both innings.
The bowling does look promising, with Hoggard and Harmison both bowling aggressively and getting wickets. Coming on the back off his performance in the Sussex-MCC match, stories about the demise of Steve Harmison may have been premature.
Player of the Week
Sorry, but it’s a Yorkie. Some great batting performances this week, but the award goes to an all-round performance. For scoring 86 (in a stand of 190 with Jacques Rudolph) and taking seven wickets, my first player of the week is Adil Rashid.
Division 1
Parochial, I know, but I’m going to start with Yorkshire’s win over Surrey. Runs galore in the first three innings, with Rudolph, Bresnan, Gillespie, Newman, Ramprakash (of course!) and White all hitting tons. However, Yorkshire’s bowling was the difference, with Rashid, Gough and Hoggard proving too much for Surrey to handle and the Tykes ran out comfortable winners.
Sussex also took maximum points as Mushtaq started where he left off last season with ten wickets against Kent. The Sussex batting relied heavily on Richard Montgomerie’s 175, with Naved and Kirtley also chipping in with useful 50s.
The other winners were Durham, where Steve Harmison took eight wickets as Worcester were put to the sword. Hundreds for Di Venuto in the first innings and Blenkenstein in the second, whereas the Worcester batting was disappointing, with only Jacques showing much resistance.
The match between Warwickshire and Lancashire ended in a draw. Warwicks started on top, with Loudon and Troughton scoring hundreds, Sutton doing the same in reply as Lancs were 150 runs behind on first innings. Tight bowing in the Warwicks second inning meant that the didn’t leave enough time to worry Lance, for whom Mal Loye hit a hundred as the match petered out.
Division 2
Notts were the only winners, against Leicestershire, on the back of a great all round bowling performance and centuries for Gallian and Hussey. Only Ackerman offered much resistance as Notts got home by nine wickets.
Runs galore at Taunton, with Middlesex declaring on 600 for 4 (hundreds for Shah, Godleman and Nash). Somerset then made 850 for 7 (another triple hundred for Langer, with tons for Hildeth, White and Trego). Middlesex saw the game out with little fuss (and a hundred for Ed Smith). It could be a hard year for the Somerset bowlers at home, for whom Andy Caddick has signed a contract extension – he may be regretting that if they don’t get a bit more life into the pitch.
A high scoring draw at Chelmsford too, where Derbyshire were on top for most of the game. Hundreds for Harvey, Pipe and Cook, but the declaration didn’t leave enough time for a result and Essex secured a comfortable draw.
England Players
With the World Cup on, there are a few England contenders on show.
On the batting side, Ali Cook hit another century for Essex, while Owais Shah scored had two good innings, 193 and 72 not out on a batsman’s paradise at Taunton. Relatively speaking, Marcus Trescothick should be disappointed in “only” getting 70.
On the wicket-keeping side, Chris Read was run out in the 30s in his only innings, gaining ground on Matt Prior, who scored 14 and Steve Davies who got 14 and 6, but losing out to James Foster who scored 61. Geraint Jones (if he is still a contender) was out in single figures in both innings.
The bowling does look promising, with Hoggard and Harmison both bowling aggressively and getting wickets. Coming on the back off his performance in the Sussex-MCC match, stories about the demise of Steve Harmison may have been premature.
Player of the Week
Sorry, but it’s a Yorkie. Some great batting performances this week, but the award goes to an all-round performance. For scoring 86 (in a stand of 190 with Jacques Rudolph) and taking seven wickets, my first player of the week is Adil Rashid.
Monday, 18 December 2006
Does 2009 start here?
Well that's just great isn't it?
For the 1,000s of us packing our shorts and suncream, ready to jet off this week to the other side of the world, the scoreline we have dreaded has come about. 3-0 down with 2 to play.
Little to play for except pride and a pathetic rebuttal of the Aussie taunts from the Immigration Official and the girl in the sandwich bar.
So what does the future hold, both for Melbourne and Sydney, and for the next few years?
Before that, let's get one thing straight, this Australian side is one of the finest Test teams ever, and in Warne, McGrath and Ponting, they really do have 3 of the all time greats. One day, we will all look back and be proud to say we saw them play.
But what of England?
Let's start with the positives. Cook looks as though he's there for the long haul. Bell is a much better player for the experience of the last year. Pietersen is more than the show pony many feared he was. Collingwood won't let anyone down. Hoggard is a captain's dream with the new ball. Panesar has justified his popular choice as first choice spinner. And well...
Strauss holds his own for now on the basis of some lousy decisions received. Harmison will surely come again.
The negatives? By common consent, the nonsense of Geraint Jones being picked on the basis of being a No.7 batsman is over. Chris Read take your chance. If you don't Jamie Foster will. It's also goodbye and thanks to Ashley Giles.
Also looking over their shoulders will be Mahmood and Anderson, with Plunkett also having much to prove.
Perhaps then the 4th and 5th Tests can form the start of what we may see in 2009 at Edgbaston, Lord's, Sophia Gardens, Headingley and the Oval.
Firstly, if Michael Vaughan is fit, and he's told Boycott he is, what are we waiting for? Either he's our captain or not. Surely now is the time for him to come back. After all, he's there with the squad.
Secondly, if Flintoff's ankle is "f'd" as he reportedly said to a journalist, then get him home and sorted. If he needs a year out, so be it. He is no captain anyway, and if Vaughan isn't quite ready, then Strauss can pick up from where he left off in the summer.
Thirdly, we are simply a batsman light and a bowler top heavy. We have capable 'filler in' bowlers for the odd over before lunch and tea in Pietersen (underrated), Bell and Collingwood.
Basically, what I am saying is that we need to think about who's in the plan and who's not.
I have a vision of team for Ashes 2009 which is like this:
Cook
Strauss
Vaughan (we hope)
Pietersen
Bell
Collingwood
Flintoff
Read
Panesar
Hoggard
Broad.
Clearly, circumstances will dictate whether Harmison lasts the pace, whether Simon Jones will makes it back, and if Trescothick is seen again (I doubt it). Also, don't forget that we won't see McGrath over here again nor Mr Warne (or will we?)
But for now, some of us have Boxing Day to contend with, and, before then, that blasted Immigration Official.
For the 1,000s of us packing our shorts and suncream, ready to jet off this week to the other side of the world, the scoreline we have dreaded has come about. 3-0 down with 2 to play.
Little to play for except pride and a pathetic rebuttal of the Aussie taunts from the Immigration Official and the girl in the sandwich bar.
So what does the future hold, both for Melbourne and Sydney, and for the next few years?
Before that, let's get one thing straight, this Australian side is one of the finest Test teams ever, and in Warne, McGrath and Ponting, they really do have 3 of the all time greats. One day, we will all look back and be proud to say we saw them play.
But what of England?
Let's start with the positives. Cook looks as though he's there for the long haul. Bell is a much better player for the experience of the last year. Pietersen is more than the show pony many feared he was. Collingwood won't let anyone down. Hoggard is a captain's dream with the new ball. Panesar has justified his popular choice as first choice spinner. And well...
Strauss holds his own for now on the basis of some lousy decisions received. Harmison will surely come again.
The negatives? By common consent, the nonsense of Geraint Jones being picked on the basis of being a No.7 batsman is over. Chris Read take your chance. If you don't Jamie Foster will. It's also goodbye and thanks to Ashley Giles.
Also looking over their shoulders will be Mahmood and Anderson, with Plunkett also having much to prove.
Perhaps then the 4th and 5th Tests can form the start of what we may see in 2009 at Edgbaston, Lord's, Sophia Gardens, Headingley and the Oval.
Firstly, if Michael Vaughan is fit, and he's told Boycott he is, what are we waiting for? Either he's our captain or not. Surely now is the time for him to come back. After all, he's there with the squad.
Secondly, if Flintoff's ankle is "f'd" as he reportedly said to a journalist, then get him home and sorted. If he needs a year out, so be it. He is no captain anyway, and if Vaughan isn't quite ready, then Strauss can pick up from where he left off in the summer.
Thirdly, we are simply a batsman light and a bowler top heavy. We have capable 'filler in' bowlers for the odd over before lunch and tea in Pietersen (underrated), Bell and Collingwood.
Basically, what I am saying is that we need to think about who's in the plan and who's not.
I have a vision of team for Ashes 2009 which is like this:
Cook
Strauss
Vaughan (we hope)
Pietersen
Bell
Collingwood
Flintoff
Read
Panesar
Hoggard
Broad.
Clearly, circumstances will dictate whether Harmison lasts the pace, whether Simon Jones will makes it back, and if Trescothick is seen again (I doubt it). Also, don't forget that we won't see McGrath over here again nor Mr Warne (or will we?)
But for now, some of us have Boxing Day to contend with, and, before then, that blasted Immigration Official.
Lack of batting experience telling
Post-mortem (1): England's batsmen
In 2005, Marcus Trescothick and Andrew Strauss consistently got the innings of to a fine start, invariably attacking from the off. A top three consisting of Strauss, Cook and Bell were always going to seek to give England the advantage by batting time; but they have palpably failed to do that. Until their sixth innings of the series, England were always 50-2, or worse. As a result, the attacking axis at five, six and seven regularly came in with England struggling. Kevin Pietersen has majestically risen to the task, but Andrew Flintoff has seemed overburdened and Geraint Jones feeble.
Alistair Cook is a player of palpable quality, but he inevitably found an Ashes tour at 21 highly-challenging; however, his 116 at the WACA proves his worth and he will only improve. Andrew Strauss, thanks to some injudicious strokeplay and a trio of poor umpiring decisions, has failed to pass 50, although he has always appeared in fine form. Ian Bell has hit three fifties, displaying an increasing maturity and confidence, especially against Shane Warne, though his wait for an Ashes hundred continues.
Of 18 completed innings, England’s top three have only twice passed 60. Experience of Australian conditions, be it in the shape of the stylish batsmanship of Michael Vaughan, the technical class of Mark Ramprakash or the resilient qualities of Mark Butcher, has been badly missing; however, I do not think Trescothick's withdrawal was hugely significant. Given the ineffectualness of England’s fifth bowler, hindsight tells us that one of Butcher or Ramprakash should have played at three, Bell should have been moved to six, where he was so excellent against Pakistan, and Flintoff should have played at seven.
Paul Collingwood has displayed fighting qualities reminiscent of Butcher, and exceeded all expectations in making 200 at Adelaide. Nonetheless, the suspicion remains that the finest player, Pietersen, should be allowed to bat at four. Many were worried Pietersen would be unable to control his impetuosity, and would regularly be caught trying to hit sixes on the huge Australian outfields; instead, he has batted with wonderfully maturity and got the better of Warne and especially McGrath.
At six, Flintoff’s batting has been characterised by a lack of coherent thinking; until his second innings at the WACA, he was too tentative but was still dismissed to rash shots; it seems the captaincy has overwhelmed him. There was a time when he and Pietersen were considered roughly equal as batsmen; while Pietersen is fulfilling his talent, it touches the confines of lunacy to suggest Flintoff would even be considered as a batsman only – which proves he should not bat in the top six. His friend Jones has been reasonable with the gloves, but calamitous with the bat. He seems incapable of playing long, disciplined innings, and he should not be selected for England again.
There are a number of positives to take from England’s batting endeavours – Pietersen’s brilliance, Collingwood’s feistiness and genuine fight and application from Cook and Bell on occasions. Yet, they suffered one cataclysmic collapse in each Test and, from six onwards, the resistance was negligible. Duncan Fletcher, then, was right to be concerned about England’s tail. So why did he select non-bowling number eights Giles and Mahmood ahead of a sixth specialist batsman?
Sunday, 17 December 2006
Cook shows he is not Ian Bell 2005 Mark 2
A lot has been said about Alastair Cook being Ian Bell 2005 Mark 2. After a highly difficult opening half to the series, the 21-year-old displayed courage, patience and no little skill in battling to a superb maiden Ashes hundred. The great shame, however, was Glenn McGrath getting him in the third last over of the day. Inevitably, the decision to utilise Matthew Hoggard as a night watchman backfired, leaving England five wickets down overnight.
Cook’s 116 encapsulated the courage and determination necessary to save Tests, an art seemingly lost in this era of gung-ho batting. His century was his 4th, the highest number ever by an Englishman prior to turning 22. He had huge trouble against Shane Warne, but his patience and willingness to play within his limitations, aided by his phlegmatic character, saw him to a fantastic ton.
One silver lining in the wake of Marcus Trescothick’s tumultuous exit from the tour was seen as being the presence of Cook, better against seam than spin, at the top of the order. In fact, Cook has had problems dealing with balls angled across him from McGrath and especially the excellent Stuart Clark. But Cook, whose Test average now sits at 49, certainly proved today that the initial hope will prove justified.
His partnership with Ian Bell, who brought the authority and confidence he displayed against Pakistan in the summer, left Australia largely clueless as to how to take wickets. Such a shame, then, that overconfidence overcame Bell before reaching a deserved first Ashes hundred. He has made five fifties against Australia; but, alas, still no hundred.
Cook now has, and the duo will surely be invaluable at the top of the order for years to come. But, with both dismissed, it will fall on the less attritional skills of Kevin Pietersen and the chronically out-of-form Andrew Flintoff to keep England in this series.
Cook’s 116 encapsulated the courage and determination necessary to save Tests, an art seemingly lost in this era of gung-ho batting. His century was his 4th, the highest number ever by an Englishman prior to turning 22. He had huge trouble against Shane Warne, but his patience and willingness to play within his limitations, aided by his phlegmatic character, saw him to a fantastic ton.
One silver lining in the wake of Marcus Trescothick’s tumultuous exit from the tour was seen as being the presence of Cook, better against seam than spin, at the top of the order. In fact, Cook has had problems dealing with balls angled across him from McGrath and especially the excellent Stuart Clark. But Cook, whose Test average now sits at 49, certainly proved today that the initial hope will prove justified.
His partnership with Ian Bell, who brought the authority and confidence he displayed against Pakistan in the summer, left Australia largely clueless as to how to take wickets. Such a shame, then, that overconfidence overcame Bell before reaching a deserved first Ashes hundred. He has made five fifties against Australia; but, alas, still no hundred.
Cook now has, and the duo will surely be invaluable at the top of the order for years to come. But, with both dismissed, it will fall on the less attritional skills of Kevin Pietersen and the chronically out-of-form Andrew Flintoff to keep England in this series.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)