Stubbornness to cost the domestic game once again?

After every defeat for the English cricket team the papers are full of boring old cliches asking how the country that invented the game can be so poor at it.

The English summer sport has been taken and perfected by the other Test playing nations.
Sadly it seems this ability to invent but not innovate is stifling the English game once more as officials struggle to deal with the future of another English invention - Twenty/20 cricket.

English county sides look set to miss out on the lucrative Champions League after IPL commissioner Lalit Modi refused to change the dates of the tournament despite the fact it clashes with the end of the English season.

Such an act is an indication of the growing power the IPL has over world cricket.

Seven years ago the ECB and the counties struck upon a brilliant idea to revitalise the domestic game with the invention of the Twenty/20 Cup. It proved a master stroke as bigger crowds and new excitement breathed fresh life into English cricket. The game soon spread is now a worldwide phenomenon.

But while the authorities have stood back and admired their handy work, the rest of the cricket world has sought to innovate and maximise the new game's money-making potential.

Where better than India, where cricket is big business, to perfect the Twenty/20 competition? The IPL did just this.

The IPL's success gave the authorities in England the perfect chance to modify the domestic game accordingly. But once again the archaic and rigid county structure has held the game back.

After the inaugural IPL the MCC's chief executive Keith Bradshaw and the Surrey chairman David Stewart suggested a tournament comprising of nine franchised teams. They would play 57 matches over 25 days at the Test grounds, but the sides would include representatives of other counties.

It was a chance to take aspects from the IPL and apply them to the English game in a truly revolutionary way. Revenue streams would have also been shared between all the counties - including the minor ones.

But in an act of self-preservation, stubbornness and short-sightedness the proposal was rejected, so an opportunity was missed.

Instead we have watched the IPL boat go by and become such a successful and influential behemoth that Modil could end up dictating the English domestic fixture list.

There is no doubt some of the smaller counties need more funds to survive, but I can't help feeling they have missed a glorious opportunity.

By rejecting the EPL proposal in what they thought was an act of self-preservation, they might have sealed their own fates.

Meanwhile, England are set to face Bangladesh in a test series. The cricket odds suggest the visitors should win comfortably, but the Tigers have been improving steadily over the last few years.

If Bangladesh do manage to upset the cricket betting and win, or even just tie, the series, it is likely Andrew Strauss' decision to miss the tour will be further criticised.

Mixed feelings taken from dramatic series

After allowing the dust to settle after a nerve-wrenching and dramatic series between England and South Africa the post-series report will probably depend on whether you're a half empty or half full kind of guy.

If you're half-full then a creditable 1-1 draw against the world's second best test playing nation is a worthy result. The resilience and character shown in the first and third test, where England clung on for dear life, is an encouraging sign of a healthy team spirit while the sole victory in the second game came in convincing fashion. Things could have got even better had they not collapsed so grimly on the fourth day of the final test at Johannesburg. Stormy weather enveloped the city in the afternoon which clung on the following day, meaning any further play would not have been possible. It perhaps would have been a hollow victory but a win nonetheless and would have gone in the record books alongside a 2-1 Ashes win last year.

If you're half empty then this was a series that England were lucky to escape from. Out played in three of the four tests and behind in virtually all of the bowling and batting stats, a combination of gutsy batting, poor bowling and a few slices of luck meant England somehow came into the last test with a 1-0- lead. The batting line-up however still appears brittle and refuses to click at the same time – while one or two will get a score, others will fail.

The two South-African born players, Kevin Pietersen and Jonathan Trott, have struggled in particular. However they do have excuses, with Pietersen returning from serious injury and Trott still a rookie at this level. A trip to Bangladesh should help them build confidence and the cricket odds suggest an easy win for England.

With the ball Graeme Swann was the leading wicket-taker and has quickly established himself as a key player, shown by his high value in the upcoming IPL auction.

But the swing-masters, who caused so much damage last summer struggled to get as much movement on the harder South African pitches. How England could do with a Dale Steyn or Morne Morkel to slam down some vicious deliveries.

But it would be unfair to criticise the team too much considering the amount of guts and determination they showed to dig out results in three of these four tests. Problems remain, but they are much easier to solve when you are not losing Test series. If the cricket betting is right, England should be able to build on this performance.

Is Cook the right man to lead England?

Essex batsman Alastair Cook is set to lead the England side on their tour of Bangladesh in what national selector Geoff Miller describes as "an audition for future engagements".

With Andrew Strauss taking a break from the rigours of the international game, Cook was seen as the natural choice to take over his duties as captain.

Although the cricket betting still makes England strong favourites to win the series there are fears the decision to rest Strauss could backfire in Bangladesh.

However, England team director Andy Flower thinks Cook is up to the job.

He said: "Alastair is a tough young man - I think you've seen that in the way he's batted and handled himself from the moment he joined the England team. In my judgment, he is a natural leader."

Since making his test debut aged 21 Cook has been a mainstay of the England side, opening the batting and averaging a very respectable 42.65 at test level. He has also clocked up ten centuries. Despite this, Flower concedes that Cook will need to develop into the role of captain.

He said: "I think on the field he'll be respected by his players. He'll have to grow into learning the tactical game, of which he's had very little experience."

Although Cook looks to be a permanent England Test skipper in the making, eyebrows have been raised at the notion of him also leading the one day side.

Having played in just two ODIs in two years Cook is hardly a regular starter, yet he will lead England in their 50-over clashes in Bangladesh.

With the World Cup due to take place in India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh in just over a year it may prove to be a mistake to hand an opportunity of captaincy to a player like Cook who could struggle to break into England's World Cup team.

However, the online sports betting experts view England as relative outsiders when it comes to that tournament and the powers that be might have one eye on the future.

Is Kieswetter a South African too far?

The news that the South African-born Craig Kieswetter has been called up to the England Lions tour has sparked controversy.

The wicketkeeper-batsman is expected to challenge for a place in the one-day team over the next year and if he succeeds he will join South Africans Kevin Pietersen and Jonathan Trott in the England fold. On top of this captain Andrew Strauss and current wicketkeeper Matt Prior were both born in the country and have a South African parent.

National selector Geoff Miller said: "We have got to get to the stage where we are very careful on that [the number of South Africans in the England team], and we will be."

So should the England team strictly be a preserve for the truly English? Personally, I feel that the team is reflective of the cosmopolitan nature of the country. If someone is qualified to play for England and are good enough, then we shouldn't hesitate in picking them, regardless of their heritage.

It's hardly a new phenomenon. Both Alan Lamb and Robin Smith were South African born players with English parents who represented England during the apartheid ban.

The team of that era also saw the likes of the West Indies' born Chris Lewis, Devon Malcolm, Gladstone Small and Phillip DeFreitas appear, and the former captain Nasser Hussain was born in Madras.

The current concern is that there will be more Afrikaans accents than English in the dressing room, with Kieswetter and Trott having represented South Africa at under-19 level.

English fans might struggle to get behind a fully South African team, but I tend to think that the number of South Africans currently available for England is an anomaly rather than a trend and I can't see anyone in cricket betting otherwise.

Our selectors should just carry on picking the best players available to them, regardless of history or passports.

Meanwhile, the online sports betting markets currently make South Africa the favourites to win the fourth Test.

Test Team of the 2000s

As the 2000s come to a close, talk of the imminent death of Test cricket is rife. Yet the decade has seen Test cricket taken to a new level: gung-ho openers, ferocious lower-order hitting, reverse swing and arguably the two greatest spin bowlers of all time have ensured there has been plenty for fans to savour.

Here is a composite XI of all those who played Tests in the 2000s. All statistics are for the decade only, not the players’ careers. The five Australian faces are reward for a decade in which, bar the odd blip, they have taken the game to new heights.

Matthew Hayden (96 Tests in 2000s, 8364 runs @ 52.93)
Loathed by many as a caricature of the worst of Australians, Hayden was a brute of an opening batsman. His muscular hitting terrified many an opening bowler, as he amassed 29 centuries over the decade. Whether waltzing down the pitch to Shaun Pollock or slog-sweeping his way to 549 runs in three Tests in India in 2001, Hayden could be relied on to score quickly with his bludgeoning bat. On the rare occasions when he was tamed, as in England in 2005, Australia’s juggernaut acquired hitherto hidden vulnerability.

Virender Sehwag (72 Tests, 6248 runs @ 52.50)
You thought Hayden was scary? His strike-rate of 60 looks sedate when set against Sehwag’s scarcely credible 80. There is no one quite like Sehwag: the hand-eye co-ordination; the blistering bat-speed; the obliviousness to pressure, the opposition and the match situation. Yet, for all that, is not Sehwag’s most impressive attribute his concentration span? He has redefined the art of 'going big', with four 250+ scores, three at over a run-a-ball, in the decade. And he has done it regularly against the best, averaging 51 against Australia. To those who say he thrives only in good batting conditions, Sehwag’s 201*, out of 329, against Mendis and Murali in Sri Lanka was a devastating riposte.

Ricky Ponting (106 Tests, 9389 runs @ 58.68)
Over the decade, there has been no wicket more sought-after than Ponting, who has scored more Test runs and centuries than anyone else. Whilst seemingly eschewing risk, he has scored his runs at a
strike-rate of 62 over the decade, dominating bowling attacks and keeping alive the tradition that a side’s best batsman and captain should occupy the pivotal spot. Ponting’s sheer single-mindedness was epitomised by 576 runs at 82.28 in the 2006/07 Ashes whitewash.

Brian Lara (66 Tests, 6380 runs @ 54.06)
Perhaps perceived more as a man of the 1990s, Lara in fact scored 21 of his 34 Test centuries in the 2000s. Throughout, that x-factor, illustrated by his idiosyncratic high back-lift and scything of bowling through the offside, remained: Lara was a man who consistently demonstrated how thrilling the art of batsmanship could be. Few performances of the modern era can match Lara’s 688 runs in three matches in Sri Lanka in 2001 – though, typically, West Indies still lost every match. There was also the little matter of his 400* against England saw him, astonishingly, reclaim the Test record score.

Rahul Dravid (103 Tests, 8558 runs @ 54.85)
Few nicknames are as appropriate as the one that has been attributed to Dravid – simply ‘The Wall’. Sachin Tendulkar is the great icon of the Indian game, but it is Dravid who has been the key batsman in their crucial victories, displaying mastery of batting’s technical challenges especially when standing out away from home. His 305 runs, for once out, to defeat Australia at Adelaide in 2003 was testament to his mental fortitude. Dravid’s finely-crafted masterpieces are a common thread linking the seminal Indian victories of the 2000s: from Headingley, to Rawalpindi and Kandy via Kingston, Perth and, of course, Adelaide in 2003, when he scored 305 runs for once out.

Jacques Kallis (100 Tests, 8552 runs at 58.97; 202 wickets @ 31.70)
Hailed by Kevin Pietersen as “the greatest cricketer ever”, Kallis’s averages for the decade - 58 with the bat, and 31 with the ball – are extraordinary, especially when considering he played 100 Tests in the 2000s. His batting is perhaps more science than art, but his steady and unobtrusive accumulation has led many a captain to despair. And, as Kallis has proved in recent times, he does have another gear. He is also the consummate fourth seamer; when occasions have allowed, as in his 6/54 at Headingley in 2003, his swing has proved devastating.

Adam Gilchrist (91 Tests, 5130 runs @ 46.63, wicket-keeper)
Gilchrist’s demoralising assaults from number seven will, for many, be the standout memory of Test cricket in the 2000s. Whether he arrived at the crease at 100/5 or 300/5, his approach was the same: audacious, clean hitting that would seize the game’s initiative, most stunningly with a 57-ball century against England in 2006. As Gideon Haigh wrote, “Gilchrist seemed to invent a new cricket variant in which, while everyone else carried on as usual, he thrashed about him with apparent impunity.”

Andrew Flintoff (74 Tests, 3695 runs @ 32.69; 220 wickets @ 32.38)
No one could conceivably claim Andrew Flintoff was a superior cricketer to Shaun Pollock. So why is he in this side over Pollock? With McGrath and Kallis parsimony personified, Flintoff can finally be unleashed as an impact bowler in short spells – like his series changing over at Edgbaston in 2005 - rather than forced into the containing role. When at his peak, Flintoff performed outstandingly in all three disciplines in the Caribbean, South Africa and India – and, of course, his 2005 Ashes performance was one of the finest all-round series enjoyed by any cricketer this decade. He was not only vital for what he himself achieved on the pitch, but the galvanising affect his deeds had on others.

Shane Warne (65 Tests, 357 wickets @ 25.17, captain)
Warne v Muralitharan has been the subject of so many pub debates over the years. And, while Murali’s statistics in the 2000s are marginally superior, he admitted that Warne “had a better cricketing brain than me.” Through sheer force of personality, the Australian could change the course of games on even the least helpful of surfaces. And, so often the symbol of the all-conquering Australian machine, his Herculean efforts in defeat in the 2005 Ashes – 40 wickets and 249 runs in five Tests – provided indisputable proof of his enduring greatness. Widely regarded as possessing the best cricketing nous of anyone who never captained his country in a Test, Warne will have the honour of leading this side out.

Dale Steyn (33 Tests, 170 wickets @ 23.70)
In an era when express pace seemed to be dying a sad death, Steyn has emerged to revive it. Bowling at speeds in excess of 90mph, he has created carnage with his devilish late swing with new and old ball alike. His yorker and bouncer alike have the capacity to destroy, and he was crucial in South Africa’s success against Australia in 2008/09, claiming 34 scalps in six Tests, including ten wickets in the famous MCG win. A more subtle and canny bowler than many of express pace, Steyn was also exceptional in India.

Glenn McGrath (66 Tests, 297 wickets @ 20.53)
It all seemed so simple, didn’t it? Plod up to the wicket, bowling with nip but some way short of express pace, hit a good line and length and perhaps extract a little movement. The most remarkable of unremarkable bowlers, McGrath could be relied upon to raise his game against the opposition’s star, and shared some memorable duels with Messrs Tendulkar and Lara. When there was a little in the pitch, as when he took 8/24 against Pakistan at Perth, McGrath was simply without peer.

With apologies to Shivnarine Chanderpaul, Shaun Pollock, Dan Vettori and Muttiah Muralitharan.

All statistics are based on Tests played from 1st January 2000 to 25th December 2009.

The same but different for England at Centurion

You could be forgiven for being optimistic after England’s dramatic draw with South Africa in the first test. After all, the result was remarkably similar to the one last July in Cardiff.

Then, a last-ditch stand by Monty Panesar and James Andersen doggedly kept the Australians at bay and earned England a draw they never looked like achieving in the opening four days of the first test. The rest, they say, is history; England went on to win the Ashes with a 2-1 series win.

Back then the draw was a moral victory for the English and their fans, while Aussie skipper Ricky Ponting was left to reflect on what might have been. In the end it cost them the Ashes.

But fast forward to today and I believe England can’t take such heart from a similar result at Centurion Park. The ‘crazy hour’ skipper Andrew Strauss described saw South Africa steamroller through the England middle order, giving them a sniff of victory that had never seemed likely at the start of the day. Scrap that, even at tea the cricket betting odds were stacked against such a frantic finish with the tourists 169-3.

But the art of the batting collapse is one England seem to have perfected over the past twenty years and that dreaded domino effect was sparked off by debutant Friedel de Wet, who took three quick wickets, with a total of five falling for just 13 runs.

On this occasion the Monty Panesar role was bravely played out by Graham Onions, who survived 12 deliveries, including the final over, to secure the draw alongside Paul Colingwood, whose dogged innings last year set the platform for the rescue act against Australia.

Putting the relief to one side, the game will again provide Strauss with a number of headaches ahead of the second test, most notably the batting. The form of Alastair Cook and Ian Bell is again a worry; England once again found themselves relying on Jonathan Trott and Kevin Pietersen for runs. If they fail then there has to be someone else who will step up to the plate. Cook has apparently been working on his technique to arrest a worrying slide in form while Ian Bell has once again found himself under pressure after a disappointing performance.

They have received the backing of their coach on this occasion and will almost certainly get another chance. But if any more ‘crazy hours’ continue, changes will surely have to be made.

England could surprise South Africa

Four years ago, England’s Ashes triumph was not the springboard to an era of dominance, but proved the prologue to a period of prolonged mediocrity. As they embark on their long tour of South Africa – they don’t fly back until January 19^th – Andrew Strauss will be determined to build on the Ashes win. It would be a depressing indictment of English cricket if beating a side now ranked fourth in the world 2-1 at home represented a glass ceiling.

By any measure, the series in South Africa appears an even sterner challenge. For all their perennial choking in ICC limited-overs tournaments, the Proteas are ranked the best Test side in the world. Though their only series of the year so far saw them lose at home to Australia, in 2008 they recorded a formidable set of results: drawing in India; winning in England, and seeing off Michael Vaughan in the process; and finally a famous series triumph down under.

However, the Tests do not commence until December 16^th, by which time the sides will have contested five one-day internationals and the drawn Twenty20s. England have almost invariably been something of a joke in the shorter formats of the game since reaching the 1992 World Cup final. New depths were plummeted in the 6-1 home thrashing by Australia. But then. Something happened.

England went to South Africa for the Champions Trophy perceived as no-hopers, and ended up reaching only their second semi-final in 12 global tournaments dating back to 1992. But more importantly the rhetoric from the camp was for once matched by deeds. England pledged to play a new brand of fearless cricket, after embarrassing themselves in consistently scraping to 220 against Australia. And, in two upset victories before reality kicked in, they managed it.

The triumph over South Africa was brought about by what Andrew Strauss called the best England ODI batting performance of his career. England shelled their inhibitions and trusted their hitting ability, hitting 12 sixes – the most they have ever managed in an ODI innings. Yet the two men together responsible for 11 of those face vastly contrasting circumstances. The diminutive Irishman Eoin Morgan will be given the opportunity to cement his position as England’s finisher. Possessing all the shots in the MCC coaching manual – and a load more developed courtesy of his ingenuity and the dexterity of his wrists – Morgan is a special talent indeed, as anyone who witnessed his 34-ball 67 in the Champions Trophy, or superlative 85* in the first Twenty20, would attest to. But so is another man who will be nowhere to be seen in South Africa.

While England talk bravely of the need to hit sixes in limited-overs games, it seems astonishing that the man who plundered six en route to a brilliant 98 in that game has since been dispensed with. Owais Shah may not be the world’s greatest fielder or runner, but he is England’s highest run-scorer in ODIs since the 2007 World Cup. No one else in England, save for Kevin Pietersen (and Marcus Trescothick), can play such destructive innings.

But his absence does provide an opportunity for Jonathan Trott. Back in the country of his birth, just like Pietersen, Trott has been accused by Michael Vaughan of celebrating with the South African side after they sealed the Test series in England last year. Trott will face scrutiny, for sure, but what really matters is his qualities as an international batsman. He displayed a fine technique and temperament in amassing 119 on debut in the decisive Ashes Test, and will occupy a position in the top three for the ODIs. It is also a big series for Joe Denly, whose international start has been full of style but not substance. The same is true for Luke Wright, fortuitously called-up to the Test squad as a Flintoff-lite.

South Africa have historically been a far better limited-overs side than England, yet in games between the two countries in the 2000s, they both have ten victories each. If England are to continue this impressive run, they will need to contain a batting line-up leaden with power, from the formidable Graeme Smith downwards. The battle between Jimmy Anderson and Smith is of huge significance for the ODIs and Tests alike. If the ball swings, Andersons represents England’s best chance of success; if he is profligate, then expect South Africa to amass huge totals.

With Steve Harmison omitted – something the home players profess to be delighted about – England run the risk of being exposed on flat tracks. The vivacious Graeme Swann will face wickets that are notoriously unconducive to spin. Stuart Broad and Graeme Onions will make up the first-choice pace attack, but opportunities abound for two men discarded after the Duncan Fletcher era. Sajid Mahmood and Liam Plunkett have had three seasons in county cricket to learn the game after having proved that international cricket is no place for on-the-job training. Mahmood is in the ODI squad as England search for middle-over penetration; Plunkett features in the Tests, after a crucial role in Durham’s Championship triumph.

South Africa emphatically start all three series as favourites. In Smith, Jacques Kallis, Jp Duminy and Dale Steyn, they have a quartet of exceptional players. England’s best hope lies in blunting Steyn’s 90mph yorkers, which could then expose a bowling attack that is over-dependant upon him – Makhaya Ntini is ageing and Morne Morkel too erratic. Then there is Ab de Villiers to contend with: good enough to have represented South Africa in several sports, he settled on cricket and averaged 75 over the six Tests with Australia last winter.

The tour promises some intriguing cricket – as England-South Africa clashes invariably do - and will provide a real guage for England’s progress under the Strauss-Flower team. Losing the ODIs 3-2 and drawing the Tests would constitute an impressive result. For even this to be possible, the onus will be on two men with South African connections – the current and former skippers, Strauss and Kevin Pietersen. The two players of proven class in England’s batting line-up, both enjoyed extraordinary tours during England’s visit five yers ago. If they can come close to repeating those displays, England should be able to score a lot of runs.