Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: Joe Denly, Liam Plunkett, Luke Wright, Michael Carberry, tim bresnan
Recent comments to a previous post have got me thinking about the state of the England game and whether we should resign ourselves to the fact that this squad is the “best that county cricket can offer”.
County cricket is often used as the scapegoat for England’s troubled performances, blamed for not producing the hardened cricketers like its Australian equivalent. At the same time old Aussie pros (Langer, Hayden etc.) don’t stop telling us how strong county cricket is and how crucial it was in their own development.
My hypothesis is that a great modern failing of England’s selectors is not recognising the value of county cricket in crafting a player’s skills.
Lets have a look at all the triumphant England players from this year’s Ashes by examining the numbers of years each have played first class cricket before their England debut (for the Saffers in the side, I accept that some of this first class cricket may not have been in the English county game). We’ll take the difference between first class debut and England test debut:
- Swann 10 years
- Trott 9 years
- Pietersen 8 years
- Collingwood 7 years*
- Prior 6 years*
- Strauss 6 years*
- Harmison 6 years*
- Bopara 5 years*
- Bell 5 years*
- Onions 5 years
- Panesar 5 years
- Cook 3 years
- Flintoff 3 years
- Broad 2 years
- Anderson 1 year*
*Does not include spells back in county cricket having been dropped
Whilst I appreciate that this is a significant generalisation, I would argue that based on this crude analysis, England’s highest performing players in the last 18 months or so were generally the ones that have spent the more extended spells in county cricket.
For me the microcosm of this was Trott, who came from nowhere (an unknown before Test selection) to produce arguably the greatest England debut performance of all time. Incidentally, he’d had 9 years first class cricket (six of which were for Middlesex in county cricket).
My conclusion is that there are genuine world class county performers out there, players that are honing their skills and are up there with the likes of Pietersen, Strauss, Swann and Prior. They just need to be found. Here are a few in my view:
- Michael Carberry, 8 years, the best fielder in the county, a 2009 county average of 70 at the top of the order. It is almost scandalous to put Cook as a shoe-in when Carberry is around
- Liam Plunkett, 6 years, played nine tests for England after just 2 years in county cricket and surprise, surprise, he didn’t last and is now out of the test picture
- Joe Denly, 5 years, still early in his career and may be too soon for England’s test squad, but an awesome talent in the making
- Luke Wright, 6 years, could develop into a genuine number six, on reflection maybe a little early for the South Africa tour, but a real talent
- Tim Bresnan, 6 years, seems to have been completely over looked for the England test squad since a solid debut against the Windies, but England should persevere with him
- James Tredwell, 8 years, in my view a superior prospect to Rashid and increasinglyPanesar, but has gone unnoticed due to steady unspectacular progess. He’ll start making more waves in the next two seasons in my view. At only 27 years old he has time.
Filed under: Uncategorized
Whilst England will be buoyant, it is not difficult to argue that this is even more of a false dawn that 2005. Let’s think about the state of each team after the respective series wins.
England’s 2005 side was as equally “young” as today’s team. Of that squad none were evidently approaching the twilight of their careers, perhaps with the exception of Giles. So why did that team not go on to greater things? A number of reasons seem apparent:
- Long-term/recurring injuries to Vaughan, Simon Jones, Harmison and Flintoff,
- Retirement of perhaps the key player of the England team in that golden period, namely Trescothick,
- Drops in form for the likes of Geraint Jones, Strauss and Hoggard,
- Lack of evident progress from the new guard in that series namely Bell and Collingwood.
All these factors served to check England’s development into the best side in the world. In fact the only player from that 2005 winning side that showed any sort of upward curve in their careers has been Pietersen.
So will the 2009 side have a similar fate, especially given the widely held belief that they are not as acomplished as the 2005 side? My head says yes.
Basically winning at the Oval will mean that England will continue to have excess flab in their side, which, for my money, accounts for almost half the team. The flab is of course Bell, Harmison, Anderson, Collingwood and some would argue Cook. It is my firmly held belief that England have no future as the number one team in the world with these players.
Anderson’s supposed career renaissance was proved a false one at Headingley and the Oval. We all know the damage he can cause when the conditions are in his favour, but unfortunately about 70% of England’s test cricket does not take place in England in the late spring /early summer. He’s a rubbish tourist and England simply won’t win in South Africa or Australia the following winter with Anderson leading the attack, let alone with Harmison backing him up.
Bell and Collingwood’s places look increasingly in jeopardy with Trott’s performance thank God. But I fear Bell will survive and Collingwood will tour, creating unnecessarily pressure on Trott who won’t be given time to settle in.
The main positive for England is Flintoff’s retirement, which will remove a severe obstacle to dressing room unity and end a disruptive influence for England’s selectors.
Finally, great that winning the Ashes is, I feel a little unfulfilled by England’s victory. This is probably because I’m a stats man. I don’t think anyone in the England team has put in a convincing performance, apart from Strauss. Broad has stagnated apart from one spell of brilliance, which masks his real value to the side. Anderson has proved he is a one shop pony. With Trott it is far too early to judge.
All-in-all there is nothing from this Ashes summer that suggests that England will challenge South Africa this winter. In fact no one born in England scored a century in the entire series.
Filed under: Uncategorized
Let’s look beyond the Oval for a second. I’ve been pondering the team I’d ideally like to see line-up against South Africa in the winter.
I’m all for a complete tear-up of the side specifically the middle order. Bell, Bops and Colly simply are not going to provide a successful future for England. Colly is honest and has backbone, but that’s simply not enough for me. It is time for a fresh approach.
The first step would be for England to abandon their misguided obsession with having 5 bowlers. If 4 can’t do the job then you don’t deserve to win. My view is that having 5 also takes away responsibility on each bowler, and breeds indiscipline. So that moves the wicketkeeper to bat at 7, like in the good old days.
I’m not going to justify any of the individual selections below, but how about this for a new order for England (I’d actually keep Bopara in the side, I must be insane).
- Strauss
- Cook
- Pietersen
- Trott
- Bopara
- Wright
- Prior
- Broad
- Swann
- Anderson
- Onions
Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: bopara, oval test, ramprakash, trescothick
Today the Somerset Chief Executive, suggested that Tresco could be talked out of international retirement. Earlier this week ex-players were clambering over the Ramps for the Oval story.
Hell why not bring Botham back for the Oval. He may have put on a bit but class is permanent isn’t it. In fact, let’s simply play the 1981 side instead of the current England team. Maybe Dickie Bird could umpire?
Has everyone gone slightly mad. THESE PLAYERS HAVE RETIRED!!! There is absolutely zero sense and possibility in harking back to past glories (or past missed opportunities in Ramps’ case).
Why on earth would England consider making such a short term downright stupid selection as Ramps after one dodgy test match for the England batting line-up? If anything Bopara is the new Ramps anyway (all the talent in the world with zero mental fortitude).
England one change for the Oval, Fred for Harmie, and that’s it.
Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: england disgace, oval fifth test, ravi bopara, steve harmison
England will lose the 4th test by lunchtime tomorrow. By the afternoon England’s selectors will be taking long hard looks in the mirror.
The performance by the team, the captain, the tacticians and the coaches has been a disgrace this last two days. And it would be easy to point fingers at the hapless Bopara, Bell, Harmison, Anderson and indeed Strauss.
The temptation will be for England to make wholesale changes for the Oval test. The most exposed are of course Bopara and Harmison who will act as the scapegoats for the defeat in the press over the next few days. I fully expect Athers to yet again launch a stinging attack on Harmie in his column.
There appear to be 8 options to resolving the Bopara, Harmison places in the side (5 for Bops, 3 for Harmie):
- The Common Sense Option – Play Rob Key, who has the experience, the composure, and the game to play at 3 in a must win test for England.
- The Straight Bat Option – Play Trott at 3 and drop Bops. Trott is currently the next in line and has batted at 3 for Warwickshire this season.
- The Coward’s Option – Move Bopara down the order to five to take a bit of pressure of him, and shift Bell up to three and Colly to four.
- The Stupid Option – drop Bopara for Trott, but move Bell into the number 3 spot, with (probably) Trott brought into at number 5 and Collingwood moved to number 4.
- The Brave Man’s Option – Keep Bopara at number 3 and give him one final chance to make a name for himself in this series.
- The Desired Option – replace Harmison with a fit Flintoff. Assuming a further cortisone injection will be permitted on Fred’s knee by the fifth test, then that would seem likely. The remaining two options are premised on Fred being crock:
- The Seemingly Obvious but Probably Stupid Option - replace Harmison with Sidebottom. We must remember that Harmison traditionally bowls well at the hard and bouncy Oval. Last year against South Africa he made a sterling comeback (one of the 57 comebacks that he has made in his career) and made a difference.
- The Lunatic Option – don’t drop Harmison.
So in short, England have a lot of options, but none are easy or obvious choices to make.
My conclusion is a mixture of the insane and stupid - let’s keep the same team for the Oval. Let’s give this bunch of flaky misfits one last stab at Ashes glory. If they fail, then so be it. And let’s build a new team in the autumn, not now.
Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: Duncan Fletcher, Gary Pratt, Punter, ricky ponting
I was quite relieved to read Justin Langer’s BBC Sport column yesterday where he led a passionate defence of “Ponting the man”.
“There is no more humble person than the Australian skipper…
Among his peers the respect for him is immense and behind the scowl which adorns the face of many champion sportsmen, ‘Punter’ is a generous and loving family man who has gone the full circle from tough street fighter to consummate professional and ambassador for the game of cricket.”
I have always felt that the reputation Ponting has carried with him, especially on these UK shores, is unjustified.
His reputation has been essentially soldified when he was run out by a direct hit from sub fielder Gary Prattby. The take-out of his subsequent rant at Fletcher was that the real pratt in this episode was Ponting, who simply couldn’t deal with his dismissial (which was a critical one in the match).
No one has actually asked whether the real pratt in this story was Fletcher himself. One only has to read the content of his column in the Guardian to see that this man is as bitter and spiteful as they come.
Aside from the one blip in 2005, Ponting has not just been a model professional, he has surpassed what one expects of a test captain. So far this summer, he has been the first to congratulate Strauss & co in the Long Room after their Lord’s victory, he has been suitably respectful to the retiring Fred, and has backed his own players to the hilt, especially the struggling Johnson.
There are two anectotal pieces of evidence that I would leave that suggest that Punter is far from the monster he is portrayed to be:
1. The last three Ashes series (including the current) have been marked by a high degree of socialising amongst the England and Australia players. The level to which players interact with each other in any given series is set by the captain’s example (and reached an “unhealthly” level when Fred was captain in 2006-7). If Punter was such a monster surely the last thing he’d want to do was have a friendly beer with his opposition after the game.
2. This is reinforced by what I heard during my time in Australia. There is a bar in central Sydney which is a known hang out for Oz cricketers during the December test matches. A couple backpacker friends of mine visited the bar and tried to chat to some of the baggy green players. Whilst most gave them the cold shoulder, Punter himself was by far the most friendly and was happy to have a beer and talk cricket. This I heard from a number of others.
In short Punter is not a monster. He is a true gent off the pitch and a fierce competitor on it.
Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: 4th test headingley, jonathan trott, ryan sidebottom, stuart broad
Elf look-a-like Stuart Broad’s days in England whites look numbered.
The last three test matches have demonstrated clearly that baby Stewie is simply not the bowler everyone thinks he is and wants him to be. And so he would have looked at today’s fourth test squad for Headingley with even more anxiety for his place than ever. Here’s why:
Trott: His selection is probably the clearest indication yet that Flintoff’s body is finally catching up with him. Fred was not at his best (with the ball) at Edgbaston and I fear he may have already made his significant contribution to the series at Lords. Trott’s selection is to some certain extent a wholly negative selection by England as it shows that if Fred is crock, then a batsmen will be picked in his place, rather than a bowler. This in my view upsets the balance of the side significantly and surely continuity of selection would have seen Bresnan in the squad as cover. If Trott comes in for Fred, presumably he’ll bat at 6 with Prior down to 7. Therefore, England then have but four specialist bowlers, one of whom could potentially be a misfiring and so far toothless Broad, a scenario which selectors will shy away from.
Sidebottom: His selection looks tempting given the Headingley swing conditions plus he’s been in good form for Notts. I also think his variety will offer a lot more for the side than Broad, who remains a bowler without an identity; neither a swing bowler nor a bang it in short bowler. Sidebottom has been missed from the side and I remember with fondness is NZ hattrick.
So in conclusion, England fourth test team depends, once again, on the fitness of Fred. If Fred is fit, Sidebottom will be a straight swap for Broad. If he is not, then both Trott and Sidebottom will come in, with Broad again dropped. If the latter then England will upset the already delicate balance of their side and lose the test match convincingly. Let’s hope Fred is fit.
As Agnew points out in his first day blog, today saw the extraordinary situation where Phil Hughes announced his disappointment at not being picked on his twitter feed, before the Oz team had been announced, much to the annoyance of selectors.
Hughes’ move was seemingly an act of stupid petulence. Any twitterer knows that his posts will get noticed. Perhaps he assumed an 11am start by which time his post would probably gone unnoticed, although the update was at 08h00am. His manager has since claimed responsiblilty for a time difference misunderstanding for the australian IT guy uploading the tweets.
A good article into the Telegraph outlines some good previous sporting twitter cock-ups. Anyway for those interested her are some other famous twittering Ashes cricketers (and others).
England:
- Graeme Swann - amusingly described listening to Moyles as “ear rape”
- Jimmy Anderson - seems the most accomplished England twitterer
Australia
- Philip Hughes - now the world’s most famous cricketing twitterer
- Graham Manou - see comment from Will Atkins below
Some selected others
Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: Edgbaston test 2009, Marcus North, Shane Watson, third test ashes
Shane Watson is like a super model with clymidia…irresistible but likely to cause a lot of pain in the long run.
And so Australia will fail to resist picking him and dropping North for the third test at Edgbaston. Hard luck for North I say. Whilst Watson is flimsier than a matchstick wafer, the Australian selectors simpy would not have included him in the squad if they did not have the intention of picking him as soon as he has the form and fitness. For the moment he has both and I think the Australian’s are well placed to pick him. North is fast becoming a first test wonder…i.e. scoring a ton early doors in a series before doing nought of note for the rest of it.
Johnson’s bowling and the Edgbaston pitch are other reasons why Watson’s selection is inevitable. So far Mitch has failed to perform and Watson will give Ponting more options, especially on a pitch where bowlers are expected to struggle (bowler’s graveyard apparently). On faster pitches like the Oval, Johnson could be pivotal so Punter will be keen to preserve his already fragile confidence in Birmingham with the help of extra bowling options (i.e. Watson).
I don’t think Clark will make it despite an impressive effort against Northants (who fielded six players with surnames beginning with the letter w, clearly a record in any game). He might sneak in ahead of Siddle but I’d be surprised. So therefore, like England, I expect just the one change in the Oz line-up. But will Watson last the distance? I reckon he will this time.
The curse of shane:
- Shane Warne: suspended for drug abuse
- Shane Bond: NZ contract terminated after IPL sign up
- Shane Watson: always injured
- Shane Lee: retired with knee problems
- Shane Burger: his surname is burger
Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: Edgbaston test 2009, freddie flintoff, Graham Onions, harmison, Ian Bell, kevin pietersen, Pietersen achilles
The news of KP’s six week lay-off following the Lord’s euphoria was like someone suddenly dropping a dog turd into my champagne glass.
Yes, unfortunately the stage is now perfectly set for the return of the David James of international cricket, Ian Bell.
But before we move on to discussing Mr Wasted Talent himself, a few words on the Pietersen debacle. Not for the first time, the ECB hierarchy should be lined up behind the Lords pavillion and shot.
Why on earth was the renowned “Swedish achilles specialist” drafted in only after the second test of the Ashes summer and not after the IPL when the injury was fully detected.
Did the selectors forget the Ashes 2005 when Pietersen arguably won the series for England with his brilliant batting? Did 2005 actually happen? Why for God’s sake was this not dealt with immediately, rather than risking a further aggravation of the injury in search of some 20:20 silverwear which England were unlikely to win anyway? Easy to say in hindisght maybe? Well perhaps, but the fact that Mr Bryson called it correctly back in June suggests otherwise.
Anyway, with regards to the Shermanator, the key question is where does Mr. Bell bat. The obvious yet incorrect choice would be to bat him at 3, move Bopara to 4 and be done with it. This would be another move of classic ECB stupidity.
Removing Bopara from the number 3 position would basically say that after a couple of average matches, the selectors have decided that Bell is a better number 3 that Bopara. It would also show that the selectors once again have given Bell unjust priority (having let him languish at 3 for 30 odd matches where he failed to produce any innings of note, aside from an 199 against SA on a Lord’s featherbed).
Therefore, if he must play, Bell should either bat at 4 as a direct replacement for KP, or at 5 with Colly moving up to four. If the selectors are serious about Bopara, then this is the right choice.
But of course, Bell will no doubt bat at 3 for the remainder of the series, reach 30-odd on a number of occasions, before needlessly throwing his wicket away just before tea, and instigating an England collapse. He’ll then score a meaningless hundred in the last test which England go on to lose, thus securing his place for the winter in SA and no doubt leading to another series of wasted oportunities. Please, please God no.
Regarding the bowlers, England might be tempted, given the current crisis state of the Edgbaston pitch, to play Harmie for Onions, but they won’t. And Fred looks like he’ll be fit so it’s not all doom and gloom. So it’ll be just one change for England.
Let’s look at the Aussies once they’ve been decimated by Wigley and Willey and/or Shane “Osteoporosis” Watson has scored a hundred.
