This week, we've seen one of the classic test matches. Set 310 to win, Australia and South Africa battled it out, with each side looking well set, only to be clawed back by their opponents. It was left to 18 year old debutant Pat Cummins, to come in with his side 8 down, and smash the 13 runs needed to see Australia to victory. It was a game that had everything - some excellent batting, some awesome bowling, some jittery collapses and some stoic partnerships. It was test cricket at it's finest, with bat and ball always in keen competition, and neither side giving the other an inch.
Contrast that to events this week in Mumbai. West Indies, a team hardly known for their batting exploits (indeed, they only possessed 7 test centuries between them) have batted through the first two days, and are 575/9 at the close of play on the second. Already, some of the Indian bowlers have been complaining about the back-breaking serface that's been served up to them, and with justifiable cause. When the West Indies are dismissed, India will then have to come out and bat, and will no doubt rack up a similiar score with no time left to force any sort of result. Even when the game in Johannesburg was reaching it's climax, it was impossible to predict which way the game would go. Contrast that to Mumbai, where the captains may as well shake hands on the draw now and save everyone the bother of turning up for the next few days.
The game in South Africa proved just how good test cricket is - not that we had any doubts about it. But events in Mumbai, and specifically the groundsmen's decision (whoever told them to do so) to create a road just sees test cricket shooting itself in the foot. Yes, attendances for test cricket are low, and the money's in T20s and One Dayers. But every cricket administrator worth his salt knows that test cricket is the ultimate, and should be protected. For all of the talk of test championships and petitions over shortened test series, the real way to "save" test cricket is to stop the batsman dominated snooze-fests that are all too common in world cricket today.
Showing posts with label South Africa. Show all posts
Showing posts with label South Africa. Show all posts
Wednesday, 23 November 2011
Monday, 21 November 2011
The Ponting Dilemma
Cricket is rarely a fairytale. Just ask Gavin Hamilton (one test cap, where he bagged a pair and went wicketless), a succession of South African captains in World Cups and Keegan Meth. But every now and again, a moment comes along where everything just falls into place, and someone has the chance to do something mythical.
Ricky Ponting is one of the greatest players of our generation; indeed of any generation. Even in fifty years his name will be spoken about reverentially by those lucky enough to have seen him. The three successive World Cups. Being captain of perhaps the greatest team to have ever played. Over 26,000 international runs. An international career thus far spanning 16 years, representing his country during their greatest era of success. There is no doubting Ricky Ponting's pedigree, yet coming into this innings, the 267th of his test career, the calls were growing for it to be his last.
Without a century in 23 months, and more incredibly, without a fifty in 11 - Ricky Ponting's form has gone to pieces. No longer the undroppable captain, and averaging well under 20 since the start of 2010, Ricky's presence in the team is becoming increasingly untenable and the idea of him being dropped ever more likely. With every loss and batting collapse come further calls for a change to be made to a brittle Australian batting line-up, and Ponting, for so long the backbone that held it together, could be the fall guy for yet another series defeat.
Ricky Ponting doesn't deserve for it to end that way. For everything he's given Australian cricket - world cricket - our last memory of Ricky shouldn't be of a dishevelled shell of himself unable to cope with the South African bowling, stripped of the captaincy and shunted down the order from his number three spot. For all of his flaws, Ponting deserves a far more dignified end. Tomorrow he'll return to the crease alongside his new captain with 54 runs to his name, and 168 more runs to win. The potential for a Ponting hundred to clinch the game and save the series is so perfectly set up that it's almost been scripted.
But Ponting getting there would create more problems than it solves. In the fairytale, Prince Ricky would hit the match-winning hundred before announcing his retirement and riding off into the sunset upon his noble steed. We've seen it before - what better way to sign off than right at the top after playing an immense innings? And Ponting might well do that. But the trouble is, Ricky Ponting loves playing cricket for Australia. Why else would he be out there? It would have been easy for him to have bowed out when he handed the captaincy over earlier in the year, but his passion for playing ensured he was determined to keep going. As long as he feels he's good enough, he will keep going. And if he is good enough, even at the grand old age of 36 years and 337 days, to score hundreds against the best bowlers in the world, why wouldn't he keep going?
So what if he doesn't get there? The new Australian selectors, headed by John Inverarity, are yet to select a squad of players, let alone a team. With recent Australian failures very much on their minds, the new selectors will certainly want to start afresh, and what better way to signal the start of a new era than to get rid of the man who epitomises the old one? While Ponting has batted very well to get to 54 overnight, even getting to a far more significant score may not be enough to save him.
Ponting deserves the dignity of a memorable test farewell, not being dropped in ignominious circumstances. While it may not be Warne and McGrath bowing out amidst the tickertape of a 5-0 Ashes whitewash, guiding his team home with a century wouldn't be far off. The fairytale ending is set up for Ricky, but even if he got it, would he take it as an ending? The hundred and the win would be the perfect close to a fantastic career, but would the lure of future glories and a Dravidian renaissance (Dravid has 10 test centuries since turning 36) keep him in the Baggy Green? Either way, some big decisions will have be made, either from the Australian selectors or Ricky Ponting himself. The next 46 runs could be the biggest 46 runs in Ponting's career - if he gets there he will prove that the light hasn't gone out, and he is still good enough to score test runs. If not, he might not get the chance to decide. For once, I'll be cheering on Ponting and hoping that he gets there, because after everything he's given to cricket, he deserves to be the one that decides.
Ricky Ponting is one of the greatest players of our generation; indeed of any generation. Even in fifty years his name will be spoken about reverentially by those lucky enough to have seen him. The three successive World Cups. Being captain of perhaps the greatest team to have ever played. Over 26,000 international runs. An international career thus far spanning 16 years, representing his country during their greatest era of success. There is no doubting Ricky Ponting's pedigree, yet coming into this innings, the 267th of his test career, the calls were growing for it to be his last.
Without a century in 23 months, and more incredibly, without a fifty in 11 - Ricky Ponting's form has gone to pieces. No longer the undroppable captain, and averaging well under 20 since the start of 2010, Ricky's presence in the team is becoming increasingly untenable and the idea of him being dropped ever more likely. With every loss and batting collapse come further calls for a change to be made to a brittle Australian batting line-up, and Ponting, for so long the backbone that held it together, could be the fall guy for yet another series defeat.
Ricky Ponting doesn't deserve for it to end that way. For everything he's given Australian cricket - world cricket - our last memory of Ricky shouldn't be of a dishevelled shell of himself unable to cope with the South African bowling, stripped of the captaincy and shunted down the order from his number three spot. For all of his flaws, Ponting deserves a far more dignified end. Tomorrow he'll return to the crease alongside his new captain with 54 runs to his name, and 168 more runs to win. The potential for a Ponting hundred to clinch the game and save the series is so perfectly set up that it's almost been scripted.
But Ponting getting there would create more problems than it solves. In the fairytale, Prince Ricky would hit the match-winning hundred before announcing his retirement and riding off into the sunset upon his noble steed. We've seen it before - what better way to sign off than right at the top after playing an immense innings? And Ponting might well do that. But the trouble is, Ricky Ponting loves playing cricket for Australia. Why else would he be out there? It would have been easy for him to have bowed out when he handed the captaincy over earlier in the year, but his passion for playing ensured he was determined to keep going. As long as he feels he's good enough, he will keep going. And if he is good enough, even at the grand old age of 36 years and 337 days, to score hundreds against the best bowlers in the world, why wouldn't he keep going?
So what if he doesn't get there? The new Australian selectors, headed by John Inverarity, are yet to select a squad of players, let alone a team. With recent Australian failures very much on their minds, the new selectors will certainly want to start afresh, and what better way to signal the start of a new era than to get rid of the man who epitomises the old one? While Ponting has batted very well to get to 54 overnight, even getting to a far more significant score may not be enough to save him.
Ponting deserves the dignity of a memorable test farewell, not being dropped in ignominious circumstances. While it may not be Warne and McGrath bowing out amidst the tickertape of a 5-0 Ashes whitewash, guiding his team home with a century wouldn't be far off. The fairytale ending is set up for Ricky, but even if he got it, would he take it as an ending? The hundred and the win would be the perfect close to a fantastic career, but would the lure of future glories and a Dravidian renaissance (Dravid has 10 test centuries since turning 36) keep him in the Baggy Green? Either way, some big decisions will have be made, either from the Australian selectors or Ricky Ponting himself. The next 46 runs could be the biggest 46 runs in Ponting's career - if he gets there he will prove that the light hasn't gone out, and he is still good enough to score test runs. If not, he might not get the chance to decide. For once, I'll be cheering on Ponting and hoping that he gets there, because after everything he's given to cricket, he deserves to be the one that decides.
Thursday, 10 November 2011
The Death of Test Cricket?
South Africa all out for 96. Australia all out for 47. 68 runs fell for 18 wickets. Is test cricket dead? Obviously not.
OK, maybe it isn't right to use the events of one manic afternoon in Cape Town to prove beyond doubt that a format has been saved. But this one weird couple of hours has given us some of the best test cricket that will be seen this year, let alone this decade.
For all of the talk of twenty20 killing test cricket, of players disinterested due to the lack of money, and of crowds staying away, the main threat to test cricket over the past few years has been completely stone dead pitches. We've seen games where 700 has played 600 after the first innings, and the captains could have shaken hands on the draw after the second day. Only a miracle performance with the ball can produce any inch of excitement or sporting competition on these sorts of pitches, leading to dull draws and talk of test cricket's demise.
So isn't it refreshing when a pitch offers a tiny bit to the bowler? While there has been talk about the standard of the pitch not being appropriate to test cricket, there has been a fair battle between bat and ball throughout. The Australian first innings was a case-in-point, a fired up South African bowling attack led by the world's best paceman Dale Steyn chipped away at Australia, but were held back by a world class performance from Michael Clarke. Bat and ball were in fierce competition, and given that these were the world's best in action, the spectacle was fascinating. Clarke eventually perished for 151, dragging his team to 248, and it was as enthralling an innings as I can remember for a long time.
What happened next was absolutely mental, with wickets falling all over the place, and there were plenty of rash shots from batsmen that were far from world class. While there may have been one too many gremlins in the pitch, surely it was more exciting and interesting than seeing bat dominate ball for session after interminable session? And the partnership at the end of Amla and Smith to get South Africa to stumps just one down shows that a lot of the wickets were down to a combination of good bowling, and awful batting.
I don't think any of us really thought test cricket was on it's death bed, and days like this proved just how alive the format is. This test, and the one last week, where the West Indies gave India an almighty shock, certainly show that test cricket isn't really in a terminal decline. Sure, games like this and stories like this don't really help, but ultimately, test cricket is in rude health. And any format that England are best in the world is surely fine in anyone's book...
OK, maybe it isn't right to use the events of one manic afternoon in Cape Town to prove beyond doubt that a format has been saved. But this one weird couple of hours has given us some of the best test cricket that will be seen this year, let alone this decade.
For all of the talk of twenty20 killing test cricket, of players disinterested due to the lack of money, and of crowds staying away, the main threat to test cricket over the past few years has been completely stone dead pitches. We've seen games where 700 has played 600 after the first innings, and the captains could have shaken hands on the draw after the second day. Only a miracle performance with the ball can produce any inch of excitement or sporting competition on these sorts of pitches, leading to dull draws and talk of test cricket's demise.
So isn't it refreshing when a pitch offers a tiny bit to the bowler? While there has been talk about the standard of the pitch not being appropriate to test cricket, there has been a fair battle between bat and ball throughout. The Australian first innings was a case-in-point, a fired up South African bowling attack led by the world's best paceman Dale Steyn chipped away at Australia, but were held back by a world class performance from Michael Clarke. Bat and ball were in fierce competition, and given that these were the world's best in action, the spectacle was fascinating. Clarke eventually perished for 151, dragging his team to 248, and it was as enthralling an innings as I can remember for a long time.
What happened next was absolutely mental, with wickets falling all over the place, and there were plenty of rash shots from batsmen that were far from world class. While there may have been one too many gremlins in the pitch, surely it was more exciting and interesting than seeing bat dominate ball for session after interminable session? And the partnership at the end of Amla and Smith to get South Africa to stumps just one down shows that a lot of the wickets were down to a combination of good bowling, and awful batting.
I don't think any of us really thought test cricket was on it's death bed, and days like this proved just how alive the format is. This test, and the one last week, where the West Indies gave India an almighty shock, certainly show that test cricket isn't really in a terminal decline. Sure, games like this and stories like this don't really help, but ultimately, test cricket is in rude health. And any format that England are best in the world is surely fine in anyone's book...
Tuesday, 3 May 2011
Flower's Journey to World Domination
The big headline news from the world of cricket today is that Andy Flower has extended his contract as England team director. While there have been a few sensationalist tweets (as there will for any story regarding international cricket) it certainly hasn't been met with a wave of shock. Flower's job with England, as successful as it has been already, is only partway through. And having only just turned down the India job, it's hardly a massive shock that he wants to stay with the England team.
If there's one thing which I could pick as a buzzword for Andy Flower's time as England head honcho (I know buzzwords are more Peter Moore's thing, but deal with it), it would be "stability". England have had a settled side in which everyone knows what they're doing, and there hasn't been chops and changes willy-nilly. Even big selectorial decisions, such as dropping Finn for Melbourne was meticulously planned, well thought-out and made with the minimum of fuss. It's not Andy Flower's way to shout and scream and rock the boat. Leaving suddenly or demanding a pay rise just isn't his way, which has been proved by today's announcement that he is to remain loyal to his players and remain as England boss.
Since taking over just about two years ago, Flower has had unbridalled success. Yes, he's won two Ashes and a World T20, but you get the impression that the job is still only mid-way through completion. Flower's ultimate aim is to create a side that dominates world cricket like the West Indian side of the 70s and the Australians during the 00s. As well as England have done in the past two years, the poor display at the World Cup showed that we're a long way off reaching world domination. This summer, in series against arguably the two best teams in the world, plus playing the pretenders to the throne summer next gives Flower the opportunity to see how far along his steeds have come.
Flower seems a man with immense loyalty to his players, and abandoning them suddenly only part way along the journey just isn't his style. He, in the Andocracy with captain Strauss, can lead this England team to hugely bigger and better things, even bigger and better than what's already been achieved. Make no mistake, Flower is in for the long haul, and for an England fan, this can only be seen as brilliant news.
If there's one thing which I could pick as a buzzword for Andy Flower's time as England head honcho (I know buzzwords are more Peter Moore's thing, but deal with it), it would be "stability". England have had a settled side in which everyone knows what they're doing, and there hasn't been chops and changes willy-nilly. Even big selectorial decisions, such as dropping Finn for Melbourne was meticulously planned, well thought-out and made with the minimum of fuss. It's not Andy Flower's way to shout and scream and rock the boat. Leaving suddenly or demanding a pay rise just isn't his way, which has been proved by today's announcement that he is to remain loyal to his players and remain as England boss.
Since taking over just about two years ago, Flower has had unbridalled success. Yes, he's won two Ashes and a World T20, but you get the impression that the job is still only mid-way through completion. Flower's ultimate aim is to create a side that dominates world cricket like the West Indian side of the 70s and the Australians during the 00s. As well as England have done in the past two years, the poor display at the World Cup showed that we're a long way off reaching world domination. This summer, in series against arguably the two best teams in the world, plus playing the pretenders to the throne summer next gives Flower the opportunity to see how far along his steeds have come.
Flower seems a man with immense loyalty to his players, and abandoning them suddenly only part way along the journey just isn't his style. He, in the Andocracy with captain Strauss, can lead this England team to hugely bigger and better things, even bigger and better than what's already been achieved. Make no mistake, Flower is in for the long haul, and for an England fan, this can only be seen as brilliant news.
Thursday, 17 March 2011
Podcast - "Come On... Got Him!" (Muffled Noise)
Download this episode on Podbean
With it all on the line against the West Indies, England needed a big result. And didn't they go and get it. England's selectors finally got it right, although Will explains that they would have got it right much earlier had they been listening to the podcast. There's some unexpected love for one of England's heroes, and some very fickle predictions as to who will win the World Cup. Plus some Irish chat for the plucky boys in green, as well as some spin advice for Australia. Jonny f***ng Trott.
Enjoy this Podcast? Listen to loads like it on the Short Midwicket Podcast Page
With it all on the line against the West Indies, England needed a big result. And didn't they go and get it. England's selectors finally got it right, although Will explains that they would have got it right much earlier had they been listening to the podcast. There's some unexpected love for one of England's heroes, and some very fickle predictions as to who will win the World Cup. Plus some Irish chat for the plucky boys in green, as well as some spin advice for Australia. Jonny f***ng Trott.
Enjoy this Podcast? Listen to loads like it on the Short Midwicket Podcast Page
Have England Stumbled Across a Winning Formula?
To say England have made hard work of this group stage has been a rather large understatement. Through a combination of good luck, bad luck, competence and a heavy dose of incompetence, England have stumbled into a position where only unlikely wins for the West Indies against India, and Bangladesh against South Africa can see England denied from getting into the knock-outs. After naming teams which were mainly wrong, the selectors were thrust into making changes for the do-or-die West Indies clash, and it evidently payed off (just).
But is this the team to take England on to further glories in this World Cup?
England's hand was forced after the embarrassing loss to Bangladesh, and changes had to be made. Wright came in for Collingwood, Tremlett came in for Anderson, and Tredwell came in for the injured Shahzad.
Wright, who has been much maligned in the cricket blogosphere (mainly by me) hasn't performed very well in his many internationals over the past few years. And had there been another alternative, England certainly wouldn't have picked him. However, with Collingwood looking like he's terminally out of form, enough was enough, and it was worth putting Wright in. And today was the day that Luke Wright came of age. Coming in at a crucial position, Wright needed to play a responsible innings to get England to a respectable total. In the past, he would have gifted his wicket away slogging for not many, but here, he grafted a hard fought 40-odd (before gifting his wicket away slogging, but I'll forgive him that one). While there are certainly better batsmen who could play for England, Wright is the only other one in the squad, and when given his chance, seized it with both hands. He also does have the ability to get a few overs out - which are needed when England play a four-man attack.
The decision to remove Collingwood (an over-the-hill player who's best days are firmly behind him) is one thing, but the brave decision was to drop Anderson. Jimmy is, and will be, England's leader of the attack, and will go on to take many ODI wickets for England over the next few years. However, the current Jimmy Anderson is a shadow of his usual self, he looks dejected, out of form, and low on confidence. While it is a hard thing to do to get rid of a bowler of Jimmy's ability, it was the right thing to do, as a four man attack can't afford to carry anyone, regardless of reputation. Tremlett didn't perform particularly well, and the decision that needs to be made is whether a rest of a few days is enough for Jimmy to recover his mojo, or whether its worth sticking with Goobah.
And the final change was bringing in James Tredwell. I'm feeling rather smug this evening, as I've been calling for Tredder's inclusion since the Ireland game. Mick Yardy is a defensive bowler, who won't take wickets. While this may be handy in T20s, it's not a ploy that will work consistently in ODIs. Tredwell is an attacking spinner, and while he may leak a few boundaries, once he starts racking up some dots, he'll start taking wickets. Which was seen in his 4-fer. I'm so pleased for Tredwell, he's carried drinks around without getting games for the last few months, and for him to seize his chance so well is admirable.
So is the eleven that was put out for England the eleven that can win the World Cup? Well, Prior isn't an ODI opener. I'd much prefer to see Swann opening, but I'd also like to play up front for Chelsea. England's middle order is the strength with Trott, Bell and Morgan being supplimented by the hitting power of Bopara and my new favourite cricketer Luke Wright below. Having two attacking spinners in Swann and Tredwell is a big plus, but while Anderson was dropped in favour of Tremlett, I'd prefer to see Jimmy coming in instead of big Chris. However, that's only if it's a 100% fit and firing Jim, so if he isn't going to bowl well, he shouldn't be in the team. Shahzad has been ruled out, and will be replaced, and we've seen that getting someone new and fresh into the team has payed dividends. So, as such, (and given my penchant for random left-field selections) I'd like to see Chris Woakes come in, and go straight into the side.
England may not win this World Cup. In fact, England may still not get out of the groups. But as I write, they're still there, and as anyone who's ever watched a Dale Winton gameshow will know, you've got to be in it to win it. There are better teams out there, but there's something about this England team that's creating tight games. And when it really matters, England are just about doing enough to come out on top. Whether by luck or judgement, England are setting this World Cup alight, and whisper it quietly, but they still fancy their chances of winning it.
But is this the team to take England on to further glories in this World Cup?
England's hand was forced after the embarrassing loss to Bangladesh, and changes had to be made. Wright came in for Collingwood, Tremlett came in for Anderson, and Tredwell came in for the injured Shahzad.
Wright, who has been much maligned in the cricket blogosphere (mainly by me) hasn't performed very well in his many internationals over the past few years. And had there been another alternative, England certainly wouldn't have picked him. However, with Collingwood looking like he's terminally out of form, enough was enough, and it was worth putting Wright in. And today was the day that Luke Wright came of age. Coming in at a crucial position, Wright needed to play a responsible innings to get England to a respectable total. In the past, he would have gifted his wicket away slogging for not many, but here, he grafted a hard fought 40-odd (before gifting his wicket away slogging, but I'll forgive him that one). While there are certainly better batsmen who could play for England, Wright is the only other one in the squad, and when given his chance, seized it with both hands. He also does have the ability to get a few overs out - which are needed when England play a four-man attack.
The decision to remove Collingwood (an over-the-hill player who's best days are firmly behind him) is one thing, but the brave decision was to drop Anderson. Jimmy is, and will be, England's leader of the attack, and will go on to take many ODI wickets for England over the next few years. However, the current Jimmy Anderson is a shadow of his usual self, he looks dejected, out of form, and low on confidence. While it is a hard thing to do to get rid of a bowler of Jimmy's ability, it was the right thing to do, as a four man attack can't afford to carry anyone, regardless of reputation. Tremlett didn't perform particularly well, and the decision that needs to be made is whether a rest of a few days is enough for Jimmy to recover his mojo, or whether its worth sticking with Goobah.
And the final change was bringing in James Tredwell. I'm feeling rather smug this evening, as I've been calling for Tredder's inclusion since the Ireland game. Mick Yardy is a defensive bowler, who won't take wickets. While this may be handy in T20s, it's not a ploy that will work consistently in ODIs. Tredwell is an attacking spinner, and while he may leak a few boundaries, once he starts racking up some dots, he'll start taking wickets. Which was seen in his 4-fer. I'm so pleased for Tredwell, he's carried drinks around without getting games for the last few months, and for him to seize his chance so well is admirable.
So is the eleven that was put out for England the eleven that can win the World Cup? Well, Prior isn't an ODI opener. I'd much prefer to see Swann opening, but I'd also like to play up front for Chelsea. England's middle order is the strength with Trott, Bell and Morgan being supplimented by the hitting power of Bopara and my new favourite cricketer Luke Wright below. Having two attacking spinners in Swann and Tredwell is a big plus, but while Anderson was dropped in favour of Tremlett, I'd prefer to see Jimmy coming in instead of big Chris. However, that's only if it's a 100% fit and firing Jim, so if he isn't going to bowl well, he shouldn't be in the team. Shahzad has been ruled out, and will be replaced, and we've seen that getting someone new and fresh into the team has payed dividends. So, as such, (and given my penchant for random left-field selections) I'd like to see Chris Woakes come in, and go straight into the side.
England may not win this World Cup. In fact, England may still not get out of the groups. But as I write, they're still there, and as anyone who's ever watched a Dale Winton gameshow will know, you've got to be in it to win it. There are better teams out there, but there's something about this England team that's creating tight games. And when it really matters, England are just about doing enough to come out on top. Whether by luck or judgement, England are setting this World Cup alight, and whisper it quietly, but they still fancy their chances of winning it.
Tuesday, 15 March 2011
Podcast - Squeaky Bum Time
Download this episode
This World Cup is really hotting up! At least, half of it is. While Group A's all sorted out, there's a lot of issues left to be dealt with in Group B, which is getting rather exciting. Places in the quarter finals beckon for some, and places on the bonfire of broken dreams for the rest. Will it be England, or Ireland, or Bangladesh, or West Indies, or South Africa or India? Or could it even be Holland who sneaks through? (It can't). Will got his calculator out to see who it could be. More updates on everyone's chances, and there's a new leader in the Fantasy League. Get in.
This World Cup is really hotting up! At least, half of it is. While Group A's all sorted out, there's a lot of issues left to be dealt with in Group B, which is getting rather exciting. Places in the quarter finals beckon for some, and places on the bonfire of broken dreams for the rest. Will it be England, or Ireland, or Bangladesh, or West Indies, or South Africa or India? Or could it even be Holland who sneaks through? (It can't). Will got his calculator out to see who it could be. More updates on everyone's chances, and there's a new leader in the Fantasy League. Get in.
Monday, 7 March 2011
Podcast - Somewhat the Pinch Hitter
Download this episode on Podbean
Since last time's shocked-cast after the England / Ireland debacle, this pod's much more measured, as Will runs through the games that have been played, and the respective chances of the nations after a few World Cup game. Dissected most of all, however, is "World Cup Winners in waiting" England's win over South Africa, and whether Andrew Strauss is a latter-day Mike Brearley or a Chris Cowdrey. Will also talks about the importance of KP's injury, and who could replace him at the top of the order. #swanntoopen.
Since last time's shocked-cast after the England / Ireland debacle, this pod's much more measured, as Will runs through the games that have been played, and the respective chances of the nations after a few World Cup game. Dissected most of all, however, is "World Cup Winners in waiting" England's win over South Africa, and whether Andrew Strauss is a latter-day Mike Brearley or a Chris Cowdrey. Will also talks about the importance of KP's injury, and who could replace him at the top of the order. #swanntoopen.
Monday, 28 February 2011
Podcast - Coming Out of Shane Watson's Closet
Podbean
The World Cup's been going on for a week now, so Will has a look at the chances of the respective nations. There's some more stuff about the strengths (but mainly weaknesses) of the format of this tournament. England's tie with India is looked at in detail, and Will wonders what it would take to turn him South African. Get on the Fantasy League (with the pin of 1992) and the Sport Guru league with the password 'spedpert'.
The World Cup's been going on for a week now, so Will has a look at the chances of the respective nations. There's some more stuff about the strengths (but mainly weaknesses) of the format of this tournament. England's tie with India is looked at in detail, and Will wonders what it would take to turn him South African. Get on the Fantasy League (with the pin of 1992) and the Sport Guru league with the password 'spedpert'.
Friday, 25 February 2011
"Saffers, Saffers everywhere..."
I am lucky enough (or unlucky enough) to be in South Africa throughout this World Cup. While there are some obvious advantages (weather, for one), it does mean I have to put up with the pro-Protea drivel ahead of the inevitable semi-final choke.
Part of the "South Africa is the greatest" hype machine is the "everyone else is rubbish and cheating and don't deserve to win and won't win because South Africa is the greatest" angle. That includes badmouthing all the other teams, by pointing out that they're fulled with Protea rejects. So aren't as good as the real deal.
Take this article as an example. Not content with finding every person who's ever been to Southern Africa, and shoehorning them in as traitors, they're also backhandedly getting their excuses in early. If England win, South Africa win because of Trott, Strauss, Prior and KP. If Kenya win, it's because Jonty Rhodes is their fielding coach. And if Australia win it's because they wear green and gold too.
This general South African feeling of annoyance that their boys are turning out in the blues, greens, reds and blacks of the other nations is not without a slight amount of hypocrisy. I don't know much about Peter Davies, but reading his next blog, he speaks eloquently about how well Imran Tahir bowled. Pakistan born and bred Imran Tahir. The elephant in the room.
I can understand South African frustration that for one reason or another, some of the best players in world cricket have slipped through their fingers. And as an England fan who's seen Pietersen, Trott, Kieswetter and Lumb play this year (don't forget Eoin Morgan... but that's another story) I have accepted that there will be some sniping and bitterness from the South African cricket fraternity. But now, on behalf of world cricket, I'm humbly asking you to quietly stop. The moment Imran Tahir kissed the badge on his chest was the moment the "imported cricketers are ruining the game" argument lost all it's credability.
So no moaning at Ryan ten Doeschate that he went orange instead of green, OK?
Part of the "South Africa is the greatest" hype machine is the "everyone else is rubbish and cheating and don't deserve to win and won't win because South Africa is the greatest" angle. That includes badmouthing all the other teams, by pointing out that they're fulled with Protea rejects. So aren't as good as the real deal.
Take this article as an example. Not content with finding every person who's ever been to Southern Africa, and shoehorning them in as traitors, they're also backhandedly getting their excuses in early. If England win, South Africa win because of Trott, Strauss, Prior and KP. If Kenya win, it's because Jonty Rhodes is their fielding coach. And if Australia win it's because they wear green and gold too.
This general South African feeling of annoyance that their boys are turning out in the blues, greens, reds and blacks of the other nations is not without a slight amount of hypocrisy. I don't know much about Peter Davies, but reading his next blog, he speaks eloquently about how well Imran Tahir bowled. Pakistan born and bred Imran Tahir. The elephant in the room.
I can understand South African frustration that for one reason or another, some of the best players in world cricket have slipped through their fingers. And as an England fan who's seen Pietersen, Trott, Kieswetter and Lumb play this year (don't forget Eoin Morgan... but that's another story) I have accepted that there will be some sniping and bitterness from the South African cricket fraternity. But now, on behalf of world cricket, I'm humbly asking you to quietly stop. The moment Imran Tahir kissed the badge on his chest was the moment the "imported cricketers are ruining the game" argument lost all it's credability.
So no moaning at Ryan ten Doeschate that he went orange instead of green, OK?
Tuesday, 15 February 2011
England's Kit Confusion
As you all know, it's not about the batsmen, the bowlers, the pinch-hitters or the death bowlers. The Cricket World Cup is all about the kits that the teams will be wearing. The fashions of the World Cup are big - with new shirts highly trumpeted and millions sold worldwide. Not too long ago we saw a whole evening devoted to the launch of the Proteas World Cup kit (to mixed reviews), but despite the fact that England are likely to have a nice new shirt, there's been a deathly silence.
There's nothing on the ECB website. There's nothing on the adidas website (who don't have a cricket specific page - or even recognise it under the "Other Sports" section). There's been absolutely nothing said by anyone. We don't even know for 100% definite that there's even going to be a new shirt worn at the World Cup.
While this is a very minor issue in the grand plan of winning the World Cup, it isn't the greatest chapter in the history of the ECB or adidas' public relations. The launch of the kit, as seen when South Africa had a big gala unveiling of theirs, can be a great event to whet the appetite of the cricketing public ahead of the World Cup. And for kids (OK, mostly me), seeing a new kit is really cool and exciting. The ECB and adidas have missed a big trick, as if they had a big launch, it would create a real buzz about the kit, and people would be rushing down the shops to get their nice new World Cup shirt with "Wright 6" or "Tredwell 53" on the back. As it is, there's nothing. Just me, constantly searching the internet for anything about the kit.
Here's how adidas had a go in the past - the launch of test, ODI and T20 shirts in 2008. Bit better than the silence of 2011. And it's got Tim Ambrose, which is always a plus.
Given that adidas have just launched a new shirt for South Africa, I'm going to assume that England are using the same template, with the green and yellow subsituted for red and blue. After much sweeping of the internet, I've found a potential artist's impression. No idea if this is going to be the real deal, but it's the best we've got.
Graeme Smith in the Proteas adidas World Cup kit
Is this the kit? Who knows...
This England shirt (if there even is a new shirt and they aren't just keeping the current navy-with-green-armpit one) won't be getting a big launch with fanfares, cheerleaders or fireworks. It will more likely than not be first seen on whoever walks onto the pitch first in the warm up against Canada on Wednesday. Hardly the big launch that it deserves. Mainly because I love a good kit launch.
There's nothing on the ECB website. There's nothing on the adidas website (who don't have a cricket specific page - or even recognise it under the "Other Sports" section). There's been absolutely nothing said by anyone. We don't even know for 100% definite that there's even going to be a new shirt worn at the World Cup.
While this is a very minor issue in the grand plan of winning the World Cup, it isn't the greatest chapter in the history of the ECB or adidas' public relations. The launch of the kit, as seen when South Africa had a big gala unveiling of theirs, can be a great event to whet the appetite of the cricketing public ahead of the World Cup. And for kids (OK, mostly me), seeing a new kit is really cool and exciting. The ECB and adidas have missed a big trick, as if they had a big launch, it would create a real buzz about the kit, and people would be rushing down the shops to get their nice new World Cup shirt with "Wright 6" or "Tredwell 53" on the back. As it is, there's nothing. Just me, constantly searching the internet for anything about the kit.
Here's how adidas had a go in the past - the launch of test, ODI and T20 shirts in 2008. Bit better than the silence of 2011. And it's got Tim Ambrose, which is always a plus.
Given that adidas have just launched a new shirt for South Africa, I'm going to assume that England are using the same template, with the green and yellow subsituted for red and blue. After much sweeping of the internet, I've found a potential artist's impression. No idea if this is going to be the real deal, but it's the best we've got.
This England shirt (if there even is a new shirt and they aren't just keeping the current navy-with-green-armpit one) won't be getting a big launch with fanfares, cheerleaders or fireworks. It will more likely than not be first seen on whoever walks onto the pitch first in the warm up against Canada on Wednesday. Hardly the big launch that it deserves. Mainly because I love a good kit launch.
Sunday, 13 February 2011
Don't Mention The C-Word
Earlier on, I was talking to a South African about who I thought would win the World Cup. After discussing the chances of India, Sri Lanka, Australia and England, he wondered why I hadn't mentioned his Proteas.
As soon as he asked me, a look of panic came across his face. His brow filled suddenly with sweat, and his breaths became shallow and rapid. He knew the word I was about to come out with, even before I'd said it.
"Well... they're chokers".
Calling South Africa chokers has become such a stereotype. But a team don't get a reputation for something like that for no reason. But are a couple of occurences of choking a generation ago indicative of a nation's psyche?
Talking to other South Africans, the thinking is that for the first time in quite a few World Cups, there isn't much expected of the Proteas. With high hopes in '99, '03, and even in '07, pressure was high, and the South Africans notably didn't deal very well with it. The theory is that as much isn't hoped for of the South Africans, they won't be heavily burdened by the weight of expectation, and won't choke.
I was surprised when talking to the eminent Saffas that not much is expected from their boys. They're in the top couple of sides in the world, and they've just beaten India in a hard-fought series. For my money, they'll be "there or thereabouts". They'll (barring disaster) qualify easily from the groups, which puts them only one game away from a semi-final. While the team, supporters and management have been downplaying Protea chances, chances are they'll be again in a situation which they haven't deal with very well historically.
While the choking occured a couple of cricketing generations ago (and as such didn't feature many of this current outfit), the mental scars that remain still haunt this nation. While they undoutably have to be considered as winners, they'll only be able to lift the trophy if they overcome their biggest foes. Themselves.
As soon as he asked me, a look of panic came across his face. His brow filled suddenly with sweat, and his breaths became shallow and rapid. He knew the word I was about to come out with, even before I'd said it.
"Well... they're chokers".
Calling South Africa chokers has become such a stereotype. But a team don't get a reputation for something like that for no reason. But are a couple of occurences of choking a generation ago indicative of a nation's psyche?
Talking to other South Africans, the thinking is that for the first time in quite a few World Cups, there isn't much expected of the Proteas. With high hopes in '99, '03, and even in '07, pressure was high, and the South Africans notably didn't deal very well with it. The theory is that as much isn't hoped for of the South Africans, they won't be heavily burdened by the weight of expectation, and won't choke.
I was surprised when talking to the eminent Saffas that not much is expected from their boys. They're in the top couple of sides in the world, and they've just beaten India in a hard-fought series. For my money, they'll be "there or thereabouts". They'll (barring disaster) qualify easily from the groups, which puts them only one game away from a semi-final. While the team, supporters and management have been downplaying Protea chances, chances are they'll be again in a situation which they haven't deal with very well historically.
While the choking occured a couple of cricketing generations ago (and as such didn't feature many of this current outfit), the mental scars that remain still haunt this nation. While they undoutably have to be considered as winners, they'll only be able to lift the trophy if they overcome their biggest foes. Themselves.
Thursday, 13 January 2011
Podcast - Not in the top six pricks...
Find other fun pods like this on Podbean
Hello, and welcome to the Short Midwicket Podcast. Or for those who didn't listen to the Ashes ones, welcome back! Will has a final cursory glance backwards at the urn (as England ride off into the night with it), and looks forward to the T20 / ODI series to come. Also looked at is the wider world of cricket (there's a world of cricket outside of Australia v England? Who'd a thunk it?), as South Africa / India and NZ / Pakistan are reviewed, as well as the spot-fixing court case. All of that crickety goodness crammed into only 25 minutes? It could only be The Short Midwicket Podcast!
Hello, and welcome to the Short Midwicket Podcast. Or for those who didn't listen to the Ashes ones, welcome back! Will has a final cursory glance backwards at the urn (as England ride off into the night with it), and looks forward to the T20 / ODI series to come. Also looked at is the wider world of cricket (there's a world of cricket outside of Australia v England? Who'd a thunk it?), as South Africa / India and NZ / Pakistan are reviewed, as well as the spot-fixing court case. All of that crickety goodness crammed into only 25 minutes? It could only be The Short Midwicket Podcast!
Thursday, 16 December 2010
Ricky Ponting - the new Michael Vaughan?
There are some quite big parallels between the current situation regarding Ricky Ponting's captaincy and the final throes of Michael Vaughan's tenure as England skipper. Spookily so...
Ponting has had to relinquish One Day captaincy recently, just as Vaughan gave the reigns over to Collingwood. While there was mixed success with Collingwood; just as with Clarke, the split captaincy only served to undermine the test captain and put a seed of doubt in other senior players mind whether the captain is the right man for the job.
Ponting himself has been in a poor run of form, just as Vaughan was in as England were overpowered by a better South African outfit. This led to inevitable calls to drop an out of form Vaughan, as well as questions over the captaincy. While Ponting's decline may not be as terminal as Vaughan's, he certainly is not the player of earlier in the decade, which doesn't bode well.
So the series itself. Australia started really well in the first few days of the series, scoring loads of runs and bowling out England cheaply. But then allowed the touring side to bat their way to a comfortable draw. In 2008, England stuck on loads of runs before bowling South Africa out cheaply, but then watched as the touring side comfortably batted their way to the draw. And both Ponting's Australia and Vaughan's class of '08 lost the second test heavily.
But that's not where the similarities end. Before the Headingley test in 2008, Darren Pattinson was plucked from obscurity behind the captains back in shoehorned into the side. Vaughan later revealed that this massively undermined his position as captain, and was a key part of his eventual resignation. Ponting has Michael Beer, a man he had never even met before Monday (and like Pattinson in only single figures of first class games), and probably wasn't calling for Beer in the selection meeting.
Do the parallels end there? If Australia lose the third test (just as Vaughan lost the third test v South Africa), then Ponting may not be granted the dignity of a tearful resignation. Ricky has already lost two Ashes series, and a third loss would certainly mean he isn't in a job this time next week. Whether he gets a spot as a specialist batsman is up in the air, as Vaughan can testify. Ricky Ponting is one of the greatest captains of recent times. But he was fortunate enough to captain the greatest sides of recent times. This current outfit is not a great side. Vaughan, the man who was Ponting's adversary in the greatest series of them all, may be able to offer some advice (or at least some understanding of) Ponting's current situation. Once the wheels are in motion, it's difficult to stop the bandwagon. And Ponting's captaincy may be reaching the end of the road.
Ponting has had to relinquish One Day captaincy recently, just as Vaughan gave the reigns over to Collingwood. While there was mixed success with Collingwood; just as with Clarke, the split captaincy only served to undermine the test captain and put a seed of doubt in other senior players mind whether the captain is the right man for the job.
Ponting himself has been in a poor run of form, just as Vaughan was in as England were overpowered by a better South African outfit. This led to inevitable calls to drop an out of form Vaughan, as well as questions over the captaincy. While Ponting's decline may not be as terminal as Vaughan's, he certainly is not the player of earlier in the decade, which doesn't bode well.
So the series itself. Australia started really well in the first few days of the series, scoring loads of runs and bowling out England cheaply. But then allowed the touring side to bat their way to a comfortable draw. In 2008, England stuck on loads of runs before bowling South Africa out cheaply, but then watched as the touring side comfortably batted their way to the draw. And both Ponting's Australia and Vaughan's class of '08 lost the second test heavily.
But that's not where the similarities end. Before the Headingley test in 2008, Darren Pattinson was plucked from obscurity behind the captains back in shoehorned into the side. Vaughan later revealed that this massively undermined his position as captain, and was a key part of his eventual resignation. Ponting has Michael Beer, a man he had never even met before Monday (and like Pattinson in only single figures of first class games), and probably wasn't calling for Beer in the selection meeting.
Do the parallels end there? If Australia lose the third test (just as Vaughan lost the third test v South Africa), then Ponting may not be granted the dignity of a tearful resignation. Ricky has already lost two Ashes series, and a third loss would certainly mean he isn't in a job this time next week. Whether he gets a spot as a specialist batsman is up in the air, as Vaughan can testify. Ricky Ponting is one of the greatest captains of recent times. But he was fortunate enough to captain the greatest sides of recent times. This current outfit is not a great side. Vaughan, the man who was Ponting's adversary in the greatest series of them all, may be able to offer some advice (or at least some understanding of) Ponting's current situation. Once the wheels are in motion, it's difficult to stop the bandwagon. And Ponting's captaincy may be reaching the end of the road.
Friday, 5 November 2010
Podcast - ODI Likey
Download the Short Midwicket Podcast on iTunes
It's been ODI ahoy recently, with some cracking games. So Will looks at them and the future of ODI cricket. Australia are in turmoil (so naturally this is dissected), and Rob Key likes fast food. Everyone's a winner.
Emails to shortmidwicketpodcast@hotmail.co.uk, tweets to @shortmidwicket, and blogs for your perusal are at theshortmidwicket.blogspot.com!
It's been ODI ahoy recently, with some cracking games. So Will looks at them and the future of ODI cricket. Australia are in turmoil (so naturally this is dissected), and Rob Key likes fast food. Everyone's a winner.
Emails to shortmidwicketpodcast@hotmail.co.uk, tweets to @shortmidwicket, and blogs for your perusal are at theshortmidwicket.blogspot.com!
Friday, 29 October 2010
Podcast - Toy Story Tim
Download the latest podcast through iTunes
England are flying out to Australia, and Tim Bresnan’s very excited for the flight over. Will’s more excited about the Ashes, almost to the point that he can’t make coherent sentences. South Africa beat Pakistan in two T20s, and Short Midwicket Fantasy Ashes is launched. Plus something very special (probably not that special) hidden away at the end…
Email in to shortmidwicketpodcast@hotmail.co.uk (like Will’s dad) for email related fun, and to sign up for the Fantasy Ashes. Tweets at @shortmidwicket, and blogs at theshortmidwicket.blogspot.com. TTFN For Now!
England are flying out to Australia, and Tim Bresnan’s very excited for the flight over. Will’s more excited about the Ashes, almost to the point that he can’t make coherent sentences. South Africa beat Pakistan in two T20s, and Short Midwicket Fantasy Ashes is launched. Plus something very special (probably not that special) hidden away at the end…
Email in to shortmidwicketpodcast@hotmail.co.uk (like Will’s dad) for email related fun, and to sign up for the Fantasy Ashes. Tweets at @shortmidwicket, and blogs at theshortmidwicket.blogspot.com. TTFN For Now!
Monday, 11 October 2010
Who Is The Best In the World?
I was talking to a few people the other day about the merits of this India v Australia series. In the not too distant past, these two would be going toe to toe as the best two teams in the world. I don't know if they are today.
When I look at both teams, they both have some awesomely crap players. Marcus North is not a test player; neither is Hauritz. McGrath, Warne or Hayden they are not. There are some good journeymen players such as Bollinger and Katich, but they will not be remembered in 30 years as any of the best. Yes, there are some world-class performers in the Australian side, but it's fairly obviously a shadow of the all-conquering side of only a few years ago.
The Indian side is better, and with legends like Dravid and Tendulkar in the top order, they will beat most sides. But the bowling of Sreesanth, Ojha and Zaheer would struggle to worry the Richards, Gooches or Laras in their pomp.
When I look globally, I see plenty of brilliant players in the world's top sides, but I also see JP Duminy, Ian Bell and Dale Richards. Top level cricket isn't what it used to be.
When the Australian side of Warne, McGrath, Hayden, Langer, Gilchrist and Lee were tearing teams apart, they were clearly the best side in the world. Likewise the West Indian side of the 80s, and the England side of the 90s (spot the odd one out...). When sides would play against them, they would need to raise their games in order to compete, and any players not good enough would soon be found out, and taken away from test cricket. Without that sort of dominant team, too many test cricketers are being carried by the performances of their teammates, and racking up far too many test caps. Or grinding out one gritty innings to save their career. (Step forward Mr North).
Sure, everyone who plays test cricket must be half-good. They're probably better than me, and probably better than a few of their club / county / state mates. But are they test-class? Without teams being right at the top of their games, test cricket is suffering. The 2005 Ashes were contested by a team who were rightly regarded as the best in the world (and full of hall of famers), and a side who had built themselves up for that series, giving themselves a chance to overhaul that great side. It led to (perhaps) the best series of all time, with the standard of cricket superb throughout. 2009 was different. Australia were rebuilding having lost loads of players; England were trying to create a team after the loss of the coach and two captains. While the competition of the series was great, the overall quality of the cricket was poor. Yes, England won, so I'm not complaining, but nobody will be watching the 2009 DVD ahead of the 2005 six-disc boxset.
So what's the point of this blog? Basically, I am saying that the overall quality of test cricket is lower than it was a few years ago. We've seen Pakistan collapse for under a hundred three times in a four game series - unthinkable previously. And this week we've seen a player who isn't good enough to be playing in tests make a hundred. For Australia. In India. I'm sure this is a cyclical thing, and in a couple of years better players will be displacing their crap counterparts, and the natural order will be restored. But until then, we're going to have to suffer another few years of Marcus North. And Ian Bell.
When I look at both teams, they both have some awesomely crap players. Marcus North is not a test player; neither is Hauritz. McGrath, Warne or Hayden they are not. There are some good journeymen players such as Bollinger and Katich, but they will not be remembered in 30 years as any of the best. Yes, there are some world-class performers in the Australian side, but it's fairly obviously a shadow of the all-conquering side of only a few years ago.
The Indian side is better, and with legends like Dravid and Tendulkar in the top order, they will beat most sides. But the bowling of Sreesanth, Ojha and Zaheer would struggle to worry the Richards, Gooches or Laras in their pomp.
When I look globally, I see plenty of brilliant players in the world's top sides, but I also see JP Duminy, Ian Bell and Dale Richards. Top level cricket isn't what it used to be.
When the Australian side of Warne, McGrath, Hayden, Langer, Gilchrist and Lee were tearing teams apart, they were clearly the best side in the world. Likewise the West Indian side of the 80s, and the England side of the 90s (spot the odd one out...). When sides would play against them, they would need to raise their games in order to compete, and any players not good enough would soon be found out, and taken away from test cricket. Without that sort of dominant team, too many test cricketers are being carried by the performances of their teammates, and racking up far too many test caps. Or grinding out one gritty innings to save their career. (Step forward Mr North).
Sure, everyone who plays test cricket must be half-good. They're probably better than me, and probably better than a few of their club / county / state mates. But are they test-class? Without teams being right at the top of their games, test cricket is suffering. The 2005 Ashes were contested by a team who were rightly regarded as the best in the world (and full of hall of famers), and a side who had built themselves up for that series, giving themselves a chance to overhaul that great side. It led to (perhaps) the best series of all time, with the standard of cricket superb throughout. 2009 was different. Australia were rebuilding having lost loads of players; England were trying to create a team after the loss of the coach and two captains. While the competition of the series was great, the overall quality of the cricket was poor. Yes, England won, so I'm not complaining, but nobody will be watching the 2009 DVD ahead of the 2005 six-disc boxset.
So what's the point of this blog? Basically, I am saying that the overall quality of test cricket is lower than it was a few years ago. We've seen Pakistan collapse for under a hundred three times in a four game series - unthinkable previously. And this week we've seen a player who isn't good enough to be playing in tests make a hundred. For Australia. In India. I'm sure this is a cyclical thing, and in a couple of years better players will be displacing their crap counterparts, and the natural order will be restored. But until then, we're going to have to suffer another few years of Marcus North. And Ian Bell.
Monday, 10 May 2010
What England owe Ravi
Kevin Pietersen, star of England's World T20 win over South Africa has flown home. In his place comes the black sheep of English cricket Ravi Bopara. Bopara, scapegoated and slaughtered for four indifferent tests on the back of three successive hundreds, has been dropped out of the one day side, and become an unloved, unwanted pariah.
But it wasn't too long ago when Ravi Bopara was the great hope of English cricket. A mainstay of the one-day team (having been part of some fantastic innings - Sri Lanka and India in 2007 to name two), Bopara made English cricket history by scoring three successive test hundreds against the West Indies last year. Bopara was fast-tracked into the test team as a specialist number three (a position he is unfamiliar with) for last summer, but after a few failures he was bombed out for the final Ashes test for the untried Jonathan Trott. Bopara didn't even make the squad for the tour of South Africa, in either the test or one day squad, but was surprisingly named in the World T20 squad. Some would say to simply justify his central contract. But who would be that controversial?
England owe Ravi Bopara. Big time. Ravi is one of our most talented batsmen, and there is no way there isn't a place for him in one of the codes. After those three hundreds (albeit against a West Indies team who had no idea why they were there), Bopara should have nailed on a place in the team for the next five years. Ian Bell has carved out a career from making a score every 10 tests, and he keeps his place. Yes, Bopara had a poor Ashes, but there's no way that Bell deserved to play in that final test ahead of Ravi. Bopara had a poor four tests, Bell had a poor four years. Bell's England career seems to be based on the principle that "he's due runs". What's to say Bopara isn't due runs? Players go in and out of form, and as any cliché-enthusiast will tell you, form is temporary but class is permanent. (Copyright every blog about Dimitar Berbatov ever). Can the selectors really justify Bell over Bopara, when Ravi is clearly the better batsman?
Ravi is definately owed one by the ECB. For the final day at the Oval, where the Ashes was clinched, every England player who played in the series got a medal, lap of honour, and a mention in Andrew Strauss' speech. Monty Panesar, who played in one test, got a special mention. Bopara's imput into England winning was slight, but at least he was part of a test winning team at Lord's. Panesar played out a draw. Bopara's cumulative score of 1-1 was the same as Steve Harmison and Graham Onions, and was equal to Panesar's 0-0. But Onions and Panesar (along with Kevin Pietersen) were all out for the lap of honour, basking in the reflective glory of an Ashes win. Bopara was playing for Essex at Chelmsford.
Bopara didn't make the squads for the tours to South Africa and Bangladesh, or the squad for the T20 tour of Dubai against Pakistan. He made a solid fifty in the T20 warm-up game before this tournament, before he was again dropped. England do owe Ravi Bopara, but ultimately, Ravi Bopara owes England a few scores. If he can make a few match-winning contributions as England win the World T20, Bopara can force himself back into the selectors reckoning for further test and ODI honours. Bopara owes it to himself to make runs. Hopefully starting tonight against New Zealand.
But it wasn't too long ago when Ravi Bopara was the great hope of English cricket. A mainstay of the one-day team (having been part of some fantastic innings - Sri Lanka and India in 2007 to name two), Bopara made English cricket history by scoring three successive test hundreds against the West Indies last year. Bopara was fast-tracked into the test team as a specialist number three (a position he is unfamiliar with) for last summer, but after a few failures he was bombed out for the final Ashes test for the untried Jonathan Trott. Bopara didn't even make the squad for the tour of South Africa, in either the test or one day squad, but was surprisingly named in the World T20 squad. Some would say to simply justify his central contract. But who would be that controversial?
England owe Ravi Bopara. Big time. Ravi is one of our most talented batsmen, and there is no way there isn't a place for him in one of the codes. After those three hundreds (albeit against a West Indies team who had no idea why they were there), Bopara should have nailed on a place in the team for the next five years. Ian Bell has carved out a career from making a score every 10 tests, and he keeps his place. Yes, Bopara had a poor Ashes, but there's no way that Bell deserved to play in that final test ahead of Ravi. Bopara had a poor four tests, Bell had a poor four years. Bell's England career seems to be based on the principle that "he's due runs". What's to say Bopara isn't due runs? Players go in and out of form, and as any cliché-enthusiast will tell you, form is temporary but class is permanent. (Copyright every blog about Dimitar Berbatov ever). Can the selectors really justify Bell over Bopara, when Ravi is clearly the better batsman?
Ravi is definately owed one by the ECB. For the final day at the Oval, where the Ashes was clinched, every England player who played in the series got a medal, lap of honour, and a mention in Andrew Strauss' speech. Monty Panesar, who played in one test, got a special mention. Bopara's imput into England winning was slight, but at least he was part of a test winning team at Lord's. Panesar played out a draw. Bopara's cumulative score of 1-1 was the same as Steve Harmison and Graham Onions, and was equal to Panesar's 0-0. But Onions and Panesar (along with Kevin Pietersen) were all out for the lap of honour, basking in the reflective glory of an Ashes win. Bopara was playing for Essex at Chelmsford.
Bopara didn't make the squads for the tours to South Africa and Bangladesh, or the squad for the T20 tour of Dubai against Pakistan. He made a solid fifty in the T20 warm-up game before this tournament, before he was again dropped. England do owe Ravi Bopara, but ultimately, Ravi Bopara owes England a few scores. If he can make a few match-winning contributions as England win the World T20, Bopara can force himself back into the selectors reckoning for further test and ODI honours. Bopara owes it to himself to make runs. Hopefully starting tonight against New Zealand.
Saturday, 8 May 2010
Team England Flying On
Way back during the long hard months of the IPL, I wrote a blog about how England were going to win the World T20. At the time, I had some stick, with naysayers supporting India, Australia, South Africa and even Sri Lanka well ahead of an England team who have never won an international tournament. Especially when you look at England's past T20 fortunes, which have been mixed (to be kind).
But I looked beyond hard stats and conventional opinion. I looked at Kevin Pietersen's brutal run-scoring. I looked at Eoin Morgan's inventive hitting. I looked at the spin of Swann and Yardy, and the handy all-rounders Collingwood, Bresnan and Wright. While I thought England would utilise Broad and Anderson, Sidebottom has performed well and offers a very tight option at the death. Kieswetter and Lumb were an unknown quantity at the top, but I tipped them to fire. I looked at the England team, and I saw a team that could win.
And if they continue as they have against Pakistan and South Africa, there's no reason why they can't.
The great thing about this England team is that they are one - a team. In the South Africa game, every single player (except Luke Wright... sorry Luke) contributed; either making good runs or taking wickets, and it was a fantastic team performance. In recent England one-day history, too much pressure would be put on a Pietersen or a Trescothick to perform, but now the pressure is spread amongst a team which bats 1-11. Collingwood was happy to continue playing attacking strokes, knowing there was Wright, Bresnan and Yardy to follow him, all of whom can hit quick runs. As a captain, Collingwood has so many options; as well as the five front-line bowlers, he also has Wright, Pietersen, Lumb and himself to be called on to have a twirl. And in the field, even Ryan Sidebottom (hardly the most mobile) made two world-class catches - even being likened to a ballerina for his diving effort to dismiss de Villiers.
James Anderson is one of the finest bowlers in the world - and he can't even get into this England team. In Twenty20, form and momentum is everything, and England have both. As the team fly to St Lucia (and I fly up the Sport Guru prediction table), there's no reason why they can't fly back home with the World T20 trophy safely in tow.
But I looked beyond hard stats and conventional opinion. I looked at Kevin Pietersen's brutal run-scoring. I looked at Eoin Morgan's inventive hitting. I looked at the spin of Swann and Yardy, and the handy all-rounders Collingwood, Bresnan and Wright. While I thought England would utilise Broad and Anderson, Sidebottom has performed well and offers a very tight option at the death. Kieswetter and Lumb were an unknown quantity at the top, but I tipped them to fire. I looked at the England team, and I saw a team that could win.
And if they continue as they have against Pakistan and South Africa, there's no reason why they can't.
The great thing about this England team is that they are one - a team. In the South Africa game, every single player (except Luke Wright... sorry Luke) contributed; either making good runs or taking wickets, and it was a fantastic team performance. In recent England one-day history, too much pressure would be put on a Pietersen or a Trescothick to perform, but now the pressure is spread amongst a team which bats 1-11. Collingwood was happy to continue playing attacking strokes, knowing there was Wright, Bresnan and Yardy to follow him, all of whom can hit quick runs. As a captain, Collingwood has so many options; as well as the five front-line bowlers, he also has Wright, Pietersen, Lumb and himself to be called on to have a twirl. And in the field, even Ryan Sidebottom (hardly the most mobile) made two world-class catches - even being likened to a ballerina for his diving effort to dismiss de Villiers.
James Anderson is one of the finest bowlers in the world - and he can't even get into this England team. In Twenty20, form and momentum is everything, and England have both. As the team fly to St Lucia (and I fly up the Sport Guru prediction table), there's no reason why they can't fly back home with the World T20 trophy safely in tow.
Friday, 7 May 2010
The Yellow Cap
The Tour de France has the Yellow Jersey. The IPL has the Orange Cap. And Sport Guru has the Yellow Cap. And I won the Yellow Cap for Round 3 of the Test Match Sofa World T20 prediction league.
Despite forgetting to make a pick for the England / Pakistan game, my excellent prediction skills gave me 3 out of 3 for the other games of the Super 8s so far (including getting the South Africa / New Zealand game on the nose with an SA win by 13 runs). My other predictions, of an unfancied Australian win and an unfavoured Sri Lanka win were also correct, giving me a 100% record for the round, and the best result out of all Test Match Sofa listeners.
I am currently in 8th position in the TMS prediction league, and while I would have originally taken a top-half finish, I'm now going for more. Lizzy - you're in my sights. I've got the momentum. I've got the predictions. Could I make a late surge up the table with the end of the tournament in sight?
Join the fun in the Test Match Sofa pool with the password wormchew
Despite forgetting to make a pick for the England / Pakistan game, my excellent prediction skills gave me 3 out of 3 for the other games of the Super 8s so far (including getting the South Africa / New Zealand game on the nose with an SA win by 13 runs). My other predictions, of an unfancied Australian win and an unfavoured Sri Lanka win were also correct, giving me a 100% record for the round, and the best result out of all Test Match Sofa listeners.
I am currently in 8th position in the TMS prediction league, and while I would have originally taken a top-half finish, I'm now going for more. Lizzy - you're in my sights. I've got the momentum. I've got the predictions. Could I make a late surge up the table with the end of the tournament in sight?
Join the fun in the Test Match Sofa pool with the password wormchew
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)