It's pretty common knowledge that I love Andrew Strauss. He's one of my favourite players to watch, he's a brilliant captain who's seen England to near world dominance in test cricket, and he's a great bloke. In his long, illustrious career, he's pretty much had it all. Except a double century.
It's bizarre that a player of Strauss' calibre; one who's achieved so much, should have never passed 200. In fact, before today, he'd never got out of the 170's. It's been the one obvious box that's been left unchecked throughout his career.
Overnight in the Middlesex v Leicestershire game, Andrew Strauss is 185 not out. Overtaking the 161 from the 2009 Ashes, his previous best for Middlesex of 176, and that infamous career-saving 177 in Napier, Strauss has moved within touching distance of that maiden double ton. Only a fairly toothless Leicestershire bowling line-up tired from the T20 exploits of the weekend stand between Strauss and the 15 runs that can seal his own personal destiny.
Andrew Strauss is no longer a young man (although at 34 he still has a few years left in him), and the chance to score a double century may not come along again. Given that Strauss plays the majority of his cricket against proven international bowlers (and India's seamers) in the full glare of the media spotlight and under the pressure of captaining his country, he certainly won't get a better opportunity than against a ragged Leicestershire attack who are mentally counting down the days until their trip to the Champions League.
Scoring 200 would be huge for Strauss, as it would almost be the final piece of what's already been an exceptional career. While scoring 200 against a fairly disinterested bottom of the table side on a flat track in Division Two isn't the greatest achievement in the history of cricket, it would give Strauss the self-confidence and belief that he can do it; something that has held him back a touch as he's approached the milestone in the past. And given the dominance of his current test side, plus their penchant for 'daddy hundreds', you wouldn't be surprised to see Strauss being the latest addition to England's Double Ton Club over the next few games.
But first he needs to score 15 more runs for Middlesex against Leicestershire. He's already made his highest ever First Class score, which is some achievement, but now he needs to convert into into a double.
Showing posts with label 2009. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2009. Show all posts
Tuesday, 30 August 2011
Friday, 12 August 2011
Bopara the Nearly Man
Ravi Bopara is the sort of man who you imagine steps on a lot of rakes. A good batsman, handy bowler, and by all accounts fairly amiable chap, Bopara just has the unfortunate knack of just being a nearly man.
For a player so obviously talented as he is, Bopara's England career has never ignited as it should have. Part of it has been down to his personal behaviour and attitude, but it's also been down to his being at the right place, but often at the wrong time. And his failure to grab hold of the opportunity when the chance presents itself.
After being in and out of the test team following his 2007 debut, the three consecutive test centuries in 2009 should have been the launchpad for him being a mainstay in the England team for decades. With Bell out of the team and Bopara bang in form, Ravi had the chance to nail down his place and become a test regular. However, he didn't seize the opportunity, and was out of the team before the Ashes series finished. Thanks to the rise of Jonathan Trott and the resurgence of Ian Bell in what became a very well settled England middle order, Bopara didn't get another chance for another two years.
After the 2010/11 Ashes, Paul Collingwood retired from his spot in the England middle order. Bopara, more mature and worldly wise by now, chose to turn down the riches of the IPL to stay and fight for the test position. His direct competitor, Eoin Morgan, went off to the IPL, but hit 193 for the England Lions against Sri Lanka, and made the spot instead. Again Ravi had to wait.
In the second test against India, Jonathan Trott rolled his collarbone, and was ruled out of this third test. This time, Ravi was sent for. And on a day where Cook made 294 and Morgan made 100, Bopara failed, with a scratchy looking seven. Trott will most likely come back in for the fourth test, and with England's middle order looking incredibly settled, Ravi may have another two years to wait until he gets his next bat in a test for England. And with James Taylor, Jonny Bairstow and plenty of others floating around who may usurp him in the pecking order, it's not inconceivable that this is the last test Ravi Bopara plays.
To be a successful test cricketer, you have to take your chances when you get them. The prime example of that is Tim Bresnan - a man who's never nailed down a permanent position in England's test team but averages 45 with the bat and 24 with the ball. He's almost made it impossible to be dropped. At a time where England are looking set to dominate world cricket, chances will be few and far between, and Tim Bresnan's seized the opportunities given to him with those big hands. Ravi Bopara, however, hasn't done that. Test cricket is a harsh place at the best of times, but with England's pool of talent so strong at the moment it's positively ruthless. On his day, Bopara can be an excellent batsman, but he just hasn't proved that for England. He may get another chance in the future and take it, but until then, Ravi Bopara will be the ultimate unfulfilled talent - England's nearly man.
For a player so obviously talented as he is, Bopara's England career has never ignited as it should have. Part of it has been down to his personal behaviour and attitude, but it's also been down to his being at the right place, but often at the wrong time. And his failure to grab hold of the opportunity when the chance presents itself.
After being in and out of the test team following his 2007 debut, the three consecutive test centuries in 2009 should have been the launchpad for him being a mainstay in the England team for decades. With Bell out of the team and Bopara bang in form, Ravi had the chance to nail down his place and become a test regular. However, he didn't seize the opportunity, and was out of the team before the Ashes series finished. Thanks to the rise of Jonathan Trott and the resurgence of Ian Bell in what became a very well settled England middle order, Bopara didn't get another chance for another two years.
After the 2010/11 Ashes, Paul Collingwood retired from his spot in the England middle order. Bopara, more mature and worldly wise by now, chose to turn down the riches of the IPL to stay and fight for the test position. His direct competitor, Eoin Morgan, went off to the IPL, but hit 193 for the England Lions against Sri Lanka, and made the spot instead. Again Ravi had to wait.
In the second test against India, Jonathan Trott rolled his collarbone, and was ruled out of this third test. This time, Ravi was sent for. And on a day where Cook made 294 and Morgan made 100, Bopara failed, with a scratchy looking seven. Trott will most likely come back in for the fourth test, and with England's middle order looking incredibly settled, Ravi may have another two years to wait until he gets his next bat in a test for England. And with James Taylor, Jonny Bairstow and plenty of others floating around who may usurp him in the pecking order, it's not inconceivable that this is the last test Ravi Bopara plays.
To be a successful test cricketer, you have to take your chances when you get them. The prime example of that is Tim Bresnan - a man who's never nailed down a permanent position in England's test team but averages 45 with the bat and 24 with the ball. He's almost made it impossible to be dropped. At a time where England are looking set to dominate world cricket, chances will be few and far between, and Tim Bresnan's seized the opportunities given to him with those big hands. Ravi Bopara, however, hasn't done that. Test cricket is a harsh place at the best of times, but with England's pool of talent so strong at the moment it's positively ruthless. On his day, Bopara can be an excellent batsman, but he just hasn't proved that for England. He may get another chance in the future and take it, but until then, Ravi Bopara will be the ultimate unfulfilled talent - England's nearly man.
Friday, 5 August 2011
Flower's Selection Headache
England's selectors name their squad for the third test against India tomorrow, and they're faced with a dilemma, and his name is Tim Bresnan. After sticking with a tried and tested formula of seven batsmen and four bowlers over the past couple of years, the selectors will have to decide on whether to drastically change policy and shuffle things around, or to stick with traditional and keep the status quo.
Ever since being gubbed at Headingley by the rampant Australians in 2009, Andy Flower has had an obvious reticence to only playing six specialist batsmen. With a long tail starting at seven, England were rolled within 34 overs, and ultimately lost within three days by an innings. Despite containing 'handy' players down the order (with Swann and Broad both sharing slightly face-saving half-centuries), England lacked the safety-net of an extra batsman, and paid the price handsomely. Since then, Flower and Strauss have steadfastly refused to change their preferred shape, which as rigidly defensive as it may be, has clearly wielded great results.
Jonathan Trott is injured, and unlikely to play at Edgbaston. And normally we would just see the "next cab off the rank" in operation, with (probably) James Taylor coming in to the side to maintain the natural order of things. However. Tim Bresnan has just had an excellent game at Trent Bridge, with a five-wicket haul and a 90 certainly adding weight to the argument that he is a true test all-rounder. It would almost appear illogical to drop him after the game he's just had, if not downright cruel. So with Trott out should England move Bresnan up to seven and go with only the six out-and-out batsmen?
Things certainly seem to be in Bresnan's favour. Even though he may arguably be a touch too high at number seven, with Swann and Broad below him, there's certainly a tail that can wag viciously. Having Matt Prior at number six isn't an issue, as he's proven in the past that he's plenty good enough to bat there, and England have enough batsmen in top form to afford to add an extra bowler. The shape could still work if Chris Tremlett doesn't pass fit, with Steven Finn ready and waiting to step into the breach, and either way England would have a very strong batting and bowling line-up.
Headingley 2009 still haunts Andy Flower, and the scars of that performance have been evident in the team selections ever since. However, it's surely impossible to omit Bresnan, and the return of Tremlett would give them a very big headache. However, the injury to Trott gives England the opportunity to have their cake and eat it, and to rearrange the shape of the side. With India on the ropes, England must go out and finish them off, and the best way to do so is with an aggressive line-up. It just remains to be seen whether Andy Flower makes the brave call in changing the policy, or the safe one in sticking with the usual.
Ever since being gubbed at Headingley by the rampant Australians in 2009, Andy Flower has had an obvious reticence to only playing six specialist batsmen. With a long tail starting at seven, England were rolled within 34 overs, and ultimately lost within three days by an innings. Despite containing 'handy' players down the order (with Swann and Broad both sharing slightly face-saving half-centuries), England lacked the safety-net of an extra batsman, and paid the price handsomely. Since then, Flower and Strauss have steadfastly refused to change their preferred shape, which as rigidly defensive as it may be, has clearly wielded great results.
Jonathan Trott is injured, and unlikely to play at Edgbaston. And normally we would just see the "next cab off the rank" in operation, with (probably) James Taylor coming in to the side to maintain the natural order of things. However. Tim Bresnan has just had an excellent game at Trent Bridge, with a five-wicket haul and a 90 certainly adding weight to the argument that he is a true test all-rounder. It would almost appear illogical to drop him after the game he's just had, if not downright cruel. So with Trott out should England move Bresnan up to seven and go with only the six out-and-out batsmen?
Things certainly seem to be in Bresnan's favour. Even though he may arguably be a touch too high at number seven, with Swann and Broad below him, there's certainly a tail that can wag viciously. Having Matt Prior at number six isn't an issue, as he's proven in the past that he's plenty good enough to bat there, and England have enough batsmen in top form to afford to add an extra bowler. The shape could still work if Chris Tremlett doesn't pass fit, with Steven Finn ready and waiting to step into the breach, and either way England would have a very strong batting and bowling line-up.
Headingley 2009 still haunts Andy Flower, and the scars of that performance have been evident in the team selections ever since. However, it's surely impossible to omit Bresnan, and the return of Tremlett would give them a very big headache. However, the injury to Trott gives England the opportunity to have their cake and eat it, and to rearrange the shape of the side. With India on the ropes, England must go out and finish them off, and the best way to do so is with an aggressive line-up. It just remains to be seen whether Andy Flower makes the brave call in changing the policy, or the safe one in sticking with the usual.
Friday, 17 June 2011
Time to Banish Broad?
England have a dilemma, and his name is Stuart Broad. 37 tests into his test career, and Broad is averaging a very average 36 with the ball. Given leeway in terms of his average and fairly poor return with the ball for the early part of his test career due to his young age, England will have wanted Broad to have kicked on by now to become one of the world's best. Put simply, he hasn't done that.
Three and a half years in test cricket (and almost five years in international cricket) should mean he's able to adapt to conditions and consistently take wickets. Yet still he belies his 142 international appearances by mindlessly banging the ball in short irregardless of match conditions, pitch conditions, or batsman weaknesses.
Broad was preferred in this game to Steven Finn - a bowler who does have a wonky radar, but bowls a hell of a lot of wicket taking balls. This afternoon (Day 2) at the Rose Bowl, Broad bowled nigh on every ball short of a length, and didn't even look close to taking a wicket. Broad isn't at all threatening with the short ball, which makes his tactics seem all the more odd. Broad appears to believe that just because he is a tall man, he has to bowl at the batsman's head and stare him down each time the batsman dare swipe at one. It's all becoming rather tedious.
If Broad wants a lesson on how a tall player can take test wickets, he should look down at the other end to see Chris Tremlett. Tremlett is a full two inches taller than the dwarf sized Broad, yet doesn't resort to attempting to break the batsman's face every ball. Instead, Tremlett bowls a full length in order to get the batsman coming forward, and takes wickets because he naturally gets extra bounce which is often all too good for the batsmen. Tremlett has only played 8 tests. It should be Broad who is showing Tremlett how it's done, not the other way around.
For three years, there wasn't a hint of Broad being dropped at all. However, if England are aiming for number one, they have to recognise when player's aren't pulling their weight, and act. That means that batsmen have to score runs, and bowlers have to take wickets. Broad just isn't taking enough wickets - he hasn't taken more than two in an innings since the tour of South Africa over 18 months ago - which quite simply is nowhere near good enough. There's no doubt that he can do it - the Ashes winning spell at the Oval in 2009 is testament to that. But those sorts of performances are becoming increasingly distant, and can England afford to have someone who isn't performing to the required level anywhere regularly enough? The key at the Oval was that Broad bowled full and attacked the stumps, with four of the five victims either being bowled or trapped lbw. If Broad returns to bowling that sort of length, he can be a very potent bowler, but he hasn't really done that since that heady day back in 2009.
Dropping Broad from the test team may seem odd when he starts his stint as an England captain next week, but it's not as if there's a shortage of test quality replacements available to come in. Finn, Bresnan, Shahzad, Onions and even Dernbach are all more than good enough and at the moment only loyalty is keeping Broad ahead of them. Broad's injury during the Ashes was unfortunate, but the fact that England won two games by an innings after he went home has proved that he is indeed a dispensible player. If England really do want to become the number one team in the world, they have to start by putting out a team of their best players. That means the batsmen who are to score the most runs, and bowlers who are going to take the most wickets. Quite simply, Stuart Broad does not take enough wickets to justify his place in the test team, and as harsh or ruthless as it may be, shouldn't be in the England test team
And if you head over to The Short Midwicket Facebook page, you can vote on who should replace Broad (if anyone) - and while you're there you could 'like' us too!
Three and a half years in test cricket (and almost five years in international cricket) should mean he's able to adapt to conditions and consistently take wickets. Yet still he belies his 142 international appearances by mindlessly banging the ball in short irregardless of match conditions, pitch conditions, or batsman weaknesses.
Broad was preferred in this game to Steven Finn - a bowler who does have a wonky radar, but bowls a hell of a lot of wicket taking balls. This afternoon (Day 2) at the Rose Bowl, Broad bowled nigh on every ball short of a length, and didn't even look close to taking a wicket. Broad isn't at all threatening with the short ball, which makes his tactics seem all the more odd. Broad appears to believe that just because he is a tall man, he has to bowl at the batsman's head and stare him down each time the batsman dare swipe at one. It's all becoming rather tedious.
If Broad wants a lesson on how a tall player can take test wickets, he should look down at the other end to see Chris Tremlett. Tremlett is a full two inches taller than the dwarf sized Broad, yet doesn't resort to attempting to break the batsman's face every ball. Instead, Tremlett bowls a full length in order to get the batsman coming forward, and takes wickets because he naturally gets extra bounce which is often all too good for the batsmen. Tremlett has only played 8 tests. It should be Broad who is showing Tremlett how it's done, not the other way around.
For three years, there wasn't a hint of Broad being dropped at all. However, if England are aiming for number one, they have to recognise when player's aren't pulling their weight, and act. That means that batsmen have to score runs, and bowlers have to take wickets. Broad just isn't taking enough wickets - he hasn't taken more than two in an innings since the tour of South Africa over 18 months ago - which quite simply is nowhere near good enough. There's no doubt that he can do it - the Ashes winning spell at the Oval in 2009 is testament to that. But those sorts of performances are becoming increasingly distant, and can England afford to have someone who isn't performing to the required level anywhere regularly enough? The key at the Oval was that Broad bowled full and attacked the stumps, with four of the five victims either being bowled or trapped lbw. If Broad returns to bowling that sort of length, he can be a very potent bowler, but he hasn't really done that since that heady day back in 2009.
Dropping Broad from the test team may seem odd when he starts his stint as an England captain next week, but it's not as if there's a shortage of test quality replacements available to come in. Finn, Bresnan, Shahzad, Onions and even Dernbach are all more than good enough and at the moment only loyalty is keeping Broad ahead of them. Broad's injury during the Ashes was unfortunate, but the fact that England won two games by an innings after he went home has proved that he is indeed a dispensible player. If England really do want to become the number one team in the world, they have to start by putting out a team of their best players. That means the batsmen who are to score the most runs, and bowlers who are going to take the most wickets. Quite simply, Stuart Broad does not take enough wickets to justify his place in the test team, and as harsh or ruthless as it may be, shouldn't be in the England test team
And if you head over to The Short Midwicket Facebook page, you can vote on who should replace Broad (if anyone) - and while you're there you could 'like' us too!
Monday, 23 May 2011
We All Dream of a Team of Brendan Nash
Whenever an innings is in danger of total subsidence, someone needs to put up their hands and fight. West Indies, reduced to 77-4 chasing an unrealistic amount of runs and with over a day left to save the series win, were on the brink. Step forward Brendan Paul Nash.
Every team needs a Brendan Nash. They may not be the most elegant or pretty strokemaker. They may go through horrible runs of form and not contribute anything for years. But when their team needs them most, they stand up and are counted.
Nestling in every test batting order, amongst the flashy extroverts and the powerful big hitters should be one gusty nurdler who just refuses to get out. No matter what's thrown at them (literally, in the case of Saeed Ajmal), using a solid defence and an immaculate ability to leave the ball, they can spend hour upon hour battling for their team.
Nash hasn't been in the greatest of form. His scores leading up to the final innings so far in this two match series were 5, 3 and 6. But his team were staring down the barrel, and he knew what he had to do.
The performances of the gutsy match saver are as important as the extravagant match winner. Would England have won the Ashes in 2009 without Paul Collingwood's nine hour vigil at Cardiff in the first test? Yes, Jonathan Trott scored the runs at the Oval to take back the urn, but without Brigadier Block's sheer gritty determination, it would have been Ricky Ponting hailed as the captain of all captains, not Andrew Strauss.
Brendan Nash is currently only 30 runs and 64 balls into saving the series for the West Indies, and he probably won't, but you wouldn't count against his sheer bloody-mindedness actually carrying the day for his adopted nations. Players like Nash are the essence of test cricket - those who won't stop fighting until the final wicket has been taken or the final over bowled. You can keep your powerplays, pinch-hitters and DLF Maximums - Brendan Nash is real cricket. And long may it continue.
Every team needs a Brendan Nash. They may not be the most elegant or pretty strokemaker. They may go through horrible runs of form and not contribute anything for years. But when their team needs them most, they stand up and are counted.
Nestling in every test batting order, amongst the flashy extroverts and the powerful big hitters should be one gusty nurdler who just refuses to get out. No matter what's thrown at them (literally, in the case of Saeed Ajmal), using a solid defence and an immaculate ability to leave the ball, they can spend hour upon hour battling for their team.
Nash hasn't been in the greatest of form. His scores leading up to the final innings so far in this two match series were 5, 3 and 6. But his team were staring down the barrel, and he knew what he had to do.
The performances of the gutsy match saver are as important as the extravagant match winner. Would England have won the Ashes in 2009 without Paul Collingwood's nine hour vigil at Cardiff in the first test? Yes, Jonathan Trott scored the runs at the Oval to take back the urn, but without Brigadier Block's sheer gritty determination, it would have been Ricky Ponting hailed as the captain of all captains, not Andrew Strauss.
Brendan Nash is currently only 30 runs and 64 balls into saving the series for the West Indies, and he probably won't, but you wouldn't count against his sheer bloody-mindedness actually carrying the day for his adopted nations. Players like Nash are the essence of test cricket - those who won't stop fighting until the final wicket has been taken or the final over bowled. You can keep your powerplays, pinch-hitters and DLF Maximums - Brendan Nash is real cricket. And long may it continue.
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.
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.
Friday, 17 September 2010
What Flintoff Gave Cricket
Andrew Flintoff has retired from cricket. Nobody could say it was a surprise, as the injuries kept stacking up, and returns were looking more and more unlikely. Fred has been a fantastic performer for England over the past decade, and while some are quick to mock his subsequent career as a celebrity, it's important that nobody underestimates Flintoff's importance to English cricket, and what he's given to cricket in general.
Brilliant bowling
Flintoff's over to Langer and Ponting at Edgbaston in 2005 was surely his highlight - and indeed was one of the best overs ever bowled. With every ball on the spot, he asked questions of two of the world's top batsmen each delivery, before removing both of them. While history remembers Hoggard's hat-trick at Barbados, it was Flintoff who took a five-for in the first innings. As both a renowned death bowler in limited overs, and as a strike bowler in tests, Flintoff was England's talisman with the ball, and by the end of his career was a better bowler than batsman (not bad for a supposed batsman who could bowl a bit). Often tipping above 90mph, as well as generating some swing, Flintoff was a deadly bowler to face. Highlights have to be the continued high performance in the 2005 Ashes, bowling to Jacques Kallis in 2008 at Edgbaston, as well as the scintillating spell on the final morning at Lord's in 2009 to finish off the Aussies and pick up an all-too-rare 5 wicket haul.
Destructive batting
While many will remember his hundred at Trent Bridge in 2005, his best innings was probably against the West Indies at Edgbaston, where he brutally marmalised the Windie attack to pick up 167. And (attention Flintoff cliche fans) he even picked out his dad in the crowd with one massive six! (Who dropped it.) Flintoff owned all the shots, and while his brute strength meant that they often cleared the rope, people shouldn't forget the natural batsman Flintoff's excellent timing. He didn't just belt teams around; a patient 95 against South Africa at the Oval was Flintoff at his best, mixing some big hitting with some delicate strokes.
Solid fielding
Flintoff was long known as one of the best slippers in the business, and his bucket-hands meant very few chances were spilled. Never the most mobile or agile, Flintoff's seminal moment in the field was running out Ricky Ponting at the Oval in 2009. (You knew it was coming!)
Captaincy
Yes, Fred may have been captain for the lowest point of English cricket, but he was also skipper for a test victory in India, as well as overseeing a ODI series victory out in Australia. But to be fair, he wasn't a great captain. Sorry Fred.
The Aura
Whenever Flintoff either came on to bowl or came out to bat, the crowd became frenzied, and expectations were raised. Every interview with players who played with Fred will speak of how much belief he gave them when they were playing alongside him, and his simply being there inspired so many great victories. When Flintoff played well, oftentimes England won, and that was due to everyone raising their game to match the feats of Fred. Conversely, opposition batsmen who had been scoring freely went into their shells once the announcer called out "Andrew Flintoff", simply because the man had such an aura surrounding him.
Sportmanship
Brett Lee at Edgbaston. Nuff said.
Sense of Fun
Everyone who played with Fred said what great fun he was in the dressing room, whether that was singing to Rocket Man or Ring of Fire, or hitting the bar (heavily) after the game. Unsurprisingly, the general public's main knowledge of Fred is of his red bleary eyes on top of the bus after winning the Ashes, confessing that he hadn't been to bed that night. Also included is the famous "mind the pavilion windows, Tino" sledge which bought the wicket of Tino Best in 2004. Sure, he could take it to far at times (Fredalo, anyone?) but what a bloke he must have been to play alongside.
New fans
After the 2005 Ashes, cricket became back page news, and was picked up by so many new fans nationwide. Much of that was due to Flintoffmania, a by-product of Ashes Fever, and his high level of performance, combined with his character meant that cricket was brought into the mainstream. While celebrity (whether unwanted or not) followed for Flintoff, he played a huge part in bringing cricket to a new generation of fans (myself included).
Andrew Flintoff may now have left cricket, but he leaves a massive hole in the game. He brought so much to the game, and served it so well, and it's only right that he is remembered as a true legend of the sport.
Oh how we love!
Your pedalo
Your gorgeous wife
Your ample girth
Your chain smoking
Your beer drinking
Your slip catching
Your seam bowling
Your six hitting
Our all round man
ooooohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
Freddie Flintoff
Freddie Freddie Flintoff
Freddie Flintoff
Freddie Freddie Flintoff
Well played, Super Fred.
Brilliant bowling
Flintoff's over to Langer and Ponting at Edgbaston in 2005 was surely his highlight - and indeed was one of the best overs ever bowled. With every ball on the spot, he asked questions of two of the world's top batsmen each delivery, before removing both of them. While history remembers Hoggard's hat-trick at Barbados, it was Flintoff who took a five-for in the first innings. As both a renowned death bowler in limited overs, and as a strike bowler in tests, Flintoff was England's talisman with the ball, and by the end of his career was a better bowler than batsman (not bad for a supposed batsman who could bowl a bit). Often tipping above 90mph, as well as generating some swing, Flintoff was a deadly bowler to face. Highlights have to be the continued high performance in the 2005 Ashes, bowling to Jacques Kallis in 2008 at Edgbaston, as well as the scintillating spell on the final morning at Lord's in 2009 to finish off the Aussies and pick up an all-too-rare 5 wicket haul.
Destructive batting
While many will remember his hundred at Trent Bridge in 2005, his best innings was probably against the West Indies at Edgbaston, where he brutally marmalised the Windie attack to pick up 167. And (attention Flintoff cliche fans) he even picked out his dad in the crowd with one massive six! (Who dropped it.) Flintoff owned all the shots, and while his brute strength meant that they often cleared the rope, people shouldn't forget the natural batsman Flintoff's excellent timing. He didn't just belt teams around; a patient 95 against South Africa at the Oval was Flintoff at his best, mixing some big hitting with some delicate strokes.
Solid fielding
Flintoff was long known as one of the best slippers in the business, and his bucket-hands meant very few chances were spilled. Never the most mobile or agile, Flintoff's seminal moment in the field was running out Ricky Ponting at the Oval in 2009. (You knew it was coming!)
Captaincy
Yes, Fred may have been captain for the lowest point of English cricket, but he was also skipper for a test victory in India, as well as overseeing a ODI series victory out in Australia. But to be fair, he wasn't a great captain. Sorry Fred.
The Aura
Whenever Flintoff either came on to bowl or came out to bat, the crowd became frenzied, and expectations were raised. Every interview with players who played with Fred will speak of how much belief he gave them when they were playing alongside him, and his simply being there inspired so many great victories. When Flintoff played well, oftentimes England won, and that was due to everyone raising their game to match the feats of Fred. Conversely, opposition batsmen who had been scoring freely went into their shells once the announcer called out "Andrew Flintoff", simply because the man had such an aura surrounding him.
Sportmanship
Brett Lee at Edgbaston. Nuff said.
Sense of Fun
Everyone who played with Fred said what great fun he was in the dressing room, whether that was singing to Rocket Man or Ring of Fire, or hitting the bar (heavily) after the game. Unsurprisingly, the general public's main knowledge of Fred is of his red bleary eyes on top of the bus after winning the Ashes, confessing that he hadn't been to bed that night. Also included is the famous "mind the pavilion windows, Tino" sledge which bought the wicket of Tino Best in 2004. Sure, he could take it to far at times (Fredalo, anyone?) but what a bloke he must have been to play alongside.
New fans
After the 2005 Ashes, cricket became back page news, and was picked up by so many new fans nationwide. Much of that was due to Flintoffmania, a by-product of Ashes Fever, and his high level of performance, combined with his character meant that cricket was brought into the mainstream. While celebrity (whether unwanted or not) followed for Flintoff, he played a huge part in bringing cricket to a new generation of fans (myself included).
Andrew Flintoff may now have left cricket, but he leaves a massive hole in the game. He brought so much to the game, and served it so well, and it's only right that he is remembered as a true legend of the sport.
Oh how we love!
Your pedalo
Your gorgeous wife
Your ample girth
Your chain smoking
Your beer drinking
Your slip catching
Your seam bowling
Your six hitting
Our all round man
ooooohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
Freddie Flintoff
Freddie Freddie Flintoff
Freddie Flintoff
Freddie Freddie Flintoff
Well played, Super Fred.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)