So despite winning the first test by a canter and being miles ahead in the second, the English cricketing press would have you believe that Alastair Cook's brave boys are on the verge of meltdown. The bowling fab four of Anderson, Broad, Swann and Finn are all in the wickets, so they're safe. Cook's captaincy seems to be going well, so he's off the hook. Prior, Trott and Bell haven't done a great deal wrong recently, so they're free to go. The columns detailing Joe Root's ascent to the role of Saviour Of English Cricket look far too positive, which means somebody has to shoulder the blame for the inevitable wheels falling off. That poor bastard is Nick Compton, who despite a steady start to his test career is already "facing the chopping block", "staring down the barrel" or even a "dead man walking". Which all seems a little harsh and unnecessary.
Nick Compton is playing in his 9th test match. In that time he's been part of an England team that won a generation-defining series away in India, and scored back to back hundreds - two things plenty of players don't achieve in 90 test matches. In that time Compton's forged a decent understanding with Alastair Cook, making six partnerships over 50, with three of those being converted into hundred run stands, and a top partnership of 231. Compton has bought a stability and maturity to the top of the order born of over 100 county games for Middlesex and Somerset where he's proven that he's willing to work hard for his runs and not throw his wicket away. His promotion to test cricket came where England were at a crossroads at the top of the order after Andrew Strauss' retirement, and he's let nobody down. And while he made two hundreds away in New Zealand in a series where English batsmen otherwise struggled, four failures in the home series has apparently put his position in jeopardy.
Jonny Bairstow is currently in the England team due to an injury to Kevin Pietersen. Jonny Bairstow has played one fewer test than Compton, and has made two fewer hundreds. Going into this match he also averaged 10 runs fewer per innings. Bairstow (23 years old compared to Compton's nearly 30) has played 40 fewer first class games than Compton. The word on the street is for Bairstow to keep his spot in the team once Pietersen returns, with Compton being the man to miss out to make way for The Reintegrated One. Has there been anything in Bairstow's test career to suggest that he's more likely to make runs than Nick Compton? I'm not sure.
I don't want to take anything away from Jonny Bairstow as he will undoubtedly score thousands of test runs for England, but Nick Compton is someone who knows their game inside out and has been piling on runs for a long time - Bairstow is still attempting to get to grips with his, as the amount of times he's been dismissed hooking for Yorkshire this season have proved. Dropping Compton to keep Bairstow strikes me as bizarre - especially considering the upheaval that doing so would cause. Getting Compton straight outta there would mean Root would have to move up to open - admittedly something he's done throughout his career for Yorkshire, but something he'd have no experience with in an England shirt, and the first Ashes test is one hell of a place to find out whether someone can sink or swim. Besides, knee-jerk decisions and uncertainty didn't get England to the number one spot in the world (even if they did knock them off again) and it doesn't seem like Andy Flower or England's way to change for changes sake.
While an Ashes summer always brings some level of media hoopla, England will do well to ignore the armchair selectors (the irony of me writing this while sitting in an armchair is not lost on me) who want the next man to finally be the one who faces the chop. There's a lot going right about this England team at the minute, and while Nick Compton has struggled for form this series, he should very much be seen as a big part of the team who hope to go and win back to back Ashes in the next six months. It is very much the way of the world that no matter how well the team are going, someone has to be supposedly in the firing line, and the best thing team England can do is to back Compton to come good and make runs, which he's more than good enough to do. While speculation about who takes to the field on July 10th at Trent Bridge will continue until the teamsheets are in, I'm confident that the selectors and the powers that be will do the right thing and keep hold of Compo. Besides, the last English opener who was certain to be dropped before an Ashes series didn't do too badly, did he?
Showing posts with label 2010/11. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2010/11. Show all posts
Monday, 27 May 2013
Tuesday, 6 September 2011
Cook Stakes A Claim For The T20s
You can never write off Alastair Cook. He just has an innate desire to prove people wrong, going about his business quietly, effectively, and at a mind-numbing level of boring. After the talk of dropping him from the test side last summer, he then went on to have the winter to end all winters in Australia. Booted out of the ODI team, he comes back in, as captain, and makes stacks upon stacks of runs against Sri Lanka, pausing only to stick two fingers up at Michael Atherton everytime he got to yet another milestone. Only a return to the T20 team, which he was written off for long ago stands between Cook and the world domination of being the best batsman in all three formats of the game.
The rain affected ODI at the Rose Bowl was the perfect opportunity to show the selectors that he can play the shortest form. He already has a T20 hundred, don't you know. Faced with a potentially tough chase of 188, Cook carried his bat, making an unbeaten 80 off just 63 balls. He even hit a six.
As match-winning as it was, I still just don't see Alastair Cook as a T20 player. The Indian attack was woefully one-paced, and didn't offer much resistance to Cook's relentless dabs into the on-side. And while it was scored at a fairly decent lick (a strike rate of 127 isn't the best, but he was no stick in the mud), he just didn't score many boundaries. His 50 came up off 38 balls, and only included three fours (and that worldy of a six). He ran the ones hard and the twos harder, and while that should be applauded, against better fielding sides than a cold bunch of Indian second teamers, he won't be able to milk it as easily as he did. Cook will want to open - which means batting in the powerplay, and that means finding gaps and hitting boundaries. England's World T20 win was based on Lumb and Kieswetter getting them off to a flyer early, before big hitters came in and carried on the good work. The fact of the matter is that there are far better candidates to blaze it around at the top of the order than Alastair Cook. Cook would also expect to come in and captain, and judging by some of the odd decisions (Dernbach 5 overs for 49, Bresnan 4 overs for 43 yet Jimmy Anderson who bowled 3 overs for just 11 isn't seen again after a superb opening spell) he may not be best suited to do that either.
However, if watching Alastair Cook over the past year has taught me anything, it's to never write off Alastair Cook. He clearly believes he has a future as an international T20 player, so he will try his damndest to impress on the selectors that he should be playing in T20s for England. Cook is in the middle of a run of form that suggests he could score runs in any situation or in any format, and the unbeaten 80, as unglamourous and unflashy as it was may go some way to showing the powers that be that he should be in England's T20 team. Whether Stuart Broad, who was given the captaincy assuming Cook wouldn't get into the T20 team agrees or not is a different matter...
The rain affected ODI at the Rose Bowl was the perfect opportunity to show the selectors that he can play the shortest form. He already has a T20 hundred, don't you know. Faced with a potentially tough chase of 188, Cook carried his bat, making an unbeaten 80 off just 63 balls. He even hit a six.
As match-winning as it was, I still just don't see Alastair Cook as a T20 player. The Indian attack was woefully one-paced, and didn't offer much resistance to Cook's relentless dabs into the on-side. And while it was scored at a fairly decent lick (a strike rate of 127 isn't the best, but he was no stick in the mud), he just didn't score many boundaries. His 50 came up off 38 balls, and only included three fours (and that worldy of a six). He ran the ones hard and the twos harder, and while that should be applauded, against better fielding sides than a cold bunch of Indian second teamers, he won't be able to milk it as easily as he did. Cook will want to open - which means batting in the powerplay, and that means finding gaps and hitting boundaries. England's World T20 win was based on Lumb and Kieswetter getting them off to a flyer early, before big hitters came in and carried on the good work. The fact of the matter is that there are far better candidates to blaze it around at the top of the order than Alastair Cook. Cook would also expect to come in and captain, and judging by some of the odd decisions (Dernbach 5 overs for 49, Bresnan 4 overs for 43 yet Jimmy Anderson who bowled 3 overs for just 11 isn't seen again after a superb opening spell) he may not be best suited to do that either.
However, if watching Alastair Cook over the past year has taught me anything, it's to never write off Alastair Cook. He clearly believes he has a future as an international T20 player, so he will try his damndest to impress on the selectors that he should be playing in T20s for England. Cook is in the middle of a run of form that suggests he could score runs in any situation or in any format, and the unbeaten 80, as unglamourous and unflashy as it was may go some way to showing the powers that be that he should be in England's T20 team. Whether Stuart Broad, who was given the captaincy assuming Cook wouldn't get into the T20 team agrees or not is a different matter...
Friday, 19 August 2011
Ian Bell's Unfinished Business
There have been two obvious stages to Ian Bell's international career. We had a boy who was thrown in at the deep end and floundered, and now we have the man who is taking on all comers and scoring an awful lot of runs. There is a clear and obvious line between the two phases of Ian Bell - being dropped out in the West Indies and being forced to leave the England set up, go back to county cricket, and earn his place back. Since his redemption it seems as though he's been on a mission to right all of the wrongs of his previous few years at top level cricket, and he could now quite justifiably be called the best batsman in the world.
Ian Bell always had the technique for international cricket. Those fluent cover drives that had the Oval crowd drooling today aren't a million miles away from the same fluent cover drives that had crowds drooling back when he was making his way in a Warwickshire, and later England shirt. What has changed, however, is Bell's mindset. Back in the day Bell was the perfect example of a player who had all of the shots, but lacked the mental fortitude to succeed in test cricket. A lot of pretty starts were very rarely converted, and the stat of him never being the first batsman in an innings to reach 100 proved that he only really made runs when England were well on top. Prone to crumbling under pressure, it seemed that Bell's time was up after he carried the can for the seminal 51 all out in Jamaica.
Bell left that miserable tour as a spare part - a player who couldn't quite cut it at international level despite making some decent scores (199 against South Africa the previous summer springs to mind) and it looked like his international career was over. During the time away from the England set up, Ian Bell grew up. He knew he had to toughen up, and that there were a lot of things he had to put right if he was to succeed. So he added some steel to that technique, and has slowly set right the wrongs of his early international career.
Never been the first batsman in an innings to make 100
Never made 100 against Australia
Never made 100 at number three
Never made a test 200 (not quite there but at 181 not out overnight he should get there early tomorrow)
Already with five test tons to his name this calendar year, and averaging 128 in 2011, Bell has turned himself into an absolute machine. Adding runs - consistent runs, to his superb range of shotmaking, Bell makes an incredibly strong case to be considered the world's best. That his feats have been somewhat overshadowed by the form of some of his teammates shows just how good a side England are at the moment. A team who, a couple of years ago always had talent but never consistently delivered, added some grit and determination to their obvious ability and have become the best in the world. A little bit like Ian Bell.
Ian Bell always had the technique for international cricket. Those fluent cover drives that had the Oval crowd drooling today aren't a million miles away from the same fluent cover drives that had crowds drooling back when he was making his way in a Warwickshire, and later England shirt. What has changed, however, is Bell's mindset. Back in the day Bell was the perfect example of a player who had all of the shots, but lacked the mental fortitude to succeed in test cricket. A lot of pretty starts were very rarely converted, and the stat of him never being the first batsman in an innings to reach 100 proved that he only really made runs when England were well on top. Prone to crumbling under pressure, it seemed that Bell's time was up after he carried the can for the seminal 51 all out in Jamaica.
Bell left that miserable tour as a spare part - a player who couldn't quite cut it at international level despite making some decent scores (199 against South Africa the previous summer springs to mind) and it looked like his international career was over. During the time away from the England set up, Ian Bell grew up. He knew he had to toughen up, and that there were a lot of things he had to put right if he was to succeed. So he added some steel to that technique, and has slowly set right the wrongs of his early international career.
Never made a test 200 (not quite there but at 181 not out overnight he should get there early tomorrow)
Already with five test tons to his name this calendar year, and averaging 128 in 2011, Bell has turned himself into an absolute machine. Adding runs - consistent runs, to his superb range of shotmaking, Bell makes an incredibly strong case to be considered the world's best. That his feats have been somewhat overshadowed by the form of some of his teammates shows just how good a side England are at the moment. A team who, a couple of years ago always had talent but never consistently delivered, added some grit and determination to their obvious ability and have become the best in the world. A little bit like Ian Bell.
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.
Thursday, 28 July 2011
The Horse for the Course or the Young Buck?
Last week at Lord's, the only selectorial decision England had to make was whether Stuart Broad or Tim Bresnan should make the third seamer spot. And with Broad having a blinder at HQ and Chris Tremlett seemingly ruled out due to injury, Bresnan is again embroiled in a fight for that final fast-bowling position in the side.
His opposition this week is Steven Finn, the fastest Englishman to 50 test wickets, but still lacks that little bit of control so desired by Strauss and Flower. The argument for Finn is a good one - he does have a great knack of taking wickets, and with a bit of extra height and bounce he could be England's ENFORCER (not that they need one).
However, things are stacked in Tim's favour. For one, he doesn't have to partake in a long late night drive from London to Nottingham the night before the game, so can instead tuck up in bed and get an early night. He also has much more of an ability to swing the ball; so much so that he was England's "horses for courses" swing bowler at Melbourne, incidentally replacing Finn. With a green top prepared and Trent Bridge historically being a swingers haven, Bresnan should surely be favourite. Add to that the fact that Finn didn't even make the 12 man squad for this game and that Messrs Flower and Strauss favour the "next cab off the rank" selectorial policy (they don't mind a bit of jargon, do they?) it's all certainly pointing towards Bresnan getting the nod at 10.30 tomorrow morning.
So Steven Finn's going to have to make the 105 mile journey from Lord's to Trent Bridge all in vain. He's spent more time on the motorways than playing for England this summer, and while he's not quite there in terms of getting into the team, he's showing willing and his knocking on the door is certainly getting louder. Sadly it seems he's just going to have to keep knocking and remaining patient for a little bit longer yet. Bresnan, however, has the chance to show why he did so well in the final two Ashes tests, and firmly show just how good a test bowler he can be for England.
His opposition this week is Steven Finn, the fastest Englishman to 50 test wickets, but still lacks that little bit of control so desired by Strauss and Flower. The argument for Finn is a good one - he does have a great knack of taking wickets, and with a bit of extra height and bounce he could be England's ENFORCER (not that they need one).
However, things are stacked in Tim's favour. For one, he doesn't have to partake in a long late night drive from London to Nottingham the night before the game, so can instead tuck up in bed and get an early night. He also has much more of an ability to swing the ball; so much so that he was England's "horses for courses" swing bowler at Melbourne, incidentally replacing Finn. With a green top prepared and Trent Bridge historically being a swingers haven, Bresnan should surely be favourite. Add to that the fact that Finn didn't even make the 12 man squad for this game and that Messrs Flower and Strauss favour the "next cab off the rank" selectorial policy (they don't mind a bit of jargon, do they?) it's all certainly pointing towards Bresnan getting the nod at 10.30 tomorrow morning.
So Steven Finn's going to have to make the 105 mile journey from Lord's to Trent Bridge all in vain. He's spent more time on the motorways than playing for England this summer, and while he's not quite there in terms of getting into the team, he's showing willing and his knocking on the door is certainly getting louder. Sadly it seems he's just going to have to keep knocking and remaining patient for a little bit longer yet. Bresnan, however, has the chance to show why he did so well in the final two Ashes tests, and firmly show just how good a test bowler he can be for England.
Tuesday, 26 July 2011
Matt Prior, and why England have nothing to fix
Before this series started, I said that Matt Prior is the best wicket-keeper batsman in the world. I'm only repeating that because at Lord's he proved me right - he put together two excellent innings filled with exciting strokes down at number seven (the second one recovering England frmo a potential collapse to a position of dominance, capped with another test century), as well as keeping expertly at the notoriously difficult Lord's.
Buoyed by this success, the calls for a Prior promotion are gathering. A test average of over 45 with six centuries certainly proves that Prior could easily bat in the top six - indeed he could even bat higher if required. Eoin Morgan, for all of his limited over success, is yet to ignite in his nascent test career, and is not yet 100% assured of his place. Promoting Prior to six would allow England to bring in Tim Bresnan at seven, and play an extra bowler.
There is logic to this idea - the injury to Zaheer on Thursday proved the fragility of a four-man attack, and adding an extra seamer would both help lighten the load on the others, and provide a supplementary option if all isn't going well for the main foursome.
However, the balance of the side would be distorted in quite an unsettling way. First off, England are losing a very good batsman in Eoin Morgan, and replacing him with a bits and pieces bat in Tim Bresnan. They'd also be adding to a bowling attack that doesn't really need adding to. They had no problems in taking 20 wickets at the bowler's graveyard that is Lord's, so why would they need any assistance at the much preferred Trent Bridge? But crucially, the biggest mistake to changing the balance of the team would be moving Matt Prior.
Prior's success over the past few series has been when he's batted at number seven. His quick scoring rate (he knocks along at a test strike rate of 66 - pretty rapid) is best implemented at the number seven position, either to counter-attack and put England back onto the front foot (as he did in the second innnings on Sunday) or to further drive home the advantage against weary bowlers (as he did in his Ashes century at Sydney). Moving him up or down the order would negate the effect of his runs; either adding undue pressure or removing his significance on proceedings.
The old saying goes "if it ain't broke, don't fix it", and given England's consistency in selection over the past few years, we're almost certain to see an unchanged side at Trent Bridge when the two sides line up again on Friday. And given the remarkable rise of Matt Prior from the earringed lout of his early test days to today's world-class performer, expect him to show why he's leapt to his highest ranking in the world with yet another high-class performance.
Buoyed by this success, the calls for a Prior promotion are gathering. A test average of over 45 with six centuries certainly proves that Prior could easily bat in the top six - indeed he could even bat higher if required. Eoin Morgan, for all of his limited over success, is yet to ignite in his nascent test career, and is not yet 100% assured of his place. Promoting Prior to six would allow England to bring in Tim Bresnan at seven, and play an extra bowler.
There is logic to this idea - the injury to Zaheer on Thursday proved the fragility of a four-man attack, and adding an extra seamer would both help lighten the load on the others, and provide a supplementary option if all isn't going well for the main foursome.
However, the balance of the side would be distorted in quite an unsettling way. First off, England are losing a very good batsman in Eoin Morgan, and replacing him with a bits and pieces bat in Tim Bresnan. They'd also be adding to a bowling attack that doesn't really need adding to. They had no problems in taking 20 wickets at the bowler's graveyard that is Lord's, so why would they need any assistance at the much preferred Trent Bridge? But crucially, the biggest mistake to changing the balance of the team would be moving Matt Prior.
Prior's success over the past few series has been when he's batted at number seven. His quick scoring rate (he knocks along at a test strike rate of 66 - pretty rapid) is best implemented at the number seven position, either to counter-attack and put England back onto the front foot (as he did in the second innnings on Sunday) or to further drive home the advantage against weary bowlers (as he did in his Ashes century at Sydney). Moving him up or down the order would negate the effect of his runs; either adding undue pressure or removing his significance on proceedings.
The old saying goes "if it ain't broke, don't fix it", and given England's consistency in selection over the past few years, we're almost certain to see an unchanged side at Trent Bridge when the two sides line up again on Friday. And given the remarkable rise of Matt Prior from the earringed lout of his early test days to today's world-class performer, expect him to show why he's leapt to his highest ranking in the world with yet another high-class performance.
Monday, 6 June 2011
Finn's Nifty Fifty
Today, Steven Finn broke a long-standing record by becoming the fastest man in English test history to get to 50 test wickets. At just 22 years and 63 days, and in his 12th test match, Finn has broken the previous record (set by Ian Botham) by 6 months. Pretty good going.
So for someone who clearly takes wickets, and has an average of 26, why hasn't Finn been in the team? Dropped after Perth and only back in here thanks to Jimmy Anderson's injury, Finn hasn't nailed down a place in the team, and chances are he'll drop out again when Anderson returns.
The key stat to look at is Finn's run rate in tests. 3.97. While he has a very handy knack of taking wickets, he does leak runs, and with a lot of England's plans revolving around keeping it tight and creating pressure, having a leaky bowler who is spraying it around can undo all of the hard work created at the other end. At the time of being dropped during the Ashes, Finn was the leading wicket taker of the series, but at what cost? His economy rates Down Under don't make pretty reading - 3.71, 6.25, 4.43, 3.33, 4.61, 5.73. While England valued his wickets, they went for the more frugal Tim Bresnan at Melbourne, and the rest is history.
But, while Finn struggles to stem the flow of runs, he does have that very happy knack of taking wickets. 50 wickets in 12 matches is testament to that. Finn is a young man, and is still learning his craft as a fast bowler. No doubt in time he'll be able to keep it tight and bowl far more consistently, but at the moment he sprays it around far too often. When Anderson, or even Bresnan becomes fit again, the question has to be whether England value a man who will take wickets at a high tariff, or create pressure and be less effective but more cheap.
It is a tricky one. Ultimately it's wickets that win test matches, and Finn takes wickets. But a lot of England's plans revolve around stifling the opposition, and forcing mistakes caused by scoreboard pressure. While Tremlett and Broad hardly covered themselves in glory this test match, normally England's attack is a much less generous proposition, and may have winkled out a few more wickets yesterday thanks to a low run rate forcing Sri Lankans to take risks attempting to force the pace.
Will Finn be dropped to make way when Anderson returns? Probably. The Andocracy have made it clear what their plans are for successful test cricket, and they can't afford to have one leaky bowler conceding over a hundred each innings. But will Steven Finn take hundreds more test wickets for England? Absolutely. Finn is still learning his craft, and there's nowhere more unforgiving than in test cricket. As Finn matures and grows in experience, any question about him being an expensive bowler will be out of the window, and he'll be an automatic pick as part of England's attack. But he quite clearly isn't there yet (as Matt Prior's 25 byes can testify) and what Finn needs to do is to go away from the glare of international cricket for a while, and just bowl. He's been very good in taking his first 50 test wickets. He'll be excellent as he takes his next few hundred.
So for someone who clearly takes wickets, and has an average of 26, why hasn't Finn been in the team? Dropped after Perth and only back in here thanks to Jimmy Anderson's injury, Finn hasn't nailed down a place in the team, and chances are he'll drop out again when Anderson returns.
The key stat to look at is Finn's run rate in tests. 3.97. While he has a very handy knack of taking wickets, he does leak runs, and with a lot of England's plans revolving around keeping it tight and creating pressure, having a leaky bowler who is spraying it around can undo all of the hard work created at the other end. At the time of being dropped during the Ashes, Finn was the leading wicket taker of the series, but at what cost? His economy rates Down Under don't make pretty reading - 3.71, 6.25, 4.43, 3.33, 4.61, 5.73. While England valued his wickets, they went for the more frugal Tim Bresnan at Melbourne, and the rest is history.
But, while Finn struggles to stem the flow of runs, he does have that very happy knack of taking wickets. 50 wickets in 12 matches is testament to that. Finn is a young man, and is still learning his craft as a fast bowler. No doubt in time he'll be able to keep it tight and bowl far more consistently, but at the moment he sprays it around far too often. When Anderson, or even Bresnan becomes fit again, the question has to be whether England value a man who will take wickets at a high tariff, or create pressure and be less effective but more cheap.
It is a tricky one. Ultimately it's wickets that win test matches, and Finn takes wickets. But a lot of England's plans revolve around stifling the opposition, and forcing mistakes caused by scoreboard pressure. While Tremlett and Broad hardly covered themselves in glory this test match, normally England's attack is a much less generous proposition, and may have winkled out a few more wickets yesterday thanks to a low run rate forcing Sri Lankans to take risks attempting to force the pace.
Will Finn be dropped to make way when Anderson returns? Probably. The Andocracy have made it clear what their plans are for successful test cricket, and they can't afford to have one leaky bowler conceding over a hundred each innings. But will Steven Finn take hundreds more test wickets for England? Absolutely. Finn is still learning his craft, and there's nowhere more unforgiving than in test cricket. As Finn matures and grows in experience, any question about him being an expensive bowler will be out of the window, and he'll be an automatic pick as part of England's attack. But he quite clearly isn't there yet (as Matt Prior's 25 byes can testify) and what Finn needs to do is to go away from the glare of international cricket for a while, and just bowl. He's been very good in taking his first 50 test wickets. He'll be excellent as he takes his next few hundred.
Sunday, 29 May 2011
Jonathan Trott Will Save Your Life
We've all thought about it. What if you're captured by aliens, and your only chance of survival is for someone to bat for a really, really long time? Only after he's scored enough runs, or bored the aliens into a stupor can you break free from their clutches and find safety. Who would be the man who you would let bat for your life?
Tendulkar might get mobbed by over-zealous fans. Kallis' wig might blow into his eyes. Ponting might come over all Ashes 2010 and start edging Anderson to Swann first ball or arguing with umpires. There's only one man who could be chosen with your life at stake. The man who's concentration would not be broken even by aliens pointing ray guns at him. A man who would instead mark his guard and check his gloves. That man is Jonathan Trott.
Jonathan Trott is everything you want in a test number three. He will score a lot of runs, form solid partnerships with other batsmen, not take many risks, and not get out. A test number three doesn't need to switch hit fast bowlers for six. A test number three just needs to accumulate an awful lot of runs and not get out. This is what Trott does.
Nick Knight on Sky this morning said that Trott is a "limited batsman" as he doesn't play a whole range of shots. Nothing could be further from the truth. Trott has studied the art of shotmaking, and worked out what shots he can play that won't get him out. He knows exactly what shot to play to any given ball, and can score runs all around the ground. During the Ashes, the Aussies thought he was an lbw candidate, so bowled straight. So Trott worked them off his legs. Sri Lanka, knowing Trott's on-side strengths, bowled short and wide of off-stump (rarely a successful strategy). So Trott cut and pushed his way to a double ton.
It seems odd that even an a day when Trott has made 200, there are some knocking him for not going quickly enough. What a ridiculous thing to say. Trott scores his runs at a strike rate of 48 - that's faster than Kallis (45), Dravid (42) and Chanderpaul (42). But strike rates aside, Trott isn't there to hit sixes and get out - he's there for a long haul and to anchor the innings.
It's becoming increasingly well documented that Trott's average (of those with over 20 test innings) is the second highest of all time (behind Bradman, obviously). After his double ton today, Trott has 1803 test runs at 66.77. To get ahead of Bradman's average, he needs to score 897 runs before his next wicket. You wouldn't put it past him to get 897 not out.
Don Bradman was a one-of-a-kind - a freak cricketer that gets thrown up once every five generations. Jonathan Trott, like Bradman, is a superhuman run machine. Quite simply, when looking at him, you just can't see any way that he is going to get out. Which is why when the aliens come, I'm sending for Trotty.
Another fun piece of Jonathan Trott average trivia
Jonathan Trott averaged 37 in Tests after his first full season with England. To get it back there now, he'd need to get 22 ducks in a row. (props to @howe_zat for that)
Tendulkar might get mobbed by over-zealous fans. Kallis' wig might blow into his eyes. Ponting might come over all Ashes 2010 and start edging Anderson to Swann first ball or arguing with umpires. There's only one man who could be chosen with your life at stake. The man who's concentration would not be broken even by aliens pointing ray guns at him. A man who would instead mark his guard and check his gloves. That man is Jonathan Trott.
Jonathan Trott is everything you want in a test number three. He will score a lot of runs, form solid partnerships with other batsmen, not take many risks, and not get out. A test number three doesn't need to switch hit fast bowlers for six. A test number three just needs to accumulate an awful lot of runs and not get out. This is what Trott does.
Nick Knight on Sky this morning said that Trott is a "limited batsman" as he doesn't play a whole range of shots. Nothing could be further from the truth. Trott has studied the art of shotmaking, and worked out what shots he can play that won't get him out. He knows exactly what shot to play to any given ball, and can score runs all around the ground. During the Ashes, the Aussies thought he was an lbw candidate, so bowled straight. So Trott worked them off his legs. Sri Lanka, knowing Trott's on-side strengths, bowled short and wide of off-stump (rarely a successful strategy). So Trott cut and pushed his way to a double ton.
It seems odd that even an a day when Trott has made 200, there are some knocking him for not going quickly enough. What a ridiculous thing to say. Trott scores his runs at a strike rate of 48 - that's faster than Kallis (45), Dravid (42) and Chanderpaul (42). But strike rates aside, Trott isn't there to hit sixes and get out - he's there for a long haul and to anchor the innings.
It's becoming increasingly well documented that Trott's average (of those with over 20 test innings) is the second highest of all time (behind Bradman, obviously). After his double ton today, Trott has 1803 test runs at 66.77. To get ahead of Bradman's average, he needs to score 897 runs before his next wicket. You wouldn't put it past him to get 897 not out.
Don Bradman was a one-of-a-kind - a freak cricketer that gets thrown up once every five generations. Jonathan Trott, like Bradman, is a superhuman run machine. Quite simply, when looking at him, you just can't see any way that he is going to get out. Which is why when the aliens come, I'm sending for Trotty.
Another fun piece of Jonathan Trott average trivia
Jonathan Trott averaged 37 in Tests after his first full season with England. To get it back there now, he'd need to get 22 ducks in a row. (props to @howe_zat for that)
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.
Saturday, 8 January 2011
England Win, This is Cool
It's become cool to say that Australia were awful and England did just enough to beat them. It's become cool to say that England clearly aren't very good, and are just organised. It's become cool to say that this was a meaningless contest between 4th and 5th in the world. But it's not cool.
Yes, England have been organised and determined, but they've been more than that. Yes, Australia didn't play well, but they weren't allowed to play well. And yes, this series masy have been between 4th and 5th, but the Ashes will always mean more than rankings.
England had the best team, the best plans, the best execution and the best fans. (That sounds like a poem, but it's not). Man for man, England outperformed their Australian counterparts (with the exception of Hussey ahead of Collingwood), but the key was that it was a team effort. Bowler's wickets were due to partnerships and the pressure they caused, and the runs were due to players who stepped up and anchored the innings. Yes, they were helped by wayward Aussie bowling and loose Aussie strokemaking, but England could only play against what they were put up against. Of course, organisation comes into it. Every bowler knew the plan for the batsman; the field they needed to set and the line they needed to bowl. And batsmen knew that certain bowlers would need attacking, and some would need defending until they were out of the attack. But organisation and planning only goes so far, it's about executing it out on the pitch. And England did that. This England team would give any other world team a run for their money.
England have strength in depth. Whereas Australia were struggling to find bowlers to put out, England had options coming out of their ears. Broad injured? No problem. Finn expensive? No sweat. Even Swann could have broken a finger, and England would have a test quality replacement waiting in the wings. There are currently two test quality spinners in Australia, and neither of them are Australian. The batting line up didn't need changes, but if it did, there were men available. But England didn't panic after the Perth defeat; they trusteed their batsman and gave them license to score runs. Which they did.
England were far and away the best side, and thoroughly deserved the Ashes win. While it wasn't a vintage, massively tight contest, when the key moments in the games came along, England won them. Heavily. England have won their first Down Under Ashes in 24 years, which out of everything else, is the coolest.
Yes, England have been organised and determined, but they've been more than that. Yes, Australia didn't play well, but they weren't allowed to play well. And yes, this series masy have been between 4th and 5th, but the Ashes will always mean more than rankings.
England had the best team, the best plans, the best execution and the best fans. (That sounds like a poem, but it's not). Man for man, England outperformed their Australian counterparts (with the exception of Hussey ahead of Collingwood), but the key was that it was a team effort. Bowler's wickets were due to partnerships and the pressure they caused, and the runs were due to players who stepped up and anchored the innings. Yes, they were helped by wayward Aussie bowling and loose Aussie strokemaking, but England could only play against what they were put up against. Of course, organisation comes into it. Every bowler knew the plan for the batsman; the field they needed to set and the line they needed to bowl. And batsmen knew that certain bowlers would need attacking, and some would need defending until they were out of the attack. But organisation and planning only goes so far, it's about executing it out on the pitch. And England did that. This England team would give any other world team a run for their money.
England have strength in depth. Whereas Australia were struggling to find bowlers to put out, England had options coming out of their ears. Broad injured? No problem. Finn expensive? No sweat. Even Swann could have broken a finger, and England would have a test quality replacement waiting in the wings. There are currently two test quality spinners in Australia, and neither of them are Australian. The batting line up didn't need changes, but if it did, there were men available. But England didn't panic after the Perth defeat; they trusteed their batsman and gave them license to score runs. Which they did.
England were far and away the best side, and thoroughly deserved the Ashes win. While it wasn't a vintage, massively tight contest, when the key moments in the games came along, England won them. Heavily. England have won their first Down Under Ashes in 24 years, which out of everything else, is the coolest.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)