Why Can't England Win ODIs in India?

It's the question on everyone's lips. Or, more pertinently, how can England play so badly only weeks after stuffing India out of sight on a tour where the world champions failed to register one victory?

All of the old excuses have been trotted out. England can't play spin. England don't know how to bowl on the sub-continent. England bat too slowly in India. England throw their wickets away. And to an extent, England have lost their first two games by falling into those very easy to pigeon-hole stereotypes.

But, that's just what they are. Stereotypes. Just because England teams of 3 years, or 30 years ago couldn't play spin or bowl tightly on the subcontinent doesn't mean that every England player to ever pull on the three lions is doomed to fail in India. England are currently producing some of the most technically correct players in generations, which doesn't indicate weaknesses against spin. Any problems England are having, as Alastair Cook touched upon in his post-match interview after the second ODI are confined to the mind. England can't win in India, because they don't believe they can win in India.

Without wanting to go into any psycho-babble, England do appear to have a mental block about playing fifty over cricket. How else can a team that currently dominate two of the three formats seem so far away in the third? How else can players like Kevin Pietersen and Ian Bell, who seem so at ease when in whites appear so out of their depths when in the colours? KP and Bell have come off unbelievable summers in test cricket and could arguably be regarded as the two finest batsmen in the world, yet put them into a fifty over match and they freeze. Pietersen hasn't made an ODI century in three years, Bell in four. Pietersen's place is under threat and Bell can't even get into this England team. How else can this be explained other than a general English mental block to playing ODI cricket?

Yes, there clearly has been a marked improvement in English ODI fortunes. Following the seminal away victory against South Africa in 2009, the Andys Flower and Strauss (and latterly Cook) have turned around English thinking about fifty over cricket, come up with winning strategies and won quite a few series. Since that South African tour, England have lost only one head-to-head series, and that was at the back end of a generation-defining and exhausting Ashes win. Yes, rain did help, but this team have just finished a home summer where they beat both of the World Cup finalists, one of them to nil. So somewhere along the line England are doing something right.

The key, as was said earlier, is in the mind. Other than the 6-1 humiliation to Australia back in 2009, England have won every home ODI series under Andy Flower. West Indies, Australia, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and India have all perished. It's no surprise. England feel far more comfortable when at home with green pitches where the swing bowlers can exploit the friendly home surfaces. Just as England have a mental block about playing on the sub-continent, it seems that teams are travelling over to us and having mental blocks about playing on a cold, wet, windy night at Durham.

Two heavy defeats doesn't make this England team a bad one, just as three rain-affected wins over India doesn't make them a great one. Until England master their sub-continental yips, England fans are just going to have to accept that their brave boys are very good at home, but not as good when away. Beating all of those teams at home shows they are a good side, but being humbled by the world champions in their back yard just goes to show how far England have to go before they can really consider themselves ODI contenders.

Ravi Bopara is Embarrassed

Ravi Bopara is the epitome of a confidence player. So often in and out of the England team, he's never truly felt comfortable in the side, so as such, hasn't felt loved by the English selectors. This lack of inner belief and trust in himself has led to poor performances, and has meant that his great potential just hasn't been lived up too.

Ravi Bopara has only really been given two solid runs in the side. The first, back in 2009, was when new coach Andy Flower told Ravi that he was the man to bat at number three for England, and put his trust and confidence in him. Bopara backed this up by making three successive test centuries. He felt as though he had a place in the team and confidence, and runs flowed.

He's had to wait until this summer for his next prolonged spell in the side. In and out over the last couple of years, he was given his chance for the final two tests of the India series, and then for the subsequent ODIs. While he started slowly, the performances have slowly but surely improved as Ravi is slowly starting to feel loved again by the selectors. A 96 at Lord's - so nearly his maiden ODI ton and comfortably his highest ODI score preceded a valuable 37* at Cardiff to guide England home, and tellingly a 4-10 in the first T20 against the West Indies. England's best ever T20 figures.

It's worth bearing that in mind. Of all of the great bowlers to have represented England over the past six years in T20 cricket, nobody has bowled better than Ravi Bopara did on Friday night. This is some achievement. However, Ravi claims he is "embarrassed" to have collected the accolade, which sort of sums up his mental issue with being in the England team. He just doesn't feel worthy enough to be playing international cricket, let alone excelling at it.

When thinking of Ravi Bopara's mentality, the perfect person to compare him to is Eoin Morgan. Both have extraordinary natural talent, as well as some equally obvious technical flaws. Yet both have had distinctly different careers in international cricket. Ever since taking to the field for England, Morgan has looked as though he belongs. Blessed with a mental fortitude that almost guarantees success, Morgan is extremely comfortable at the highest level, and has reaped the rewards of that. Bopara almost needs someone to constantly remind him that he actually is a very good cricketer, and while he will always be blessed with an extraordinary talent, what isn't so sure is his ability to perform and impress consistently for England. Ravi's feeling of embarrassment at his record figures sums up his attitude, and you get the feeling that had Morgan broken a record that he would be enjoying it rather than feeling bashful about it.

Technically, Eoin Morgan has his limitations. He isn't brilliant to the short ball, and is often very edgy when driving the ball off the front foot. But it's almost assumed that he will be a key player for England over the next few years, purely because he has the state of mind that he is sure to succeed. Ravi Bopara doesn't have this. What Bopara needs is for a prolonged run in the team backed up by good performances. At the moment, he is getting a run in the team, and those performances are beginning to come. With Morgan set to miss out on the next England tours, Bopara will get a few more opportunities in the side, and has a chance to stake a claim for a regular starting role. However, if he is to become one of the world's best - he must radically change his own mentality - stop being embarrassed and start enjoying international cricket. Only then can he become a Morgan.

What Actually Is The Point of The T20s v West Indies?

The other day I spouted something about how I'm not a huge fan of the Champions League. Created solely to make a lot of money quite quickly, it sort of opposes everything us cricket bloggers should stand for. So you'd have thought that a final hurrah for the England team in international action this summer would cheer me up and get me all misty eyed. Well, not really either. This horribly shoehorned in seriesette has no real benefit other than to fulfil Sky's contract. So I don't really care about these matches either.

You could ask what I'm doing as a cricket blogger when I evidently have no real interest in cricket. And you'd be right to ask that.

So, mainly to show that I can be bothered (even if nobody else is), here's why you should watch the two T20s against the West Indies.


Young Talent

Everyone loves seeing a young player making his first tentative steps into international cricket, filled with hope that they'll be the next big thing. And at the moment, England's team is packed with them. Bairstow, Stokes, Briggs, Hales, Buttler - the potential in this team is immense. And while some won't live up to their big billing (remember the fanfare Luke Wright arrived in after a debut fifty against India in 2007), chances are a few of them will turn into bona fide England legends. And in twenty years after Sir Joseph Buttler is made prime minister after leading England to 6 successive Ashes wins, you can say that you were there (metaphorically) at the start.


England are winning

Given even fairly recent cricketing history this is still somewhat of a novelty, and we should enjoy it while it lasts. England are currently top of the test rankings, World T20 champions and have just beaten the ODI World Cup winners. And have looked really good whilst doing so. Yes, it may be a pointless seriesette that in a couple of weeks we'll have forgotten all about, but if England get to wave yet another trophy around at the Oval on Sunday, it's a great opportunity to celebrate everything else that's good about English cricket. Enjoy the success while it lasts - it may be gone sooner than we think...


Graeme Swann will be captain

Given the fact that Swann is at least fifth (and possibly sixth) in line to the throne, the chances of him captaining England again are fairly slim. Swann probably knows this is his one and only chance to do something destructive as England captain, so expect him to pull out all of the stops. Stink bombs at the toss. The team running out to "Diamond Lights". Fielders on the boundary told to get girls numbers for the captain. Who knows. But it will be worth watching.


The West Indies are playing

Everyone loves watching the West Indies. They're either really good and make cricket look easy, or they're hilariously crap and are good for a few laughs. In a T20, there is the potential for both possibilities. Expect dolly catches dropped, huge sixes over the pavilion, stupid collapses, demon yorkers and players forgetting to bring their bat out to the middle. It's always entertaining to watch the West Indies. Plus they may start dancing if they take any wickets, which is always a bonus.


OK, that's pretty much it. While it may not make the history books in 100 years as one of the great series, it'll be good for a couple of hours of light entertainment. Plus afterwards you get to watch me on Sports Tonight Live. What's not to enjoy?

Home or Away?

So England have won the ODI series against India. Given England's fairly abysmal start to 2011 in limited over cricket, two series victories over the two World Cup finalists is an obvious feather in the cap, especially given many assumed two heavy defeats would mark Alastair Cook's first two series in the job as captain.

However, England have had it mostly in their favour. Injuries to India, depleted after a long, gruelling and fruitless tour has meant that it has been far from the full strength side that saw India take the World Cup crown in April. Rain has come at opportune moments for England - first at Durham to save England as they wobbled, and then at Lord's, where Duckworth and Lewis' permutations could have seen the game go either way (and in the end, it went neither). However, the key asset to England thus far this series has been the choice of pitches that home advantage brings.

England's strength, as seen in the tests, is in their swing bowlers, who can move the ball both ways. Given Indian batsmen's historic aversion to being worked over by the moving ball, England have exploited that weakness effectively, seen most clearly at The Oval, where a combination of an emerald pitch and Jimmy Anderson reduced India to 58-5, and effectively out of the game.

So are England well within their rights as the home side to prepare pitches that favour their strengths? Well, yes. As has been pointed out, India are likely to prepare pitches that spin big for the away ODI series to follow - an area that England have historically struggled with as well. As Hampshire have shown in the T20 this season, it's well within a team's rights to take full advantage of home advantage by creating pitches that suit the side (and arguably to create a side that suits the pitch).

However, the question should really be whether England should actually take advantage of that home advantage, or whether they should be a little more thoughtful about things. It's becoming a running joke that England can do well at home before wilting in away series - especially in World Cups. The home successes mask clear problems in the side which are exploited when the conducive conditions aren't in play, leading to poor performances in 'alien' foreign climes. Surely if England are to progress in ODI cricket, they have to learn how to play, and to win on any pitch and in any given condition. Green-tops at The Oval are all well and good, but how will England grow as a limited over team when they are rolling teams over at home, before inevitably being rolled themselves on a raging turner in Chennai, Mumbai or Bangalore.

England have done well this summer in ODI cricket, but still have a long way to go before becoming genuine World Cup contenders. It's all well and good taking loads of wickets when the ball's hooping around corners, but England's real test will be when they travel to India in a few weeks for the return ODI series. Only once England learn to play well overseas can they be regarded as one of the best limited over teams around. Until then, as always, they'll just be seen as good in their own backyard.

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...

Missing Morgan Mixes Up the Middle Order

The news that Eoin Morgan has picked up a shoulder injury that will see him miss the rest of an India ODI series that already seems to have fizzled out into a damp squib may not seem important, but it couldn't have come at a worse time for England. With a resting Kevin Pietersen missing, and now Eoin Morgan, England have absolutely no idea of their strongest ODI batting line up, and will have to wait a further few months to organise themselves properly so they can discover it.

The idea of resting players is not a new one, and it is by no means a ridiculous one. Last summer, Kevin Pietersen looked jaded and forlorn - a shadow of himself having struggled through a test series against Pakistan. So, like it or not, KP sat out the ODI series, and has since made a couple of double tons and rediscovered the form that made him one of the world's best batsmen. And it's also clear that Alastair Cook, who wasn't at the time involved in England's limited over plans clearly benefited from the time out of international cricket at the end of last summer, seen in the winter to end all winters for Cook. International cricketers can't be expected to play 24/7, 365 days a year or they'll burn out - the current plague of injuries surrounding the Indian team is testament to that.

However, Pietersen missing last year's ODI series confused the selectors in the ODI format, leading to a very haphazard build up to the World Cup ultimately ending in Pietersen being shoehorned in to open, and nobody really knowing what England's best team was. Following the ultimate disappointment that the World Cup proved to be, England had the chance to reestablish themselves as an ODI side, with a new captain, and a blank canvas on which to create the best team possible. However, the middle order is still cause for concern.

Do the selectors want to use the tried and trusted batsmen from the tests with Trott batting at three, Pietersen at four, and Bell and Morgan at five and six? But is that line-up lacking in 'explosive' players? Do they want to bring in young Ben Stokes for his all-round abilities (even though he can't bowl at the moment, which was a decision not particularly thought through...), which means that someone has to make way? Or do they want to pack the side with one-day specialists like Bopara or Patel? The absence of Pietersen automatically means it isn't England's strongest side, meaning somebody is only temping for KP, and now with Morgan missing it means that more short-term fixes are going to be made towards a long-term problem.

England's lead-up to the World Cup was very poor, and while selectors have spoken about learning from their mistakes and moving on, it's plain to see that they still have no idea who they want in or how they want them to play. With Pietersen and Morgan, England's two ODI trump cards going to be out for the rest of the series, the search for a consistent and settled team will go on. It's just as well that against the world champions, England have their ever faithful match-saving joker. The September English weather.

The Evil Empire of the BCCI

If the cricket world was to be made into a film, it's pretty obvious who the bad guys would be. The BCCI. Yes, there are naughty people like Allen Stanford or Mahzar Majeed who come along every once in a while to provide plot twists, but they're more incompetent criminals then evil empire. The evil empire, of course, being the BCCI.

It does all add up. The BCCI created a league that they want to control world cricket, as well as giving themselves a monopoly at the top of the ICC (who, like the Ministry of Magic in Harry Potter, mean well but are largely incompetent). After taking all of the money and making all of the decisions, the evil empire then go around doing evil things like kicking associates out of the World Cup, or having massive conflicts of interest within the IPL or drowning kittens and the like. The BCCI are downright despicable, and they make people want to throw their popcorn at the big screen in disgust.

Of course, the people are so scared of the BCCI that they daren't speak out. Thought-crime is punishable by death, or by having their contract terminated, which means that people are happy to either toe the party line, or stick their heads in the sand and pretend it isn't happening. Any publication that disagrees with official BCCI policy (or indeed, doesn't support it wholeheartedly) is banished, and only a select few are allowed to report the news to the people - but only once they've signed a contract pledging to only speak the good word of the BCCI.

Every film needs a good guy - and oddly in this case, the good guy is Nasser Hussain. Not content with just inanely agreeing with every press release from the Empire, Nasser isn't afraid to speak his mind, no matter what the consequences. After verbally sparring with Chief Minister of Propaganda Ravi Shastri, Hussain then likened the Indian fielding to "donkeys".

Hardly the most cutting of comments, but everyone knows that anyone who opposes the BCCI in any way is committing a gross act of treason, and is liable to firm retribution. In this case, the BCCI get in touch with the ECB and tell them to "control their commentator". However, the ECB not being a totalitarian cricket state, they're unable to control this rogue journalist. And quite rightly.

Nasser Hussain is employed by Sky Sports, and a few other media outlets in order to give his opinions. Which is what he's done. If he thinks the Indian team have fielded like donkeys, he's well within his rights of free speech to say so. The fact that the BCCI think they are in any position to say that "commentators who make such comments, should abstain from saying such things" is a violation of Hussain's right as a journalist to report as he sees fit. The BCCI, or indeed any cricket player, official or body have no right at all to interfere with the commentators or reporters whatsoever, and any body that does so should be stopped immediately.

I was appalled to see that two of the leading commentators in Indian cricket are on the BCCI payroll, in order to spout BCCI policy, whitewash the news and brainwash the public. And that the BCCI are threatening the ECB, who quite rightly have no say over who Sky employ or what they say certainly smacks of an evil empire attempting to covert the world to their way of thinking - and should be stopped immediately.

As a cricket blogger, I will naturally agree with some of what I read and hear about cricket, as well as also disagreeing with certain items too. That's the nature of a free press, who are able to report whatever they see fit. But if an organisation is threatening and blackmailing reporters into only reporting whatever fits at the time, then the freedom of the press is lost. The BCCI have absolutely no place telling anyone what to, or not to say, and the evil empire certainly need putting back in their place. It's just as well that the good guy, the seeker of truth and justice, won't let it lay.

Where Do India Go From Here?

It's a tough place to be in when you've lost 4-0. The series has ended in humiliation for India, the number one test ranking has been lost, and there are seemingly no silver lignings to speak of. However, if England have proved anything over the past couple of years, it's that a team can go from a seemingly hopeless situation to the summit of test cricket in not a long space of time, with only a few minor tweaks. So how can India regain their number one ranking and become a successful test team again?


1) Don't accept mediocrity

England have got where they've got by carefully stripping away the chaff to find an exceptional group of players. Yes, this may be a once in a lifetime golden generation of English cricketers, but only the best of the best are tolerated. Throughout the English team are players at the absolute pinnacle - Cook is the best opener in the world, Trott the best number three, Pietersen and Bell the best middle order. Matt Prior is the best wicket-keeper batsman, Swann the best spinner, and the pace attack of Anderson, Broad and Bresnan / Tremlett is the best fast bowling attack going. For a team who came into the series as number one, India have an awful lot of players who aren't really good enough to compete with the world's elite. Raina was out of his depth, Sreesanth and Sharma didn't cut it, and neither Harbhajan or Mishra looked consistently threatening. India must be ruthless and cast aside those who just aren't good enough, in order to bring in young talent who can be.


2) The batting needs a shake-up

It's clear to see that India's batting boasts some of the best run-getters in the history of test cricket. However, the likes of Tendulkar, Dravid, Sehwag and Laxman won't last forever, and to avoid a situation seen with the Australian team post 2007 when all of the legends retired at once, India need to gradually ease a few new names in. Some tough decisions need to be made - at 36 (and 10 months) is VVS Laxman as good as he once was? Is Sehwag? Is Dravid? And heaven forbid, is Sachin? Tought as it may seem, Indian will be better served shifting aside some of the legends in order to move on and look towards the future.


3) Sachin

The cult of Sachin, as it has become known, is weighing heavily on the Indian team. The fact that headlines have been focused more on Sachin's failures to make the elusive hundredth hundred rather than the embarrassment of a 4-0 reverse speaks volumes for the over-arching importance Sachin has in the Indian team. As much as a legend as he is (and make no mistake Sachinistas, before I get death threats, I am not in any way detracting from his past), at the end of the day, Sachin is just one player out of eleven. He is not the be all and end all of the story. While Sachin must bring a lot to proceedings - his experience and calm head in the dressing room for one, it does seem from the outside that some players are unable to cope with the pressure that being even in the same side as Sachin brings. For India today there didn't seem much thought about saving the test - instead all focus was on Sachin's attempt at the 100th 100. As unbelievable a player as he was, and still is, Sachin has become a distraction to this India team and their goals. In an ideal world for the Indian team, Sachin will make his seminal ton in the ODI series that now follows, and hang up his bat, allowing India to move on and out of his shadow, and refind their focus.


4) Preperation and priorities

Put simply, the BCCI have made a complete hash of organising this tour. The single warm-up game at Taunton was not enough to get ready for a tour in the notoriously tough conditions of England, and reminiscent of England turning up undercooked ahead of the 2006/7 Ashes mauling at the hands of Australia. And ultimately the way Sehwag's injury (that he picked up during the World Cup) was handled shows the lack of respect that the BCCI have for test cricket (and how low on the list of priorities it is) - had Sehwag had his operation immediately he would have been fit for all of this series, and probably the West Indies tour as well. But he delayed the operation with the BCCI's blessing... to play in the IPL. Only when test cricket is put at the top of the list will India again prosper.


5) End the culture of player power

Duncan Fletcher is a very shrewd, experienced coach who has done an awful lot in the game of cricket. However, his word, which was always law when coach of England, seemed as though it was often overruled and ignored. From the outside, it seems as though the Indian players, and the senior players in particular, did what they fancied and the coach was powerless to stop them. From only warming-up or training when they felt like it to (supposedly) calling for only the one warm-up game (some wanted no warm-ups at all), players were taking the easy way out in order to avoid any hard work. Which led to a failure of a series. After Zaheer's injury, it was disclosed that the Indian players decide personally how to look after themselves, and picking up a series ending injury only a few overs into the first morning at Lord's certainly suggests that Zaheer was doing it wrong. Only when responsibility and power is handed back to the coach can India do well. Ultimately, he is paid to make these things happen, and the Indian players would be fools to ignore his experience and expertise.


All in all, it's been a pretty abject tour for India. And while there is a lot of hard work ahead, it isn't all doom and gloom for them. In MS Dhoni they have an excellent forward-thinking captain, and if he develops a strong partnership with Duncan Fletcher, they can organise a master plan not too dissimiliar from the plans of Andys Flower and Strauss. They also do have some very good players who took them to number one in the first place, as well as a lot of promising young talent to choose from to help them return. It has been a pretty humbling series from an Indian perspective, but with a lot of hard work and subtle changes, there's no doubt that the mase for world's number one team will be back in Indian hands sooner or later.

Dravid Shows Fight

It's been a series that's lacked a little something.

As good as England have been, it's been a bit of a breeze, with Team India not offering a lot of resistance once they've been pushed up against the wall.

If this was boxing rather than cricket, it would have been stopped a long time ago.

England started by coming out swinging, landing some lusty blows early. And while India had the odd couple of hours when they decided to fight back, generally they've just laid back and taken the relentless beating that England have given to them, with no real sign of resistance.

Apart from one man.

Rahul Dravid, who moved to his third century of the series at the Oval, has been the only Indian player to show anywhere near the required level of guts for test cricket.

While his teammates have barely mustered half of his runs, Dravid's tons at Lord's, Trent Bridge and the Oval have been gutsy, determined, and full of application. Three things that his fellow tourists have been quite clearly lacking throughout the series.

In almost every regard, pretty much every other Indian player has gone missing. With the ball, they've been happy to watch England rack up mammoth partnerships while heads have dropped and bowlers do nothing. And with the bat, nobody has wanted to dig in and grind out the tough runs when England's seamers proved that conditions have been far from bowlers graveyards.

Except Dravid. In a series when everyone was expecting the hundredth hundred of a legend, we've seen a different kind of fulfillment of another. Sachin, just like Raina, Laxman, Dhoni, Sehwag, Mukund, Ishant and the rest of them, have gone missing when it's mattered the most, and will ultimately go home empty handed. Dravid, however, has put his hand up, regularly, and while he will too leave with nothing from the series, his legend will be enhanced.

This series was billed as the heavyweight championship of the world, but instead it's been more of a mauling in a pub car park. Only Dravid, the old campaigner, has stopped England from landing yet another knockout blow. If his teammates had shown anywhere near the fight he has this series, it almost certainly wouldn't be the battering that this bout has turned out to be.

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.

Bunny's Back

Way back in September 2010, I wrote this about Graham Onions. Bunny's always been a personal favourite of mine, whether it's for smearing Aussie stumps with fine swing bowling or defiantly blocking out to save games in South Africa. Onions had forced his way into the England side thanks to some excellence at county level, and had just about got himself into England's first choice test eleven. But disaster struck in the form of a back injury that ruled him out for a season just before the Bangladesh tour, and England moved on since then.

It's fair to say that since Onions last donned an England shirt things have changed. First came Steve Finn, who raced to 50 test wickets in the fastest time possible. Then Chris Tremlett, who's international redemption has seen him become one of the most feared fast bowlers in the world. And then Tim Bresnan, who has turned from bits and pieces seamer to a genuine test all-rounder who averages 45 with the bat and 24 with the ball. And while Onions has been out injured, England moved from also-rans to Ashes winners and World Number Ones. He couldn't have picked a worse time to miss, as England had quite clearly moved on from him.

But, they haven't. With the fourth test against India being quite the dead rubber, it seems that Jimmy Anderson's slight niggle won't be risked. So into the squad comes Graham Onions, the forgotten man of England's success.

A similiar sort of situation happened back the last time England were any good - the heady days of the 2005 Ashes. Simon Jones, who'd been a key quarter of England's fearsome fast four broke down in the fourth test at Trent Bridge, with what proved to be a quite serious injury. In the time it had taken for Jones to get back on a field and prove his fitness, England had moved a long way from the Welshman, and he remained just a memory as England floundered in the post-2005 failures.

Luckily for Onions, he hasn't been forgotten, and is back in the squad for the test starting on Thursday. He may or may not get selected, as the pecking order system used probably has Steven Finn still ahead of him, but it shows he is right back on England's radar. At a time when England's fast bowling pool couldn't be stronger, if Onions comes in and seizes the opportunity as Finn, Tremlett and Bresnan have, there could be quite a few headaches for Andy Flower between now and England's next test appointment in the UAE in the new year.

Five Reasons Why England are Number One

1) Planning

This England team are the most organised and prepared in the world. Every individual player knows every individual weakness of every opponent, and how best to exploit it. Thanks to the tireless work of Andy Flower and his team of analysts, England are one step ahead before a ball's even been bowled.


2) Consistency

Consistency on two levels - in terms of performance and in terms of selection. England are now far less likely to take their eyes off the ball and have a shocker in one test, which has led to far greater performances throughout. And the consistency of selection has seen players in poor form being nursed back into shape, and ultimately pushing England to the top spot.


3) Strength in depth

Luckily this strength hasn't had to be used too often thanks to not many injuries, but as and when the situation has required, players have stepped up and performed. When key players have retired or been unavailable, there have been ready made replacements who've come in, and the county production line is incredibly strong at the moment, which can only see this strength continue going forward.


4) Luck

Every successful team needs a bit of luck, and England have had plenty. Their best team in donkeys years has come at a time where the traditional best teams in the world have been rebuilding and not offering as strong an opposition. Plus they've seen opponents lose key players to injury at crucial times, which has certainly helped.


5) They have the best players

It may seem an obvious one, but to win games of cricket you need to be generally a better team than the opposition, and more often than not England are putting out man for man better players. Throughout their batting they are immensely strong, and their fast bowling options are an embarassment of riches. They have the best attacking spinner in world cricket, as well as a captain and coach that brings everyone together to get the best out of them. It's no wonder that with all of that happening that England are the number one ranked team in the world. And that might not change for a long time.

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.

Alastair Cook is Relentless

Alastair Cook seems as though he is never satisfied. Even when making his first ever test 250 (and the becoming the first Englishman to make a test 250 for 21 years) he barely raised the bat to the crowd, thinking more about how he was going to score the next 250.

Alastair Cook loves batting, and he loves scoring runs. Everything he does appears to be on some sort of personal vendetta to score as many runs as he possibly can. He can never have enough runs. You can picture him in a future James Bond film as some sort of evil meglomaniac, constantly batting and refusing to get out, taking over the world by boring opponents to death whilst scoring millions of runs.

Some critics of Cook say that he can't pick up the rate and accelerate, which is sometimes needed when a declaration is in sight. But quite simply Cook sees no need to pick up the scoring rate - he's just happy scoring runs, and lots of them, and he'll try and score as many as he can. He knows that if he keeps making mountains of runs, England will keep winning test matches, and that what keeps pushing Cook on to keep going.

I don't like using the term run machine, but it's hard to give Cook any other title. He almost seems emotionless while at the crease, effortlessly switching between a heavy concentration and an automaton state of unawareness. The man doesn't even sweat, which just confirms the fact that he is clearly not human. In the film where Cook is the villain, he'd just keep coming at James Bond, no matter how many bullets are fired at him. Cook would just swat them away, with dabs into the on-side for singles to keep scoring runs. The film would only end after about 12 hours when Strauss has enough and decides to declare, but even then Cook would be unaware to what's happening around him; still focussing on scoring more runs.

Alastair Cook is an immense batsman, and will no doubt go down in history as one of England's greats - if not the best. Every successful team needs a player who is so set on scoring runs that failure is not an option; a cold hard ruthless killer who drills the opposition into the ground and demoralises them so completely that it doesn't seem to be a fair fight. Fortunately for England, they have Alastair Cook, who will continue to do that for quite a few years to come. Unfortunately for the rest of the world, they also have Jonathan Trott, who if anything, is even more relentless. Good luck, rest of the world. You're going to need it.

Podcast - Stuart Broad's Vaseline

Subscribe to the Short Midwicket Podcast on iTunes!

Or, download this via Podbean

England's win at Trent Bridge was a victory for tenacity, and Will dissected just why England are so damn good. The various controversies are looked at, from Bell's run-out to the DRS, and even to Vase-gate, as Will looks at whether the spirit of cricket is indeed alive and well. India are all injured, so will looks at why, as well as working out whether Tim Bresnan really is the greatest all-rounder in the world and if England should go in to Edgbaston with only six batsmen.

Podcast Powered By Podbean

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.

2005 v 2011 - Ultimate Team

Last night I had a look at this current England side, and whether they're better than their 2005 counterparts. Seeing as quite a few people have been getting involved in creating a 2005-2011 composite side (including Tom Fordyce of the BBC), I thought I'd have a go myself.

1) Alastair Cook (2011) - Just count the runs. Not in sparkling form thus far in this India series, but his feats over the winter and into the Sri Lanka series speak for themselves.

2) Andrew Strauss (2005) - A really tough one this for the opposing opening berth - do you want the Strauss of 2011 with added captaincy? Or the hard-hitting Trescothick, who'd otherwise walk into any composite England team of recent history? Instead I've gone for 2005 edition Strauss, as he gutsed out two big hundreds despite wearing a few from Brett Lee. As classy and stylish a batsman as you could ever see, and 2005 was just about at his pomp.

3) Michael Vaughan [Captain] (2005) - As much for the excellent batting (on his day Vaughany was as good as any in the world) as the innovative and inspirational captaincy. Would certainly get the best out of his bowlers, as well as plenty of runs from number 3.

4) Kevin Pietersen (2011) - The Kevin Pietersen of 2005 was a breath of fresh air; the young skunk-haired Saffa who hit Warney for sixes and dropped catches for fun. The 2011 KP still drops the odd catch, but has become a bit more wise about his cricket. While in 2005 he'd hit a six, but then be caught on the boundary trying it again, in 2011 he's a touch more circumspect, as seen in a gritty 200 at Lord's last week. After a rough patch, 2011 KP has found a way back to the 2005 form that saw him burst onto the world scene, which is why the more mature vintage makes it into the team.

5) Ian Bell (2011) - No contest at all for which edition of Ian Bell to put into the team; in 2005 he was very much a boy amongst men, whereas in 2011 he towers over his contemporaries. Since being shellshocked in 2005, Bell has added guts to his obvious skill, and is arguably the best batsman in the world right now.

6) Andrew Flintoff (2005) - Do I even need to elaborate? Runs, wickets, bucket hands at first slip, inspirational match-winning performances, a few drinks.

7) Matt Prior (2011) - Matt Prior is quite simply the best wicket-keeper batsman in the world, and his all-round game has improved leaps and bounds since arriving on the international scene. Geraint Jones never flourished with either glove or bat, but is still revered as a hero for catching Kasprowicz down the leg side.

8) Graeme Swann (2011) - Graeme Swann is an attacking offie who turns the ball a fair way. Ashley Giles was a defensive slow left armer who's stock ball was the straight one. Thanks for the runs at Trent Bridge Gilo, but I'm sticking with Swanny.

9) Steve Harmison (2005) - Harmy was probably already on the slide by 2005, but was still a fearful sight for any batsman. That early spell on the first morning at Lord's where he skittled the Aussies (and cut Ricky Ponting) set the tone for the series (even if England were thumped) and Harmison led England's most successful attack of recent years with distinction.

10) Jimmy Anderson (2011) - The leader of England's attack six years later. Now with an ability to swing it wherever he wants, there is no better bowler in English conditions, and Jimmy takes wickets for fun.

11) Simon Jones (2005) - A tough one for my final seamer's spot. Chris Tremlett, he of the fearful bounce? Stuart Broad, the enforcer man risen from the dead who takes wickets and scores runs? Matthew Hoggard to share the new ball and make it talk? Instead, I've gone for the master of reverse swing, and the unsung hero of England's 2005 Ashes win. The Welsh Warrior, Simon Jones.


So then, that's my composite 2005 and 2011 England team. Just imagine if such a side (at their peak) had taken to the field - especially with the likes of Trescothick, Trott, Strauss, Pietersen, Tremlett, Broad and Hoggard in reserve - we'd have been world number one years ago!

2005 v 2011 - Who's Better?

With the current England side looking like it's going to be the best in the world in a couple of weeks, it's natural to wonder if it's the best England side in living memory. Of course, the biggest opposition to that claim is the victors of the greatest series - the class of 2005. Captained by Vaughan, inspired by Freddie at his best and packed with big names, the 2005 vintage battled and beat the best side in the world.

The 2011 lot are also playing the team who are at the summit of test cricket. However, unlike 2005, instead of scraping tight fought victories, they're destroying all before them and sauntering to big wins. This doesn't automatically make the 2011 team better than their 2005 contemporaries, as it's plainly obvious that the opposition in '05 of Warne, McGrath, Gilchrist, Ponting et al are on a slightly higher plain than the current touring Indian side.

However, for me, if the two best England sides of the 21st century were to meet, there'd only be one winner. As good as the 2005 team were, they managed to win the Ashes while carrying a few players. Ashley Giles, a man who's runs at Trent Bridge and the Oval make him a hero amongst men, was hardly the most threatening spinner of the ball. You don't get called the Wheely Bin for nothing. And the 2005 edition of Ian Bell is a far cry from the hardened run-machine currently seen, with a freckly rabbit-in-the-headlights a more apt description. In 2011, there simply isn't that. Everybody pulls their weight.

However, we won't know the true ability of the 2011 side for quite a while. Back in 2005, having won the Ashes, England had the world at their feet. However, a combination of taking their eyes off the ball, untimely injuries and the gradual aging of players meant the side drifted apart and world domination was not reached. As such, the 2005 side is seen as just a one-off - a side that was put together with winning the Ashes in mind, and ultimately they achieved their goal. The key for Andy Flower and Andrew Strauss is to create a legacy - a side that dominates world cricket for years to come.

England's Win a Victory for Tenacity

Test cricket is more than just about having a good technique or a solid defence. It's about mental fortitude and having the concentration for fifteen two-hour sessions of intense cricket where you have to keep your eye on the ball. Games of test cricket can be won and lost in an instant, and the best teams are those who are always switched on and are as such able to win those games at any given moment.

Having a team of good cricketers does go a long way, but the great sides of test cricket are the teams full of "winners" - those who refuse to give up when faced with defeat, or allow opposing teams to rise from difficult situations. England are certainly a team of winners. At 88/6 and 124/8 on the first afternoon, it would have been easy to fold and put up a score that would almost certainly be a losing one. But the grit and determination of the lower-order saw them to 221; not an awful score given the tough scoring conditions. India had overtaken that score with only four wickets down, and looked set to build a sizeable lead. But England fought back, and led by Stuart Broad taking 5 wickets for 0 runs in 18 balls, were reduced to a lead of only 67.

Even when things weren't going their way during that Indian first innings, England kept fighting. They never stopped believing that they could cause an Indian collapse, and it only needed the spark of Stuart Broad to make it happen. Compare that to the lifeless display of bowling from India at the back end of England's second innings, where runs were being gifted away and nobody seemed to bothered. The impressive Praveen Kumar aside, it was a completely gutless and embarrassing display, as Prior, Bresnan and Broad all cashed in with the easiest runs in test cricket they will ever make. India had completely given up - remarkable for a team that boasts some of the greatest talents to ever grace the game, are World Champions, and the current holders of the world number one ranking. That seems as though it's going to be meekly surrendered too. Bell's innings was full of class, and even allowing for his reprieve, India still were in with a chance. Bell departed at 323/4, a lead of only 256. Had they got their tails up and stuck into England, they could have been looking at a chase of not much more than 300. Given that Bell showed batting wasn't a total nightmare on that pitch, and that they possess Dravid, Laxman and Tendulkar, India were still in with a big chance of winning that game. You know England, or indeed, any team of winners would have at least given it a crack. Instead, they ceded another 200 runs as England's tail took it well out of their reach. By the end, it was men against boys. They didn't even bother trying to reach the victory target of 478.

India are quite clearly a team of class individual players, all with skills that on their day make them world-class performers. However, when the going got tough, they didn't get going at all, instead retreating so meekly it made England's march to victory almost painful to watch. The hosts, on the other hand are a side that relish the big battles, and they invariably win them. To win the game by 319 runs given the perils of the first two days certainly shows the character of this current England team. India earned the number one test ranking, but have underperformed massively so far, with England taking full advantage. England are now odds-on to take over that coveted number one ranking, and having seen the way they've played in the first two tests of the series, you'd fancy them holding onto the position for a very long time to come.

My Take on the Bell Run-Out

I won't make this a long-winded thing because I know absolutely every cricket fan with access to the internet has already voiced their opinions on the incident already, but just because I can, here's my two cents worth.

Massive credit to India. They didn't have to repeal the appeal. With the game situation as it was, they knew just how important the wicket of Ian Bell would be, and in the laws of the game, they had taken it. It would have been easy for them to do nothing, or to argue that they'd done nothing wrong in whipping the bails off and appealing. From what we heard from Rahul Dravid, the whole team felt distinctly uneasy at getting the wicket that way, and the unanimous decision was made to recall Bell.

However, as sporting as India clearly were, England certainly didn't cover themselves in glory. Bell's celebrations when reaching 150 were, given the reprieve he'd been granted, a touch over-exuberant, and he seemed to show a tragic lack of self-awareness when not taking responsibility for his part in it in the interviews at the end. And Andy Flower and Andrew Strauss probably shouldn't have put pressure on the Indian dressing room to change the decision - at the end of the day it was completely up to India to decide and nothing to do with Strauss or Flower.

We all know the whole situation could have been avoided had Ian Bell simply waited for some sort of signal from the umpires, or for the ball to be thrown in from the boundary. However, once he didn't do that, India were well within their rights to knock the bails off, and the umpires were totally correct in giving him out. There's no denying that Bell was certainly very foolish, and the way he argued his way out of the situation rather than holding his hands up and admitting his error didn't look brilliant. However, the odd situation shouldn't take away from a fine innings - one of the best we'll see in test cricket this year, and what could be a match-winning one.

All in all, while the ICC statement praises one side, only one has come out of this in credit. India, who lest we forget are the number one side in the world, certainly set the benchmark for the way cricket should be played, and for that, they should be applauded from the rooftops. The spirit of cricket, in some quarters at least, is certainly alive and well.