Despite my best intentions to get up early and watch the cricket from the bitter beginning, I didn't. A week's worth of fatigue (plus a bad case of man flu) meant I didn't awake to watch Steven Finn and Michael Carberry being given their test caps, or Cook passing 50. However, having got up for 6.30 (ready to start my day) I did see Jonathan Trott being given out by an absolute shocker. Yesterday, the ICC said that the UDRS was "here to stay". However, with no such technology being used in this series, Trott was given out - and he was looking like maintaining his good form and making a big score - a score which could guarentee his place in the team when Andrew Strauss returns. While the umpire's decision was poor (and ultimately just wrong, as proved by TV replays), this is a prime example as to why the UDRS should be implemented across the board.
While Trott was looking good before getting out, by all accounts captaincy debutant Alastair Cook was even better. Amazingly hitting two sixes (which probably says more about the bowling then anything else), Cook reached his century just before the tea interval. Having never reached 200 in professional cricket (his best being 195 v Northants in 2005), Cook must fancy his chances of making what his batting mentor Graham Gooch would call a "daddy". While the bowlers have hardly been Warne, Laker or Holding, Cook has shown good mental fortitude and technique to keep scoring at a good rate.
In other news, Kevin Pietersen has astounded critics by making double figures - when most pundits were of the impression that his switch hit was actually confusion as to whether he was left or right handed. KP seemed to have a new technique against those left handed spinners which had so plagued him; getting his front foot well out of the way - taking LBW well out of the equation. Hopefully KP can go on and make a 'gritty' century - something he has not always done in England colours.
England are firmly in the box seat at 243-2, and with Cook's century comes the inevitable century from Ian Bell (he can only make them when someone else has done it first). I predicted an English victory within three days, and if they can keep up the scoring rate, it could well be quicker.
Friday, 12 March 2010
Thursday, 11 March 2010
Oh, it's the IPL...
It's difficult to write the obligatory IPL blog (or IPL3 as this year's event will be hereforth known) as quite honestly I am not excited about it. I have been weighing up the pros and cons of staying up until 3am to watch the start of the Bangladesh-England test, but have payed no attention to the hype surrounding the start of the IPL. To be quite honest, I don't even know who's playing. Or any of the star players for any of the teams. It's not that I am against the IPL, it is just that I don't really care.
I know that this must be sacreligious for an internet cricket blog to not pick a pro or anti-IPL viewpoint. All of the Indian blogs are no doubt detailing each team, player, and security guard; whilst many English, Australian and South African blogs are ridiculing the cheerleaders, glitter and Lalit Modi. However, I am not going to be doing that either.
I sat down (well, lay down) to write this blog grudgingly, knowing it would have to be saying something about the IPL. Despite the many interesting things currently happening in world cricket; England touring Bangladesh, Zimbabwe touring the West Indies, Australia touring New Zealand, the PCB shooting themselves in the place where their foot used to be, Michael Clarke looking for nude photos of his girlfriend; the IPL starts tomorrow, and should take centre stage. Because Lalit Modi said so. But why should it? Just because loads of Indian businessmen I've never heard of and some woman who used to be in Big Brother have thrown loads of money at something, doesn't make it particularly interesting or enjoyable. Ultimately, the IPL is an Indian domestic competition, just like the KFC Big Bash or the MTN40 (I had to look that one up). And as such, I am treating it with the same apathy as any overseas domestic competition.
It's not that I wouldn't enjoy it if I watched it. Last year, whilst incapacitated with illness (possibly ebola, probably swine flu) I actually watched the events from South Africa. And for the most part, they were fairly interesting. I was watching as Flintoff got injured, and I was watching as Pietersen got injured. I also watched as Paul Collingwood and Owais Shah sat on the bench throughout. And then the English players went home and I stopped watching (I was better by then). I only really showed interest in the games involving players I had interest in, and no disrespect to your Roelof van der Merwes, but there were plenty of players who I didn't care about. My reason for not paying attention to the IPL is simple: there is nothing really drawing me in. Just like watching a game of French league football - it could be a perfectly fine game full of well paid players showing good skills, but if there are no players I know I won't watch it. Which is ultimately why I won't be watching this years IPL.
While I will no doubt succumb and flick through a few highlights on ITV4, the IPL lacks something to succesfully maintain my interest, and I'm guessing, the interest of the world at large (outside India). Over the next five days, the only cricket I'll be watching will be Bangladesh v England.
OK, probably the next three days...
I know that this must be sacreligious for an internet cricket blog to not pick a pro or anti-IPL viewpoint. All of the Indian blogs are no doubt detailing each team, player, and security guard; whilst many English, Australian and South African blogs are ridiculing the cheerleaders, glitter and Lalit Modi. However, I am not going to be doing that either.
I sat down (well, lay down) to write this blog grudgingly, knowing it would have to be saying something about the IPL. Despite the many interesting things currently happening in world cricket; England touring Bangladesh, Zimbabwe touring the West Indies, Australia touring New Zealand, the PCB shooting themselves in the place where their foot used to be, Michael Clarke looking for nude photos of his girlfriend; the IPL starts tomorrow, and should take centre stage. Because Lalit Modi said so. But why should it? Just because loads of Indian businessmen I've never heard of and some woman who used to be in Big Brother have thrown loads of money at something, doesn't make it particularly interesting or enjoyable. Ultimately, the IPL is an Indian domestic competition, just like the KFC Big Bash or the MTN40 (I had to look that one up). And as such, I am treating it with the same apathy as any overseas domestic competition.
It's not that I wouldn't enjoy it if I watched it. Last year, whilst incapacitated with illness (possibly ebola, probably swine flu) I actually watched the events from South Africa. And for the most part, they were fairly interesting. I was watching as Flintoff got injured, and I was watching as Pietersen got injured. I also watched as Paul Collingwood and Owais Shah sat on the bench throughout. And then the English players went home and I stopped watching (I was better by then). I only really showed interest in the games involving players I had interest in, and no disrespect to your Roelof van der Merwes, but there were plenty of players who I didn't care about. My reason for not paying attention to the IPL is simple: there is nothing really drawing me in. Just like watching a game of French league football - it could be a perfectly fine game full of well paid players showing good skills, but if there are no players I know I won't watch it. Which is ultimately why I won't be watching this years IPL.
While I will no doubt succumb and flick through a few highlights on ITV4, the IPL lacks something to succesfully maintain my interest, and I'm guessing, the interest of the world at large (outside India). Over the next five days, the only cricket I'll be watching will be Bangladesh v England.
OK, probably the next three days...
Monday, 8 March 2010
England v Bangladesh A
While the highlight of today's play for most will be the unbeaten century of Jonathan Trott, for me it's the feat of Matt Prior. According to the BBC Sport scorecard , Prior hit 69 runs from only 21 deliveries - with no fours or sixes! He must have been knackered in that Chittagong heat...
Saturday, 6 March 2010
England's Twitter Revolution
With the shock revalationary news that previously Twitter-shy Paul Collingwood has joined Twitter, the whole cricketing world is aghast. Collingwood opposes everything Twitter stands for, with his stoic hours of test defence for England belying his new status as 140 character micro-blogger. Collingwood has also appeared very informative and interesting in interviews, something that Twitter does not often lend itself too, with banality usually being the lifeblood of most tweets. So why would England's ginger hero want to join the likes of Graeme Swann, Jimmy Anderson, Tim Bresnan and The Short Third Man on Twitter?
Probably because Twitter's rather fun. With millions of worldwide users, there is obviously some attraction to seeing what other people are thinking. Especially when those people are celebrities. That's why I joined! I often while away time reading the tweets of various sporting types, and have (hopefully) amused a few of my 120 followers into the bargain. On a long, boring tour of the subcontinent (which the England team are currently on), there are definately advantages to being on Twitter, compared to another game on Pro Evo, or a walk into the Bangladesh countryside. In the evenings, when there isn't much in the way of entertainment, and added to us being in the era of the smart phone where Twitter is always available, players can easily express their thoughts through a new medium. During the Sri Lanka tour of 2007, many of the England players signed up for Facebook (the new thing at the time), and now a few are signing up to Twitter.
During the Ashes last year, the tweets of Anderson and Swann entertained thousands, as regular fans were granted an insight into the English dressing room (and Phil Hughes gave us an insight to the Australian selectors). While both Anderson and Swann did not get the large numbers they expected for their not-very-publicised "Tweet Off" (and I should know... I was there!), there was very good feedback about their tweeting activities. The actions of Tim Bresnan, who signed up only to tell a fan to "get back to his mum's basement" caused slight embarrassment to the ECB, who warned the irresponsible Bresnan off the social networking site. So should the ECB stop the higher profile Swann, Anderson and Collingwood (as well as any potential others) from tweeting? Ultimately, the twitter accounts of the players are their own, and could theoretically be allowed to put up whatever they want. However, PR-wise, they should be warned from certain things, such as abusing fans a la Bresnan, revealing confidential team information (like Phil Hughes or tennis' Andy Roddick), or being a downright moron (Darren Bent).
England's Twitter Revolution may or may not have any impact on the team's performance, but certainly has an impact on the team's relationship with the fans. If handled properly, the social networking site can be a massive PR success for the ECB, who are always trying to attract new fans to the game. And hopefully for me, Swann can attract more players to Twitter.
Probably because Twitter's rather fun. With millions of worldwide users, there is obviously some attraction to seeing what other people are thinking. Especially when those people are celebrities. That's why I joined! I often while away time reading the tweets of various sporting types, and have (hopefully) amused a few of my 120 followers into the bargain. On a long, boring tour of the subcontinent (which the England team are currently on), there are definately advantages to being on Twitter, compared to another game on Pro Evo, or a walk into the Bangladesh countryside. In the evenings, when there isn't much in the way of entertainment, and added to us being in the era of the smart phone where Twitter is always available, players can easily express their thoughts through a new medium. During the Sri Lanka tour of 2007, many of the England players signed up for Facebook (the new thing at the time), and now a few are signing up to Twitter.
During the Ashes last year, the tweets of Anderson and Swann entertained thousands, as regular fans were granted an insight into the English dressing room (and Phil Hughes gave us an insight to the Australian selectors). While both Anderson and Swann did not get the large numbers they expected for their not-very-publicised "Tweet Off" (and I should know... I was there!), there was very good feedback about their tweeting activities. The actions of Tim Bresnan, who signed up only to tell a fan to "get back to his mum's basement" caused slight embarrassment to the ECB, who warned the irresponsible Bresnan off the social networking site. So should the ECB stop the higher profile Swann, Anderson and Collingwood (as well as any potential others) from tweeting? Ultimately, the twitter accounts of the players are their own, and could theoretically be allowed to put up whatever they want. However, PR-wise, they should be warned from certain things, such as abusing fans a la Bresnan, revealing confidential team information (like Phil Hughes or tennis' Andy Roddick), or being a downright moron (Darren Bent).
England's Twitter Revolution may or may not have any impact on the team's performance, but certainly has an impact on the team's relationship with the fans. If handled properly, the social networking site can be a massive PR success for the ECB, who are always trying to attract new fans to the game. And hopefully for me, Swann can attract more players to Twitter.
Thursday, 4 March 2010
Finn's chance to beat England's bowling curse
With the news today that Ryan Sidebottom is going home from Bangladesh, with Stuart Broad and Graham Onions unlikely to play, England's bowling line up for the tests looks decidedly weak. With Jimmy Anderson also not playing due to a knee injury, England may well be forced into blooding three fast bowlers with only two test appearances between them. In light of the spate of injuries and withdrawals, Middlesex seamer Steven Finn has been added from the Lions squad, with Tim Bresnan joining the squad from the One Day team. Bresnan has only played twice in England whites, with Finn having never played at international level. They are due to be joined by Ajmal Shahzad, veteran of a sole Twenty20 game against Pakistan. With either Luke Wright or James Tredwell (both uncapped) also likely to play in the first Chittagong test, England could quite conceivably play a bowling attack with only one bowler (Graeme Swann) having played more then twice. So surely England will be rolled over against test cricket's weakest team?
In short, no. While England will miss their main three strike bowlers (and Ryan Sidebottom) from their attack, Graeme Swann proved that he is capable to take much of a batting line-up in South Africa, and Bresnan has proved in short form games that he is a perfectly good bowler. If Finn and Shahzad are added to this (or England's forgotten man Liam Plunkett), England should have more then enough to roll over a pretty poor Bangladesh team. The only remaining spot is debatable, between all-rounder Luke Wright, and off-spinner James Tredwell, both of whom will act in a supporting role to the main bowlers. So England should have enough about them (both in terms of wickets, and runs if both Bresnan and Wright play) to easily beat Bangladesh.
While England's bowling problems may appear to be cursed, this tour could turn into a blessing for England ahead of the Ashes. Steven Finn, the 6 foot 8 fast bowler has been lined up to become England's next great fast bowler. England have searched for a 'hit the deck' bowler who will worry batsmen with his bounce, and with the end of Harmison's international career, this search has become more critical. Finn is only 20, but if he gains the international experience in the fast-bowling desert of Bangladesh, he could be an outside shout for the first test in Brisbane. Finn will no doubt become a crucial part of England's team over the next few years, and with some question marks remaining over Graham Onion's ability when the ball isn't swinging, Finn could throw down the gauntlet to the selectors with wickets in Bangladesh. While Finn is certainly not guarenteed to start, it is worth looking at him and Shahzad, as Plunkett has already proved that he is not international quality. Even if Finn doesn't perform particularly well (or at all), being in and around the England squad will set him up for the future, as well as showing that he is very much part of the selectors plans.
I have long supported the rise of Steven Finn, and hopefully he can get the international recognition that he both craves and deserves.
In short, no. While England will miss their main three strike bowlers (and Ryan Sidebottom) from their attack, Graeme Swann proved that he is capable to take much of a batting line-up in South Africa, and Bresnan has proved in short form games that he is a perfectly good bowler. If Finn and Shahzad are added to this (or England's forgotten man Liam Plunkett), England should have more then enough to roll over a pretty poor Bangladesh team. The only remaining spot is debatable, between all-rounder Luke Wright, and off-spinner James Tredwell, both of whom will act in a supporting role to the main bowlers. So England should have enough about them (both in terms of wickets, and runs if both Bresnan and Wright play) to easily beat Bangladesh.
While England's bowling problems may appear to be cursed, this tour could turn into a blessing for England ahead of the Ashes. Steven Finn, the 6 foot 8 fast bowler has been lined up to become England's next great fast bowler. England have searched for a 'hit the deck' bowler who will worry batsmen with his bounce, and with the end of Harmison's international career, this search has become more critical. Finn is only 20, but if he gains the international experience in the fast-bowling desert of Bangladesh, he could be an outside shout for the first test in Brisbane. Finn will no doubt become a crucial part of England's team over the next few years, and with some question marks remaining over Graham Onion's ability when the ball isn't swinging, Finn could throw down the gauntlet to the selectors with wickets in Bangladesh. While Finn is certainly not guarenteed to start, it is worth looking at him and Shahzad, as Plunkett has already proved that he is not international quality. Even if Finn doesn't perform particularly well (or at all), being in and around the England squad will set him up for the future, as well as showing that he is very much part of the selectors plans.
I have long supported the rise of Steven Finn, and hopefully he can get the international recognition that he both craves and deserves.
Wednesday, 3 March 2010
Eoin Morgan earns Central Contract
Well done to him. After fulfilling the required quota needed for an incremental contract, Eoin has gained a contract that could see him net a five figure sum. And the three figure sum that mattered from him yesterday was 110*.
I am fully aware that this post is more of a tweet then a blog, which is really my reason for this post. Basically, I need more followers. At the moment, twitter.com/shortthirdman has only 9. Even my alter ego twitter.com/willatkins has 120. I don't care if you don't have Twitter, loyal blog fans. Sign up, and follow. My 100th follower will win a signed book, or something.
I am fully aware that this post is more of a tweet then a blog, which is really my reason for this post. Basically, I need more followers. At the moment, twitter.com/shortthirdman has only 9. Even my alter ego twitter.com/willatkins has 120. I don't care if you don't have Twitter, loyal blog fans. Sign up, and follow. My 100th follower will win a signed book, or something.
Monday, 1 March 2010
Twenty20 specialism ignored
While the BBC Sport website emblazon the headline that Alastair Cook has not made the preliminary squad for the World Twenty20, it's worth noting the other players who probably should, ahead of Cook, who shouldn't. Just like normal captain Strauss, stand-in captain Cook has been deemed not 'twenty20' enough for the squad, and as such, will play no part in the Caribbean. And by all accounts, this is a good thing. The selectors have seen the shortest form of the game as a very specialist form, and as such have not selected some of the best 'cricketers' in the country. It has long been recognised that Strauss is to play no part in T20, so why should Cook's 50 tests guarentee him a place on the plane? Ultimately, it is about picking the right players for the format. And to be honest, I don't know if England have done that.
In the two previous World T20s England have selected a squad full of 'specialist' T20 players. Players who would otherwise not be in a fifty-over or test squad were suddenly propelled to the tournaments, with Darren Maddy, Jeremy Snape, Vikram Solanki, James Kirtley and Chris Schofield being picked in 2007, with Dimitri Mascarenhas, James Foster, Robert Key and Graham Napier selected for last year's event. While history has shown that England did not play well at the tournaments, I support the selection of good county Twenty20 players. However, if you look at the current 30 man squad, there doesn't appear to be many specialist T20 players in there (only Mascarenhas from the previously mentioned). Michael Lumb, Peter Trego and Steven Finn aside, there are no players who have been called in on the back of good T20 performances, with all players having either represented England previously or the Lions recently. While the 30 man squad does include the young talents of Finn, David Wainwright and Chris Woakes, it is doubtful whether any will make the final squad, with specialists ostracised from the party.
For last years tournament England made the bold selections of Key and Napier (on the back of continued county T20 excellence), but did not select Napier at all (even for warm-up games), and Key was only shoehorned in at the last minute for the Holland game before being bombed out. While they appeared to make a statement in the selection of Foster that they were looking for consistency behind the stumps, he has not been selected this time - as have Key and Napier, who also miss out. England will never succeed at T20 if they cannot retain some consistency in selection - 15 opening partnerships is testament to that. Of the 30 man squad it is also apparent that some players (Shah, Bopara, Mascarenhas) have been put in purely to justify their central contracts with no intention of taking them to the West Indies. So while England in the past have attempted to treat the 20 over format differently, we will no doubt see a rehash of the current 50 over touring side. Just without captain Cook.
England 30-man ICC World Twenty20 squad
Paul Collingwood (Durham, captain)
James Anderson (Lancashire)
Ian Bell (Warwickshire)
Ravi Bopara (Essex)
Tim Bresnan (Yorkshire)
Stuart Broad (Nottinghamshire)
Steven Davies (Surrey)
Joe Denly (Kent)
Steven Finn (Middlesex)
Craig Kieswetter (Somerset)
Michael Lumb (Hampshire)
Sajid Mahmood (Lancashire)
Dimitri Mascarenhas (Hampshire)
Eoin Morgan (Middlesex)
Graham Onions (Durham)
Kevin Pietersen (Hampshire)
Liam Plunkett (Durham)
Matt Prior (Sussex)
Adil Rashid (Yorkshire)
Owais Shah (Middlesex)
Ajmal Shahzad (Yorkshire)
Ryan Sidebottom (Nottinghamshire)
Graeme Swann (Nottinghamshire)
James Tredwell (Kent)
Peter Trego (Somerset)
Jonathan Trott (Warwickshire)
David Wainwright (Yorkshire)
Chris Woakes (Warwickshire)
Luke Wright (Sussex)
Michael Yardy (Sussex)
In bold are the 15 who will go to the World Cup. You have my word.
In the two previous World T20s England have selected a squad full of 'specialist' T20 players. Players who would otherwise not be in a fifty-over or test squad were suddenly propelled to the tournaments, with Darren Maddy, Jeremy Snape, Vikram Solanki, James Kirtley and Chris Schofield being picked in 2007, with Dimitri Mascarenhas, James Foster, Robert Key and Graham Napier selected for last year's event. While history has shown that England did not play well at the tournaments, I support the selection of good county Twenty20 players. However, if you look at the current 30 man squad, there doesn't appear to be many specialist T20 players in there (only Mascarenhas from the previously mentioned). Michael Lumb, Peter Trego and Steven Finn aside, there are no players who have been called in on the back of good T20 performances, with all players having either represented England previously or the Lions recently. While the 30 man squad does include the young talents of Finn, David Wainwright and Chris Woakes, it is doubtful whether any will make the final squad, with specialists ostracised from the party.
For last years tournament England made the bold selections of Key and Napier (on the back of continued county T20 excellence), but did not select Napier at all (even for warm-up games), and Key was only shoehorned in at the last minute for the Holland game before being bombed out. While they appeared to make a statement in the selection of Foster that they were looking for consistency behind the stumps, he has not been selected this time - as have Key and Napier, who also miss out. England will never succeed at T20 if they cannot retain some consistency in selection - 15 opening partnerships is testament to that. Of the 30 man squad it is also apparent that some players (Shah, Bopara, Mascarenhas) have been put in purely to justify their central contracts with no intention of taking them to the West Indies. So while England in the past have attempted to treat the 20 over format differently, we will no doubt see a rehash of the current 50 over touring side. Just without captain Cook.
England 30-man ICC World Twenty20 squad
Paul Collingwood (Durham, captain)
James Anderson (Lancashire)
Ian Bell (Warwickshire)
Ravi Bopara (Essex)
Tim Bresnan (Yorkshire)
Stuart Broad (Nottinghamshire)
Steven Davies (Surrey)
Joe Denly (Kent)
Steven Finn (Middlesex)
Craig Kieswetter (Somerset)
Michael Lumb (Hampshire)
Sajid Mahmood (Lancashire)
Dimitri Mascarenhas (Hampshire)
Eoin Morgan (Middlesex)
Graham Onions (Durham)
Kevin Pietersen (Hampshire)
Liam Plunkett (Durham)
Matt Prior (Sussex)
Adil Rashid (Yorkshire)
Owais Shah (Middlesex)
Ajmal Shahzad (Yorkshire)
Ryan Sidebottom (Nottinghamshire)
Graeme Swann (Nottinghamshire)
James Tredwell (Kent)
Peter Trego (Somerset)
Jonathan Trott (Warwickshire)
David Wainwright (Yorkshire)
Chris Woakes (Warwickshire)
Luke Wright (Sussex)
Michael Yardy (Sussex)
In bold are the 15 who will go to the World Cup. You have my word.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)