West Indies v England, 2nd Test, Day 5: An Extraordinary 24 Hours for Test Cricket

 

West Indies v England, 2^nd Test, Day 5: An Extraordinary 24 Hours for Test Cricket

August 29^th 2017

Over the last twelve hours the cricket world has been turned on its head. First, the West Indies pulled-off an astonishing chase against England: the twentieth highest ever successful chase in Tests. Then, Bangladesh completed a win against Australia when, at 158-2 chasing 266, only an Australian win seemed possible.

Both results were earth-shaking: the West Indies had not won in England since the epic tour of 2000 when Walsh and Ambrose had their swansong and England finally lost their fear of the West Indians. Bangladesh had never beaten Australia in a Test. Australia have played Bangladesh 29 times in all formats and previously lost just once – in an ODI in Cardiff in 2005 after Andrew Symonds had been dropped on the morning of the match for partying the night before and a certain suspicion exists that Australian minds were not exactly focused on the game. It is a measure of how little Australia rate Bangladesh that in 14 years there have been just two previous series between the two sides and, in one of those, Australia famously tried to win a Test in a single day.

If, for a few hours, Australian fans could laugh at England, the manner of the Australian surrender, highlighting one of the topics common to both sides – their vulnerability on turning wickets and the paucity of their spin-bowling resources to respond – was every bit as poor. Australia’s response has been to give themselves the option of going into the must-win 2^nd Test with just one seamer. Now this was a tactic used with success by India in the 1970s and by Pakistan in the ‘80s, but they could count on extraordinary spinners of the quality of Bishan Bedi, Prasanna, Chandrasekhar, Venkat, Abdul Qadir and Iqbal Qasim; Australia simply do not have the same quality in depth. It is the same as if England had played Moeen, Batty, Dawson & Ansari together in India: four spinners, yes, but not four of any quality or threat. Last winter England learnt the hard way that it is not how many spinners you play, but how much quality that they have that counts. It is true that for a must-win match on a turning pitch in Port-of-Spain in 1974, England did play four spinners and won, but the spinners were Greig, Underwood, Pocock and Birkenshaw: all class acts (Geoff Arnold shared the new ball with Greig, who turned to spin as soon as the shine was off the ball).

England’s response to their own humiliation at Headingley has been to name the same XIII for Lord’s, but one suspects that Toby Roland-Jones may play instead of Chris Woakes – more of that later. “Same players, better play” might have rasped Essex’s legendary Tonker Taylor in response to the squad announcement.

England turned up on the fifth morning to conditions that normally would have guaranteed a win not long after Lunch: overcast skies, dim light and perfect seam-bowling conditions. The script seemed perfectly prepared for Jimmy Anderson to take his 500^th Test wicket and, despite not playing T20 since 2009 and ODIs since 2015, get close to his 800^th international wicket (he is now on 784).

In reality, England had lost their way not so much by a poor batting performance on the 1^st day (their total was short of what it should have been, but not so far short), but by a collectively horrible bowling performance on the 2^nd day. Apart from Jimmy Anderson, the rest of the attack was very poor. In fact, it is probably not unfair to say that the decision to replace Toby Roland-Jones with Chris Woakes probably lost England the game. Chris Woakes desperately needed the game, but responded with a terribly rusty performance and the rest of the attack took their cue from him. Stuart Broad was inaccurate. Ben Stokes as ineffective as he has ever been and Moeen Ali just had an awful match with the ball. If he has shown anything, Toby Roland-Jones has demonstrated an ability to provide control and nip in with crucial wickets when they are most needed; it was an ability that England sorely missed here. One hopes that sanity will prevail, that Roland-Jones will be restored for Lord’s and that Chris Woakes will be asked to play every possible game both for Warwickshire and for Warwickshire 2^nd XI from here to the end of the season to get himself properly match-fit and into a good rhythm to be unleashed on the Australians.

Arguably, England should have made 330 in their first innings and the West Indies no more than 300. Had that happened, the course of the game would have been very different. As it was, after the dreadful “wheels off waggon” session on the 4^th evening that led to the England declaration and the sensation that the West Indies had given up on the match, suddenly the steel was back again in the Caribbean performance. Once again, from one session to another the whole momentum of the series changed. The day was tense but, in reality, once the West Indies got through the first hour without losing a wicket, the result had an air of inevitability. The last ball of the fourth over of the morning England had the chance to put the game to bed: short delivery from Broad, Brathwaite could not control the ball - it went at a comfortable height to Cook, through his hands and on to the boundary for four runs. Instead of being 11-1 and England with an early breakthrough, the opening partnership went on to 46 from 16 overs before Broad finally ended it. More critically though, Brathwaite was on 4 at the time and went on to score 95 and to guide the West Indies to 197-3 when he fell finally. From the moment of that drop the force and the momentum was always with the West Indies and the young Padawans always had the measure of their supposed Jedi Masters.

After a poor first innings, yesterday, whenever something happened, which was all too rarely, Broad seemed to be involved. First the missed catch by Cook, then he had Powell caught by Stokes at 4^th slip, then he himself missed what would have been an incredible catch off his own bowling, but deflected the ball onto the stumps to leave Kyle Hope stranded. 46-0 had become 53-2 and the inevitable West Indian defeat seemed to be just a matter of time. Then again at 285-4, with nerve-ends jangling, Cook dropped Shai Hope off Broad, ending any real chance of a late panic. Broad was not a happy bunny. Even then there was time still for Stokes to drop Blackwood too – a sitter – at 316-4. After seven catches and a run-out were missed by the West Indies, England showed that they were just as fallible in the field. One wonders if there were sighting problems at the ground, because even normally extremely reliable fielders were dropping catches.

On a day when Moeen was expected to be the main threat, he cut an unhappy figure: two dropped catches off his bowling and too many bad balls. The suspicion that he dislikes the pressure of being expected to be the match-winner on the last day of a Test seemed to be confirmed. Moeen, like Graeme Swann did before him, likes getting an early wicket; when he does, the bounce is there and he starts to fizz – yesterday, there was no fizz, no zip in his action and, indeed, after a promising first over the previous evening, little real threat however, to be fair, he also saw those two catches go down off his bowling; maybe, if the first of them had been taken, he might have clicked into life. Less forgivable was the lack of threat from the seamers. Stuart Broad bowled with some fire, but little luck and, after a wonderful start, Jimmy Anderson seemed to be missing some spark, while Woakes and Stokes just served to release the pressure on the batsmen.

Against the West Indian side of the 1^st Test England would still have won. This one though played sensibly, failed to panic even when they lost a wicket and hunted down the target like a pack of wolves stalking their prey. When the run rate required started to rise, the ball started to fly to the boundary, easing any run-rate pressure and when chances were missed, they made England pay.

It was the 9^th longest 4^th innings in 51 Tests at Headingley (5 of the 8 longer ones were in losing causes), the 20^th highest successful 4^th innings chase in Tests, the 2^nd highest successful chase ever at Headingley and an object lesson in hunting-down an apparently extremely tough target.

This being cricket, probably England fans are as delighted as the West Indians. It might no longer be true in all parts of the world, but the practice of celebrating the deserved success of the opposition still exists in the English game. After a desperately disappointing South African side were dispatched, England needed proper practice against realistic opposition. Even more so, almost everyone wants West Indian cricket to rise again. However, native caution suggests that we have seen so many good one-off West Indian performances and so many false dawns that, unless this result is followed up in the 3^rd Test it will look like just another frustrating reminder of a bygone age. However, at least in this Test, players such as Brathwaite, Shannon Gabriel, Blackwood and Shai Hope have shown that there is hope for West Indian cricket and that talent continues to be produced. We saw in the 1^st Test that there are Test-quality players even in this severely weakened squad: one hopes that better governance from the WICB will give the young players the chance to develop and thrive, remembering that the West Indies are the current holders of the U19 World Cup, so serious talent is still coming through, despite everything. What the West Indies can ill afford is to lose these players too to the T20 circuses that have led to the WICB banishing all their biggest stars. Think of how much Brathwaite and Hope could learn if they were able to play their Test cricket alongside players such as Chris Gayle and Lendl Simmons for the next two years.

Back in 2004, Brian Lara was finishing his career, but the West Indies could field a pace attack of Jermaine Lawson, Fidel Edwards, Tino Best, Pedro Collins, Corey Collymore and Adam Stanford. It was an attack of frightening potential, that could have been every bit as great as the attacks of the ‘80s and ‘90s but, little by little, they either never developed as they should have, or simply drifted away. The memory of that team should serve as a dreadful warning to the WICB that they either look after their current crop of youngsters or they may not get another set of talented youngsters to lose.

Many England fans have condemned Joe Root’s declaration on the fourth evening. Just why, is a mystery. England were on top. The West Indies looked defeated and 99% of the cricketing world expected the loss of early wickets and a rapid spiral to defeat. Root saw the unexpected chance to win and to seal the series and went after it. Attack, not caution was the right approach. The opprobrium if he had batted on into the final morning would have been terrible to behold from the self-same fans who attacked his supposedly over-generous declaration.

For now, we are back to Square One. The Lord’s Test will be an unexpected decider. Given England’s record of losing the final Test of series over the last four years, they can ill-afford not to bring their A-Game to Lord’s. The West Indies will know that they have a wholly unexpected chance of a series win at a ground where England often underperform (W10 D4 L4 in the last 10 years, but W4 D2 L3 in the last 5 years and 3 defeats and a draw in the last 6 Tests there).

With Tom Westley given a, presumably final, chance to succeed, the only likely doubt is whether to go with Woakes or Roland-Jones as third seamer. One assumes that on his home ground, Roland-Jones has to play. England can scant afford to experiment or to take risks and the tight, mean line and length of Roland-Jones will help to bring a discipline to the attack that was so lacking in Leeds.

West Indies v England, 2nd Test, Days 1 to 4: About Turn! As You Were!

 

West Indies v England, 2^nd Test, Days 1 to 4: About Turn! As You Were!

August 28^th 2017

We wanted England to face a much stiffer challenge and for the batsmen to get tough runs. Well, we have had it, although the betting is that the end result will be the same, even if the route has been totally different.

The good news: we have a game on our hands. Yes, despite one high-profile pundit stating that the impending three-day finish in this game just added weight to the need for four-day Tests, we have a last-day run chase and a (potentially) tight finish on the cards.

The bad news: for the first three days, England were way off the pace, both batting and bowling and often made the West Indies look like world-beaters. If the West Indies had fielded better, they might have sealed a three-day win.

The worse news: after being in a position after Tea on Day 3 in which a West Indian win early on Day 4 looked to be the most probable result, they have folded like a card house in a gale. After three days of plaudits for their massively improved display and turning the series on its head, going into Day 5 we are right back to where we started this Test.

Mark Stoneman and Dawid Malan desperately needed runs and both got them when England needed them most desperately. Tom Westley has failed again twice and looks unlikely to figure in the Final Test of the series. The fact that both got their runs with England having their backs to the wall and  looking set for a heavy defeat and when batting was hardest only makes it better. The only downside was that both reached 50 and then got out soon afterwards, instead of going on to a really big score. Stoneman held the innings together when it could have fallen apart had he gone early. Malan set up the glorious counter-attack that was to follow with a “they shall not pass!” innings of tough grind. They both look set to have booked places in the tour party to Australia. Westley, in contrast, has fallen-away after a good start and, with a sequence of 25, 59, 29, 9, 8, 3 & 8, makes it look likely that he will give up his place in the 3^rd Test: one line of thought is that Alex Hales may come back, batting at #5, with Malan moving up to #3. A middle order of Hales, Stokes, Bairstow, Moeen, followed by Woakes and Broad contains sufficient fire-power to give any side serious indigestion.

The transformations undergone by the West Indies in this match have been utterly bizarre. More than Doctor Jekyll and Mr Hyde, it has been more like The Hulk, changing from mid-mannered Bruce Banner into the bullying Hulk, bursting out of his clothing, laying waste to all around and then, just as suddenly, transforming back into Bruce Banner and having dirt kicked meekly in his eyes. For eight and a half sessions they have bossed the match and then, thanks to slovenly missed chances – dropped catches (plural), run-outs missed and wickets off no balls (from a leg spinner of all people) – they have let England recover from 94-3, still 75 short of making the West Indies bat again, to the point where they could declare, setting 322 to win on a pitch that is turning square and, at times, keeping very low.

The West Indian transformation has been stark. They have bowled far better and have made more runs in one innings here than in two in the 1^st Test. They looked an all-round better side and certain to level the series. No one expected England to face a fired-up side that was spitting blood and to be made to look second rate. However, the return to being Bruce Bannerman has been even more unexpected: comic missed chances (how often do you see a side fail to complete a run-out with both batsmen at the same end and the return coming in to the bowler, who only has to gather and knock off the bails?) Lethargy in the field and diabolically bad tactics (delaying the new ball and allowing Malan and Stokes to play themselves in when another wicket before Lunch might well have killed-off the England fightback). And then, when they had another chance to finish things off – England falling from 303-4 to 327-7 – and chase around 200, the England lower order scored runs at will and set up a declaration against a side that appeared to have given up.

It is fair to say that most pundits thought that a lead of 180 might be enough to defend and that 220 would give England a real chance but, at 327-7, with the lead only 158, West Indies seemed to have given up already despite the fact that batting suddenly looked well-nigh impossible, with the ball jagging everywhere. By the time that Moeen was dismissed for a rapid 82, the game was genuinely up and the et tu brute, was the 46 added in 11 overs by Woakes and Broad, as Joe Root set about planning the unlikeliest of declarations. With most pundits thinking that England needed to score 350 to stand a chance – and that it would be a tough ask for the batting to get that many – to be able to declare at 490-8 was just ridiculous.

Moeen Ali, who has been in red-hot bowling form this summer, now has a worn, fifth-day pitch, offering extravagant turn and some variable bounce, with a lot of rough outside the left-hander’s off stump. Despite his reputation for disliking the pressure of being expected to win a game in the fourth innings, he has every chance of compensating for a poor first innings bowling performance and being the match winner.

Of the twenty-one successful fourth innings chases at the ground, only twice has a side scored more than 220 to win at Headingley – one of those was Don Bradman’s legendary chase of 404-3 to win in 1948 and the other was a dead rubber in the 2001 Ashes, with Australia perhaps not quite straining every sinew to win and Mark Butcher playing the innings of his life.

More alarming for the West Indies is that fact that the highest fourth innings score to draw a Test at Headingly is England’s 238-6 against Pakistan in 1974 and that that Test was the only time that a side has batted out more than the minimum 96 overs that the West Indies will have to face to force a draw in a Headingley Test. Three sides have though faced more than 96 overs in the fourth innings at Headingley when failing to avoid defeat.

Of the nineteen fourth innings chases to end in defeat at Headingley, the median innings length was just 62 overs.

In other words, unless the 2017 West Indians can match something that only Bradman’s Invincibles have done and score 322 to win a Headingley Test, it is hard to see any other result than an England win some time around Tea.

West Indies v England, 1st Test, Days 2 and 3: West Indian Annihilation

 

West Indies v England, 1^st Test, Days 2 and 3: West Indian Annihilation

August 19^th 2017

Any side that loses 19 wickets in a day on what was not a particularly difficult surface and particularly after watching the opposition score runs at will for 5 sessions, has some issues. Cricket followers who, like me, watched the England v West Indies series in the 1980s will know the feeling of utter impotence at watching your side crushed like a fly under a swatter. Then, it was England who looked totally and utterly defenceless against the West Indian assault. England at least had the consolation of winning series against other sides who themselves also looked totally overwhelmed against the Caribbean marauders.

England supporters will remember the humiliating taunts from around the world as Australia started adding to the one-sided hammerings, suggesting that England should no longer be considered worthy of 5-Test series or of even playing other top sides and should be limited to games against the likes of Zimbabwe and Bangladesh. It was not pleasant to hear and some of the patronising comments about the West Indians now should make fans uncomfortable: not so long ago it was us – how many people remember that back in 1999 England were formally rated the weakest Test side in the world? There but for the grace of Duncan Fletcher, go I!

The problems of the West Indian side are obvious. Most of the top players no longer play Test cricket but, instead, travel round the T20 circuses of the world. There are different reasons for this: weak administration that obliges players to be available for the Caribbean First Class season if they wish to play Tests and then fails to cope with the consequences; the lack of real incentives such as central contracts to make it attractive for senior players to make themselves available; the emphasis in the Caribbean on success in T20 cricket as the route to success and riches; and the fractious relations with the Board that have caused one senior player after another to resign the captaincy. The result is a West Indian side which is made up mainly of young players who have played in a highly diluted First Class tournament on benign pitches that hardly prepares them to face the likes of Jimmy Anderson on a surface that gives him even minimal assistance. And, it is fair to say, there was little swing or movement off the pitch. The West Indian system still throws up talented youngsters and this side has a number of good players who, with more support – for example, the presence of a couple of experienced 30-something players in the team, could really develop into fine Test players.

Just as Zimbabwe passed through a prolonged crisis because of the unavailability of senior players due to poor administration of the game – a crisis that they have really never recovered from – the West Indies are finding it harder and harder to attract teams to play them, especially series that will make money for a cash-strapped Board. In fact, one of the few series that remains profitable is the England tour of the Caribbean, as thousands of England fans descend on the grounds with money to spend.

This vicious cycle is making a move to two-division cricket – already existing de facto – something that will become soon a formal reality, with all its consequences. Despite the fact that the West Indies, Bangladesh and any other side that may be relegated to Division 2, will fight it tooth and nail – after all, no side wants to lose the chance to play India, Australia and England and, instead, to be limited to a diet of loss-making Tests against Zimbabwe, Afghanistan and Ireland – it does the development of West Indian cricket no earthly good for their players to suffer constant 3-day hammerings. More than anything, the West Indian players need to develop winning habits, to learn how to close out wins and to work for draws and to get the team spirit that comes from celebrating success. Maybe it will be better for the side in the long run to be the big fish of the Little League for a few years than to continue to be the whipping boys at the top table.

Right now, the only real issue is where the dividing line is put. Most fans would place Ireland, Afghanistan, Zimbabwe, West Indies and Bangladesh in Division 2 (although Bangladesh may not be there for long given the rate at which their results are improving). India, Australia, England and South Africa would be placed by most judges in Division 1. So the main question would be which of Pakistan, Sri Lanka and New Zealand would draw the short straw as, with twelve teams, two divisions of six becomes the most logical proposition. Six teams means five series, home and away – ten series in all – which would fit into a three year cycle quite comfortably and allow traditional cross-division series to continue, played like soccer friendly internationals. In other words, we could have a three-year cycle of promotion and relegation, with a World Champion proclaimed every three years. Interests could be protected by distributing part of the revenues of the top division to the sides in the lower division, to be ploughed into development.

Back to the game itself. On fifty-one occasions the West Indies have lost by a margin of 250 runs or more. Forty of those defeats have been by an innings. Just fourteen of those defeats have been by a margin superior to an innings and one hundred runs and just six by a margin greater than an innings and two hundred runs (four of them in the last ten years). Today the margin was an innings and 209.

Having started the day at 44-1, with two batsmen who were fairly set and after a delay due to rain, you would have scarcely imagined that the game might end well before the end of the day. Yet, just 28 balls into the day, it was 47-4 and the debate was about whether or not the Follow-On would be enforced. Had it not been for the delayed start, it is likely that the Follow-On would have happened even before Lunch.

As had happened in the South Africa series, as soon as a partnership started to threaten to steady the ship, a wicket fell. On this occasion it was Tobias Skelton Roland-Jones who, most likely, sealed his trip to Australia by extinguishing Hope just when he and Blackwood seemed to be sailing out of the storm into calmer waters. Roland-Jones may be one of the less-heralded recent England caps but, after three Tests, he has 14 wickets at 19.4: that is about half what he was averaging for Middlesex this season. Wickets for Toblerone in consecutive overs left the West Indies 101-6 and, effectively, ended all realistic chances both of saving the Follow-On and of making any sort of contest of the match.

The defiance of Blackwood showed what was possible, but two run-outs in the first innings and a dreadful sprint out of the crease and wild yahoo from Blackwood to get himself stumped by a mile in the second was illustrative of the West Indian problems of discipline. Had the West Indies got to 250 it is unlikely that Joe Root would have enforced the Follow-On but, 346 behind and with back-to-back Tests, the thought of extra rest for the bowlers certainly overweighed the desire to give Stoneman and Westley the chance to make cheap runs.

In the past, even with the West Indies so far short, you might have imagined that England would take the conservative option, bat again, set the opposition 600, or even 700 to win and then see rain consign the match to a draw. The reality was that even if Stoneman had batted again and made a century, it would have been against an attack that was completely demoralised and doing little more than trying to postpone the inevitable defeat: the runs would have meant little. By Tea it was 76-4 and the discussion was no longer about the wisdom of enforcing the Follow-On but, instead about whether or not the extra half hour would be claimed: it was not – the match lasted fewer than twenty overs more.

As performances go, this was not, at least by the West Indies. As preparation for Australia it was pretty meaningless for England, who have learnt nothing new. They still do not know if Dawid Malan can cut it in Tests. The jury is still out on Tom Westley. And poor Mark Stoneman has had just one innings and the whispers have already started about his place being under threat (!!!) mainly due to the limited time before the touring party must be selected. Even if Stoneman, Westley and Malan make centuries in the 2^nd Test, will that mean that they will be successful against Australia? The sad fact is that unless the bowling that they face is much more challenging than it has been in this Test, no one will take their runs too seriously.

The bowling attack has looked good, but it has hardly been challenged. Moeen Ali has 28 wickets at 16.4 in 2017: all of the six bowlers with more wickets have played at least two more Tests in 2017. Jimmy Anderson has 25 wickets at 13.1. Will either run through Australia as easily as they have gone through South Africa and the West Indies? Most certainly not! What of Toby Roland-Jones: 14 wickets at 19.4 in his first three Tests is one of the great international starts, but you can think of reasons why he may find life far harder in Australia, although you can also think of reasons why he may be a very valuable member of the attack.

England have a maximum of ten days more of Test cricket to decide what is their best XI and who should be the reserves, but do not bet on them getting more than seven. Right now, ten of the names are known already (Cook, Root, Stokes, Bairstow, Moeen, Woakes, Roland-Jones, Broad, Wood and Anderson): the last four places may require a wing and a prayer.

West Indies v England, 1st Test, Day 1: Opportunities Missed for Both Sides

 

West Indies v England, 1^st Test, Day 1: Opportunities Missed for Both Sides

August 17^th 2017

This was a day of contrasting emotions. I woke up in Denver to find England 44-2 and in some strife. By the time that I had got back from a visit to the Denver Museum of Nature and Science it was 348-3 and it was the West Indies with the headache.

Day 1 has suggested that this series will be as one-sided as we feared that it would.

It has also continued the trend from the summer of the side that bats first dominating the match. There though, similarities end. In the South Africa series each first day was tightly contested and it was unclear which was the side that was on top. After the first half hour this was simply a one-sided massacre.

England really needed Stoneman, Westley and Malan to make a score against searching bowling. Instead, after just 7.3 overs it was 39-2 and both Stoneman and Westley had gone for single figures. There is some debate over the Stoneman dismissal: fans say that he got possibly the ball of the day; detractors, that his shot to attempt to deal with it was not exactly one to be proud of. Westley shuffled across his stumps, got hit and somehow seemed to get away with it until the West Indians decided finally to review. After a promising start, Westley’s returns have diminished to the point that he seems unlikely to see out the series: 25, 59, 29, 9, 8. Undoubtedly he will have the 2^nd Test – maybe, if he is lucky, a second innings here too, but that looks increasingly doubtful – to make a score but, if he cannot seal his place then, the selectors may have no alternative but to play a replacement in the 3^rd Test. Stoneman is in a similar position: he will get two Tests but, if he cannot make a score, his replacement will be most likely to get the final Test of this series.

The Stoneman debate is an interesting one. His career average is significantly under 35. Supporters point out that he had five poor years initially, before suddenly and gloriously coming good and that his career average is adversely affected both by his slow start and by having to play at Chester-le-Street. These facts are used to carry his case over Jennings. Curiously though, exactly the same applies to Jennings: his early seasons in the county game were tough before he suddenly and gloriously came good – his figures in 2016/17, both the county season and then with the Lions and with England, broke no argument. He also has made big runs at Chester-le-Street and, what is more, unlike Stoneman, stayed on, even when Durham were relegated.

For the sake of England’s success and the sanity of the selectors, let us hope that Stoneman scores big either in a potential second innings here or in the 2^nd Test, although many of Alistair Cook’s failed partners started with a century in their first or second Test.

A look at the list of opening combinations – 14 of them in five years since Andrew Strauss retired – is salutary:

	Year(s)	Innings	No.	Runs	Best	Average	Run Rate	100	50
AN Cook, H Hameed	2016-2016	5	0	338	180	67.60	2.47	1	1
NRD Compton, AN Cook	2012-2013	17	1	927	231	57.93	2.69	3	3
AN Cook, BM Duckett	2016-2016	4	0	154	100	38.50	3.58	1	0
MM Ali, AN Cook	2015-2015	5	0	183	116	36.60	2.71	1	0
AN Cook, AD Hales	2015-2016	20	0	684	126	34.20	3.08	1	4
AN Cook, KK Jennings	2016-2017	12	0	404	103	33.66	2.71	1	2
AN Cook, SD Robson	2014-2014	11	0	355	66	32.27	2.76	0	2
AN Cook, A Lyth	2015-2015	13	0	402	177	30.92	2.83	1	0
AN Cook, JE Root	2013-2016	11	0	293	68	26.63	2.22	0	1
AN Cook, IJL Trott	2015-2015	6	0	154	125	25.66	2.44	1	0
MA Carberry, AN Cook	2013-2014	10	0	250	85	25.00	2.81	0	2

Using a qualification of minimum four innings (so far three of the combinations have had just a single innings together), by far the stand-out combination has been Cook and Hameed. Of the combinations that have had at least ten innings together, Cook and Compton lead the way, averaging better than 20 more than Cook and Hales: there was a feeling that Compton was dropped prematurely and this table suggests that Nick Compton has another reason to feel aggrieved. It also suggests that England’s loss of Hameed, first to injury and then to poor form, has been a tragedy, although it is fair to point out that if you take out that opening partnership of 180 at Rajkot, the figures for Cook and Hameed, while still decent, are a little less spectacular. Time will tell if Rajkot was a fluke or standard issue, as Hameed will surely go to Australia if he shows any form at all.

On commentary, Sir Geoffrey made a very good and quite alarming point. England have gone down the list of reserves as injuries and loss of form have robbed them of players. With just two more Tests to go after this one, if Stoneman and Westley cannot make a case to go to Australia, who DO you pick now? The Duckett (and, to a certain extent, the Jennings) experiment show that you cannot pluck a batsman out of Division 2 cricket and expect him to step up easily, ruling out many of the suggested candidates that have been proposed.

However, once Stoneman and Westley were dismissed, we returned to the traditions of the summer. All through the South Africa series, once the bowlers got rid of #2 and #3 with minimal bother, #4 and lower led the counter-attack. And that is exactly what we got again. With at least one, four-ball an over, Cook and Root raced along. Soon, 39-2 was just a distant memory and the West Indies bowling was disintegrating.

Even if you were an England fan it was slightly disheartening: you wanted Cook and Root to show their class against a searching examination and win through; instead, they seemed to get some gentle middle practice. It told us nothing about playing against the pink ball. It told us nothing that we did not know about Cook and Root. And it made the failures of Stoneman and Westley to register a score even more disappointing because there was a century there for the taking if they had seen off the new ball. Maybe a century against such friendly bowling would have meant little, but one talent that a Test batsman needs is to be able to take advantage and get greedy when the going is good.

With both batsmen past their century and the 250 partnership just a nudge into the deep away, Kumar Roach tried something new and radical – a straight ball! Joe Root, possibly taken by surprise, missed obligingly and the ball castled him.

Enter the third batsman under real pressure: Dawid Malan. With Alex Hales seemly making an unarguable case to bat at #5 and the return of Chris Woakes just a matter of time – the betting is that he will play the 2^nd Test, with a return for Hales potentially in the 3^rd – Malan’s hold on his place is getting as tenuous as the Martian atmosphere. Off the mark. Poorly executed cut shot. Straight into the hands of Dowrich at slip. And straight through. Malan survived and proceeded to take advantage of more loose bowling. He will have sterner tests, but 28* at the Close and accompanying Cook to his 150 will do for a start.

Malan may have no better chance to get a Test century: insipid bowling in friendly conditions. Tomorrow he can come back, bed in and try to make an imposing score to seal his place on the flight to Australia.

Cook, in contrast, has the chance to make a point. Over the last two years there have been plenty of 50s, but only two centuries, neither of them one of those big, daddy hundreds that he was so well known for. Cook must know that 200 is on. He must be aware that an even bigger score is on. A Cook double century will serve notice that his appetite for huge scores is still as large as ever. However weak the opposition, Australia will take notice.

Tomorrow will be an interesting day. If England see off the initial thrust, the potential is there for some individual landmarks before a declaration around Tea. Jimmy Anderson might be quite looking forward to getting his hands on a new pink ball, under lights, with a total near 600 behind him. Surely though the West Indies cannot be this poor again, can they?