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?