West Indies v England, 3rd Test, Day 2: Series in the Balance

 

West Indies v England, 3^rd Test, Day 2: Series in the Balance

September 8^th 2017

England’s strange Test summer has taken another turn. For a significant part of the day it seemed possible that the West Indies score of 123 could yet give them a first innings lead. At 63-5 it was far from impossible that England might be rolled for under 120. At 119-6 and 134-8 it seemed that the first innings lead might be a very small one but, in a low-scoring match, even a lead of 20 could be vital.

The tactics at that point though were odd. With batting a lottery and the obvious thing to do being to get back out and bowl and exploit the conditions, the tail, with its big-sitting batsmen, appeared to be happy to poke around. Moeen tentative in his brief innings. Broad, painfully aware that he would not get many in his own half, managed just 3 from his first 14 balls. Roland-Jones 6 from his first 11. Even if the days of his 169 against Pakistan and frequent Test 50s are long gone, never to return, he is still a clean hitter when the mood takes him and can change momentum with a quick 30. Toblerone has become a powerful hitter down the order for Middlesex who is developing the ability to hit a quick 50 (he has 1x100 and 8x50 in First Class cricket and is creeping up the batting order as his batting becomes more consistent). Then, the chip changed and, for a few minutes the destination of the match changed: 11 from an over by Gabriel, 6 from Roach’s next over, 5 from Holder, before nine dot balls inevitably led to the fall of Roland-Jones. In came Anderson and the leather flew briefly and gloriously, overs going for 12, 8 and 8, including a couple of sixes. Sixty added for the last two wickets in 11 overs and suddenly the lead was 71 when, not long before, England would have given grateful thanks for a lead of 21.

When the West Indies started their innings, batting was still not offering any job security. At 21-2, with batting still looking uncomfortable in murky light and many overs, plus the potential extra half hour to come, you could even dream of a two-day finish. It did not happen because Powell and Shai Hope put in some solid batting in a crisis, as they had in the first innings. Powell did not reach the Close, but by then the West Indies were effectively at parity and Chase and Hope could see the side through to the Close. You can see how much the West Indian side has grown during the series.

West Indies start what is now, effectively, a one-innings match at 22-3. The difference is that today is expected to be a day for batting. If they can see through the first hour it could be a long day for the bowlers and England could face a really testing target on Day 4. If, in contrast, England can take an early wicket the match may finish quickly.

Other factors that add intrigue? Broad has problems with his heel again and may struggle to bowl many overs or to bowl flat out. And Anderson, now in the 500 Club, has received two warnings for running on the pitch. Were Anderson to be removed from the attack for a third transgression, England’s attack would be severely stretched, with Moeen suffering another end of series crisis of confidence and form. However, the key bowler for England today may just be Roland-Jones, who has a knack of taking vital wickets just when they are most needed.

The match and the series are in the balance with, maybe, England just slightly ahead. England though will not want to have to rely on Stoneman, Westley and Malan to win the game for them. If Cook and Root fall cheaply, panic reigns and right now, there is not too much faith in the rest of the top order being able to cope with a panic.

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, 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.

South Africa v England, 3rd Test, Day 5: Moeen Makes His Point

 

South Africa v England, 3^rd Test, Day 5: Moeen Makes His Point

July 31^st 2017

At the start of play the England target was to remove one or both overnight batsmen in the first hour. For South Africa, it was to see out the first hour and then build for Lunch.

For much of the time the atmosphere was one of inevitability such that the chat in the TMS box seemed almost peripheral to the cricket. This got to the point that Jon Agnew was able to pass a good fraction of one sleepy passage of play with an elaborate wind-up of Geoff Boycott. Boycott, bless him, fell for it completely. So clever and plausible was the story concocted and so complete the collaboration from the rest of the team, that hundreds of thousands of fans must genuinely have believed that Boycott’s famous hundredth hundred at Headingley on August 11^th 1977 was going to be struck from the record books. Sir Geoffrey’s reactions were tightly controlled (just as well), but witnesses could see that an explosion was building. Just as Sir Geoffrey launched into a brief denunciation of the plan on the lines of “that’s rooooobish that is!” (still, amazingly, without expletives), Jon Agnew responded calmly and matter-of-factly with “it’s also a complete wind-up”, before explaining how the team had collaborated to concoct a false press release from the ICC. Boycott’s reaction was a heartfelt “You MUPPET!!!” which left everyone helpless with laughter (including, one suspects, many listeners).

Why could the TMS team completely ignore the cricket in the middle? More than an act of God, it was an act of Roland-Jones. As the stand between Elgar and Bavuma prospered and passed a hundred, as the overs ticked by and nothing much seemed to be happening, the pitch not doing much, Joe Root must have started to wonder if he was going to suffer a new humiliation as captain, with South Africa wriggling out of what looked like a lost position. Showers were threatened later in the day. Surely Elgar and Bavuma couldn’t, could they?

The early thrust of Stokes and Broad was seen off and, as the advert goes, Joe Root decided to “make it Toblerone”. Two overs passed with little incident. Two overs of Moeen at the other end too passed with little of note. Not a lot going on. Pitch friendly. Ball soft. Weather kind. And then the unexpected.

The first ball of Tobias Skelton Roland-Jones’s third over was straight. Bavuma defended. Big shout. Turned down by Alem Dar.

And then something happened that, at Trent Bridge, would have needed divine intervention to come to pass: a sensible referral by England. Three reds. Marginally hit pad before bat. OUT!

In comes Vernon Philander. First ball nips back nicely. Philander pads up. Oh dear! It was a repeat of Faf du Plessis’s “Mike Gatting moment”. 150-4 and cruising becomes 150-6 and in deep trouble. It could so easily have been even worse as the hat-trick ball was edged and only just failed to carry to Ben Stokes.

Even then, Elgar and Morris seemed to be carrying South Africa to Lunch. Once again, a partnership started to build. Once again, South Africa could not make it count. What is more, it was the last ball before Lunch when Morris played a loose shot that he almost got away with because it rebounded off Bairstow’s leg, just within range of the diving Stokes.

It was a recurring theme as South Africa tried to save the match. It is why it all seemed so low-key and inevitable. Partnerships of 21, 27, 108, 45 & 47 all got going, but were cut off before they could become too worrying. Three batsmen made 20s or 30s, but could not push on to the 50s that Elgar needed to come at the other end if he were to save the match. Whenever there was a ray of hope for South Africa, you knew that they would be unable to make it stick.

Even then there was a final twist. After Lunch Elgar and Maharaj started one of those annoying partnerships that delays the inevitable. After two quiet overs, runs started to come in a flood: 12 off one Roland-Jones over, 12 off his next, 6 from Moeen who seemed rather innocuous.  Ben Stokes relieved Roland-Jones, presumably to provide three tight overs from one end before the new ball. There were ten dot balls broken by a single and, suddenly, Moeen produced one of those magic balls that he seems capable of when he relaxes.

Tossed-up. Into the footmarks. Grips. Elgar goes at it hard. Outside edge. Straight to Stokes.

Next ball. The only difference is that Elgar’s drive is replaced by Rabada’s push. The delivery, the edge and the catch are identical.

Would Stokes be a gentleman with Moeen hanging on a hat-trick, but six balls from Stokes to come? Maharaj is suddenly shotless, but keeps out the six. No great drama.

Morkel’s first ball is delivered in the middle of a fielders’ convention. Morkel misses. The ball slams into pad. Umpire Wilson waits and waits and finally shakes his head. And, with that shake, eleven fielders are jerked into making the T-sign simultaneously as if the umpire were pulling their strings.

“Going down leg”, say the commentators.

Then: “this might be close”.

Then: “I think that he might be out”.

Then: “it *IS* going to be out!”

It is not a No Ball. No edge. Pitching in line. Impact in line. Hitting full on leg stump. The review process ratchets-up the drama as the TV umpire Kumar Dhamasena goes through the checks one by one, like a Prosecuting Attorney presenting Exhibit A, Exhibit B, … and requesting a conviction. Three reds.

“You can give that out. You are on camera now.”

Cue screams of delight and wild celebrations.

Moeen has the first hat-trick in an Oval Test. It was the first by an England spinner since 1938 and only the third time that victory in a Test was sealed with a hat-trick (the last was in 1902).

Having been discarded by many fans as not worth his place in the side after the Tests in India, Moeen Ali has 18 wickets at 14.7 in three Tests in 2017 at a strike rate of 26.7. Of all bowlers who have taken at least 10 wickets this year, the next best is Jimmy Anderson, with a strike rate of 43.5. Moeen cannot possibly keep up this rate of success but, since the end of the 2016 season, he has 39 wickets at 29.9 in 10 Tests, despite a dry spell in India where he took just 3 wickets in the last 3 Tests of the series.

Why do people keep questioning his place in the side?

So, since the end of the 2016 season, Moeen Ali’s contribution has been:

10 Tests

·       39 wickets at 29.9

·       636 runs at 33.5, with 2x100 & 3x50.

That is quite a contribution for a player regarded by many as a journeyman who is not good enough. Moeen has made his point. Quietly, but he has made it.

Now, we move on to Old Trafford and the 4^th Test. The hint is that the pitch will have a little more life. Trevor Bayliss has hinted that England will not need the extra batsman and suddenly, it seems, England have all manner of healthy problems.

1.     Who misses out?

Of the three debutants, Toby Roland-Jones took 8 wickets and made the vital breakthroughs in both innings. Tom Westley made 25 and 59 and looked calm and unfussed. It would be hard to drop either. Dawid Malan is the most vulnerable, with 1 & 10, getting two very good balls, although it has not passed unnoticed that both were in-swinging Yorkers that he failed to get bat on: there is a vulnerability there. However, Malan has earned his chance and showed in his T20 debut that he has the ability and the steel to make a success of an international career.

If Gary Ballance were fit, the most obvious player to make way would be Malan, with Ballance replacing him at #5, even if you feel that Malan would get another chance as soon as humanly possible. As it is, Ballance is not yet ready but, he has been assured that he is the man in possession when he is ready to come back.

2.     What about the balance of the side?

The pundits, without exception, liked the balance of the side, with 5 specialist bats, followed by 3 genuine all-rounders. With Bairstow at #7 and Moeen at #8 and Roland-Jones at #9, there was a formidable sting in the England tail. 183-5 became 316-8 in the first innings and 202-5 became 313-8 in the second innings.

However, Trevor Bayliss is hinting that he wants to play Liam Dawson at Old Trafford. If he does, Malan looks like being the player to make way, although you could suggest playing Dawson instead of a seamer. A much less plausible option, suggested by some pundits is to drop Jennings (who has been promised the four Tests) and ask Westley to open: this is the sort of fudge that has been universally condemned in the past.

Again, the balance of the side could depend on the weather forecast. The threat of rain and seam bowling conditions sealed Dawson’s fate at The Oval; a hot, dry spell may seal his place at Old Trafford.

3.     What about Woakes and Ball?

Chris Woakes will surely go to Australia. He will also be ready to play again come the 1^st Test v West Indies on August 17^th: who is rested to give him a game? If Jake Ball is going to go to Australia, does he get a Test, or will be played only in the ODIs and T20 that follow the West Indies series? With injured players coming back and looking for games, competition for places is going to be increasingly fierce.

4.     Can Alex Hales be re-commissioned?

Alex Hales is producing the sort of incredibly destructive form that got David Warner his first cap before he had even played a First Class match. Although Hales opens in limited overs and T20, he now bats in the middle order in First Class cricket. There are people who think that his form is now so exceptional that England cannot pass-up on his talent. Can he be fitted into the England middle-order at #5? With Tom Westley looking a good fit at #3 you can make a case for a middle order of Westley, Root, Hales, Stokes, Bairstow & Moeen that would give more than one side pause for thought.

However, right now England’s first problem is to close out the series.  Recently, far too many Test victories have been followed by a defeat in the next game. There has also been a pattern: England have won 14 of their last 17 home Tests batting first, but only 4 of 14 when batting second. The facile suggestion is to win the Toss and bat at Old Trafford, but a far more convincing demonstration would be to lose the Toss and win the match.

The keys to the England win at The Oval were:

·       Winning the Toss

·       Philander’s incomprehensible selection

·       Taking advantage and posting a solid first innings score

·       South Africa returning to the timid and fragile batting of the 1^st Test

And, almost more than anything else

·       Much better use of DRS.

Now, England have to show that it was the 2^nd Test horror show that was the anomaly in this series and South Africa have just 4 days to re-group. Which England and which South Africa will turn up in Manchester? England cannot rely on South Africa easing their way by making another dreadful selection mistake.

South Africa v England, 3rd Test, Day 1: Cook the Difference in the Glo

 

South Africa v England, 3^rd Test, Day 1: Cook the Difference in the Gloom

July 27^th 2017

It is amazing how opinions have shifted. Just three weeks ago a well-known pundit who goes by the pseudonym of The Analyst was confidently predicting a 4-0 win to England in the series. The 3^rd Test has opened with England in some disarray and hoping to avoid somehow going 2-1 down.

What is more, with South Africa able to field their strongest side and wondering who to drop, England have fielded three debutants: two forced and one in a strategy change.

With Gary Ballance out, one change was always going to happen. Tom Westley may wonder if Joe Root did him a favour by electing to bat on a grey day, with a slightly green pitch, in conditions likely to favour the bowlers. A report on his innings would make you wonder what has changed: shaped up competently, got into the 20s nicely, gave it away. It is almost as if Gary Ballance had never gone. Early Lunch due to rain. Did not play himself back in. Nice catch through to the slips straight after the interval.

Westley was not made to wait long. Keaton Jennings is clearly struggling for form recently (innings of 12, 5, 4, 35, 20, 27, 43, 0, 57, 71, 6, 39, 8, 33, 0, 3 & 0 in First Class cricket since mid-May). Vernon Philander, fortunately for England, was off the pitch almost as much as on it, vomiting and sick but, when he had the ball in hand gave England the holy terrors, taking 2-3 in his first six overs. Jennings reads Philander like I read Linear B.

We know that Jennings will get a least one more Test, but the pressure has ratcheted-up further and the air-heads within fandom who have been on his case all series are now positively willing him to fail to get their own man instead. The schedule is very unforgiving for players out of form these days. Back in the 1981 series Mike Brearley complained that Middlesex did not have a game between Tests that would allow him some middle practice: Jennings may not play another innings for Durham all summer.

England’s second debutant, Dawid Malan, came to the wicket after Philander had come back briefly and removed Joe Root. The poor forecast and likely seaming conditions sealed Liam Dawson’s fate. It became increasingly likely that Malan would play and England, duly, made a pragmatic selection. Malan in at #5. Stokes pushed down to #6, Bairstow at #7 and Moeen Ali, a slightly over-qualified #8. It means that South Africa have to work their way through an awful lot of batting to get at the tail, such as it is, with Toby Roland-Jones, a more than capable batsman with a First Class century and averaging 22.6 , likely to bat at #9 and Stuart Broad,  who has 11x50 and 1x100 in Tests, batting at #10.

The upshot is that even if the extra batsman failed, the bowlers would have the scant consolation of seeing the batting go on and on, as unkillable as the Terminator. On difficult batting days you know that a couple of batsmen will get a lethal delivery and you want to make sure that the bowlers know that taking a wicket will not necessarily make their job much easier.

The strike rates of all the England batsmen are within a lick of 50, showing what a battle it was. At 113-2, with Cook and Root dug in, England were slowly, but surely, getting on top. De Kock’s phenomenal catch to a superb Philander delivery put a stop to that. Malan was given a searching examination of technique, finally got off the mark with a single and immediately received an in-swinging Rabada yorker. Slightly off balance, he fell as he tried to jab the bat down, lost his dignity and, worse, his middle stump. The betting is that Rabada will have noticed his difficulty and may try something similar in the second innings.

From the fall of Malan to the rain-sodden Close, Cook – who looks in wonderful form – and Stokes have played proper Test cricket. Even though there has been a little, late acceleration, the run-rate over the day has been well under 3 and, instead of the crash-bang-wallop-OUT of the 2^nd Test, England actually look as if they are trying to construct an innings. With conditions likely to be a little easier on Day 2, followed by an increasingly difficult and miserable Day 3, it is an approach that could pay dividends if the batsmen can keep at it.

Stokes is playing with admirable self-denial so far – always a bad sign for the bowlers – and Cook is mixing crashing boundaries – half of his runs have so far come in 4s – with watchful defence. The 168 deliveries that Cook has not hit to the boundary have produced just 42 runs so far. Without Alistair Cook’s efforts in scoring almost half the day’s runs and more than half the runs off the bat, England would have been in a sorry mess.

England will hope that Cook can maintain his obduracy, going on to his century and beyond and that Stokes can maintain his defiance in the morning. By the same token, South Africa know that if they can remove both in the first hour, they will be well on top in the match. England will know that if both Cook and Stokes survive the first hour, they will be well set. Score 350-380 and make South Africa bat in increasingly difficult conditions on Saturday. Now that is the theory…

Day 2 should see the wonderfully named third debutant in action. Tobias Skelton Roland-Jones will be the first player named Tobias and the first named Skelton to play a Test match. He will be hoping that his debut innings is delayed until well after Lunch. Despite that fact that Mark Wood had been given the all-clear last week after a scan on his sore heel, it was no great surprise that Toby Roland-Jones was told a few days ago that Wood would again fail to play three consecutive Tests and that for the first time in many years England would be able to intimidate the opposition by fielding a player with a doubled-barrelled surname (I believe that there have only be three since the war). Unlike Wood, Toblerone is a seam and swing merchant at a healthy  pace.  He may have been looking enviously at the pitch and thinking that he could have done with bowling on a few like this one at Lord’s over the last couple of seasons.

3rd Test, Squad Announcement: And the Winner is…!

 

3^rd Test, Squad Announcement: And the Winner is…!

July 22^nd 2017

We have had a couple of days to digest the bomb(s) that the selectors have dropped.

First and most important, they were spared the embarrassment of having to admit to error and drop Gary Balance thanks to his broken finger. Ballance is conveniently unavailable for the 3^rd Test and that debate can wait.

In his place plays Tom Westley. This is an interesting call and one of the less expected names in the sense that there were plenty of calls in the press for him to be called up, but you rather thought that he might be pipped at the post and get a call from the selectors beginning “awwwwwfuly bad luck Tom. You were so close.”

If you just look at his career average, you see under 38 – a useful player, definitely a county stalwart, but nothing exceptional. He has spent several seasons in the more relaxed climes of Division 2 cricket, where pitches are often not so good and attacks are friendlier after some lively new ball overs. Last season though, his runs at 53 were a large part of the reason why Essex were promoted and he is now averaging 53 half way though his first Division 1 season: last season was not a flash in the pan.

What is more, when newly promoted Essex started fast, largely due to the quantity of runs from Alistair Cook and Tom Westley, people nodded wisely and thought that it would not last. We are now more than half way through the season and Essex are sitting pretty at the top with a healthy lead and five wins from eight matches. Yes, they could suffer a late meltdown but they have already enough points in the bank to ensure that those who bet on them to go straight back down can throw away their betting slips and, after several seasons where the County Championship title has gone down to the last round and even the last day, or last session of the season, there is every chance that this season the title will be wrapped up with at least one round to spare. Westley’s recognition is recognition that Essex have hit a winning formula and that their players deserve recognition too.

However, Tom Westley’s elevation was the result of a delicate and complex ballet.

Question 1: Do we persist with Keaton Jennings?

This should not even have been a question given that he has only played 4 Tests and his first 3 were marked with a century, a fifty and a battling 33 in the second innings of the 1^st Test when conditions were at their most difficult, which helped set up the win.

Dropping him so quickly was not an option. However there was a permutation that would have seen Mark Stoneman selected as an opener and Jennings dropping to #3. This was in line with the original Plan A of the selectors to square the Cook-Hameed-Jennings triangle by playing Jennings at #3 and let Hameed open. Social media are still full of calls for Hameed to open, but his recent run of 0, 9, 10, 18, 38*, 0, 2, 17 & 23 really does not broke argument. He has hardly scored a run since leaving India as injury, illness and expectation have taken their toll. Jennings is hardly in sparkling recent form, but a fifty in each innings for the Lions sealed his spot. Hameed managed just 0 & 2 against South Africa A.

It seems though that the selectors stated firmly that Jennings would open. That, apparently, ruled out Stoneman, who was not considered a suitable option for #3. Westley thus was considered the best fit as a specialist #3. This allows Jennings to find his feet against what is proving to be an extremely testing new ball attack (ask Alistair Cook, whose scores of 3, 69, 3 & 42) are some way short of the form that he has shown for his county: 3x100, 2x50 and no score lower than 31 in his last eight matches). It also allows Joe Root to stay at his preferred  #4 position.

So, Part 1 of the England conundrum has been resolved with

       1.     Cook

2.     Jennings

3.     Westley

4.     Root

Part 2 involves the bowling.

Moeen Ali has bowled 59 overs and taken 14 wickets.

Dawson, Broad, Stokes and Wood have bowled a total of 213 overs and taken 15 wickets.

Wood’s only wicket of the series came when he bowled a token over before Tea on the final day of the 1^st Test and JP Duminy decided to end his Test career with a rash shot.

While the series bowling averages are topped by Moeen Ali and Jimmy Anderson, the next five slots are all held by South African bowlers. The England support bowling has been very disappointing. Stuart Broad has bowled well and has been a fine foil for Jimmy Anderson, but with limited luck. Stokes, Dawson and Wood though, all too often, have released pressure.

Having six bowlers does give the captain many options. It also means that bowlers have relatively light loads through what is a very compressed series. With several bowlers who are carrying long-term injuries, or who are approaching the end of their careers, or both, not over-bowling them is a major concern. In theory, Joe Root can call on a bowler of high pace (Wood), two of the best seamers in world cricket (Anderson and Broad), an X-Factor bowler (Stokes), a decent off-spinner (Moeen) and a Slow Left-Armer (Dawson). It should be an attack that can prosper in any situation.

That though, is only a theory. The reality is that something is holding Mark Wood back. In the ODIs, the knowledge that he would bowl a maximum of ten overs in two or three spells allowed him to release his aggression. In the Tests, the thought that he may need to bowl 20 or even 25 overs in a day (so far he has been nowhere near that), have caused him to hold back. He is bowling neither fast, nor aggressively. He is not giving control. His only wicket was due to a piece of rank bad batting. While not bowling badly, he is not achieving what his team needs, which is to exploit breakthroughs with incisive bursts of aggression.

Wood’s place is under threat for other reasons. He is carrying a heel injury and although passed fit, it may be that he is not risked. Get him through the series. Get him ready for Australia. One option is to play Toby Roland-Jones at The Oval and at least see what he can do. Is he a plausible option for Australia if others are unavailable? Most likely Woakes (probably unavailable until the West Indies series) and Ball would be picked ahead of him, but Roland-Jones is probably only an injury or two away from going to Australia. With the lack of any kind of meaningful practice in modern tours of Australia, the best time to find out about him before the Ashes start will be in a Test. The West Indies series will be needed to re-commission Ball and Woakes and perhaps as a confidence builder for Wood. If England are serious about Toby Roland-Jones, they have to bite the bullet and play him.

The impression is that TRJ or Toblerone – as he is known – has had a discrete season. He is though the leading wicket-taker for Middlesex in the Championship by a clear margin and in the top dozen Division 1 wicket-takers, although his average of 35.6 is poorer than any of the top fifteen wicket-takers apart from Neil Wagner. He has also laboured with what BBC Radio London’s Kevin Hand has called “Five Day pitches”, on which bowling out sides once, let alone twice, has been a real battle. This though may be an advantage in Tests as he has learnt the skills to winkle out batsmen on good pitches.

A look at the leading wicket-takers in Division 1 does reveal some reason for hope. Two South Africans in exile: Harmer and Abbott lead the way with 44 and 40 wickets respectively. Behind them, Ben Coad on 39 has surely earnt a ticket to Australia. Seventh on the list, with 24 wickets, is a name who probably no one would have guessed: Somerset’s Jack Leach, apparently getting his mojo back. Hovering around the top 20 are Stephen Parry of Lancashire, Liam Dawson, Dom Bess (17 wickets at 19.5 in just three matches) and Ollie Rayner. Leach and Bess will surely go on tour with the Lions and it is not impossible that one or other may be in the party to Australia. Yes, there are some spin options. Maybe no one in the Shane Warne class, but then, who is?

Despite Liam Dawson’s success this season for Hampshire, his place is under real threat. England picked him, not as the best spinner, but as an able batsman who can bowl tight overs and relieve the pressure on Moeen Ali. Since his battling 66* in the 1^st innings at Channai his scores have been: 0, 0, 0, 13 & 5* and his bowling: 2-129, 2-67, 2-34, 0-26 & 1-42. Looking at the cold numbers and an economy that has only been below 3.7 in his last four innings as South Africa collapsed at Lord’s, you would have to say that he is not supplying what England need. It is hard to avoid the feeling that he is batting at least one place too high in the order and that England would be better served by having a specialist batsman in his place and pushing Bairstow, Stokes and Moeen down a place.

Although the name of Dawid Malan had been mentioned – after all, he has made his T20 debut and averages over 40 this season, as well as being an under-rated leg-spinner – his naming was unexpected and definitely not universally approved. A common complaint is that England are addressing an all-too-real batting issue by picking a T20 specialist. Yes, Malan made his name with a remarkable T20 century in 2009 and made his debut for England in T20, but he has been a Lions regular for several seasons without ever quite making it into the Test team. He has also got a solid record in what has frequently over recent seasons been a dysfunctional Middlesex middle order.

If I had to take a bet, I would say that the selectors will baulk from three changes and three new caps, but two is a very good bet. Right now, I would bet good money on one of Dawson and Wood missing out, with Malan for Dawson the most likely swap. The only reason why it may not happen is that if The Oval pitch looks like being a big turner, as it has at times in the past, the selectors may think that Dawson is necessary. If, however, the weather is likely to be grey and cool, encouraging seam more than spin, Malan will slot in at #5.