Ashes 2013
Testing the bench strength is always
worthwhile
September 17th
[22:00 CEST]
A few months ago the loud moaning – I would be tempted to say “whining” – was that
if James Anderson got injured England would have no more than a club attack
that would be powerless to resist Australia’s batting power. As theories go, it
was understandable. Tim Bresnan was coming back from a second operation, as was
Graeme Swann. Stuart Broad had struggled with a heel injury during the winter. There
were no credible reserves. Australia had nothing to fear: one or two injuries
and England would be on their knees.
That it did
not quite work out that way was in part due to the lack of injuries, but also
to the pack mentality of the England attack. It could bear Steve Finn
completely losing form and confidence and still win 3-0 and come within a tick
on an umpire’s light meter of making it 4-0, even with Tim Bresnan out injured. When
a wicket was needed, it might be Tim Bresnan one day, Graeme Swann another,
Stuart Broad the next – there was little choose in terms of strike rate and
contribution to the series win.
The Fifth
Test and the ODIs have been used to check the bench strength. Ajmal Shazad who,
two years ago, was a Test player is out of favour but, instead, the selectors
have looked at Chris Woakes, Boyd Rankin, Chris Jordan, Ben Stokes, James
Tredwell and Simon Kerrigan. There were some outstanding successes: Boyd Rankin
was one and, after a nervous start, Chris Jordan was another. There were some
terrible disappointments: those who have watched Simon Kerrigan’s career were
stunned to see how he disintegrated into a bundle of nerves, while James
Tredwell’s star waned as the Australians went after him and found that he had
no answers. There were a couple of seminal moments in the series when first
Steve Finn and then Simon Kerrigan were severely dealt with by the Australians
and Alistair Cook, showing some steel (for some) and bull-headedness (for
others) showed that he had no time for them once they had let him down. Eoin
Morgan, who had to juggle more slender resources, must have been tempted to run
from the field, head in hands, crying “Oh dear! Oh my!” in the manner of Hardy
Har Har, as he watched Tredwell dismantled, knowing that what he had available
to replace him would be even more vulnerable.
Ben Stokes, I
would give a provisional pass to. Yes, he took wickets, but was expensive with
it. He looks too raw to bowl as a third seamer and his batting, while very
promising in two difficult match situations, will need to develop further to make him a genuine Test all-rounder.
There is speculation that he will go to Australia as the spare all-rounder, but
I would prefer to see him playing regularly with the Lions there, than carrying
drinks for all but two or three days with the main squad. Similarly, we saw too
little of Chris Woakes to make a real judgement. A lot of people wanted to bury
him based on some nervous initial overs but, after a timorous start, he did the
job asked of him of keeping things tight to spell the front-line bowlers and,
if his first Test wicket was from a typical slog overs shot, he deserved to get
it – he had bowled some fine deliveries on an excellent line just outside of stump
that, on another day, could have taken two or three cheap wickets. Can he make
himself into a genuine Test bowler? Too
slow? Well, he was faster than some of the Australian bowlers in the Test
series and, as Glenn McGrath showed, you can take wickets bowling at 80mph if
you develop a weapon.
In contrast,
Boyd Rankin, who looked like being the anecdote of the summer, as the man who
changed sides only to be forgotten, became England’s go-to bowler and responded
with a series of displays, each better than the one before. With doubts about
Chris Tremlett’s fitness and staying power, it looks as if Boyd Rankin will go
to Australia as England’s enforcer: if Australia produce fast, bouncy pitches,
Boyd Rankin will thoroughly enjoy himself, as Chris Tremlett did in 2010.
However,
Rankin was on the radar beforehand. Chris Jordan was not. Brought to England
from Barbados for a cricket scholarship due to his exceptional talent, he made
a rapid impact. However, injury and the slow Surrey trainwreck let to him
becoming a marginal and disaffected player at The Oval, however much he
returned to Barbados and bowled like a demon in the winter. Why the West Indies
Cricket Board did not pay attention to his excellent returns in Caribbean
domestic cricket is a mystery. Knowing that he was qualified for England
through his grandparents and would be through residence too, they must have
known that there was a chance that he would be lost, so it is hard to fathom
why he did not get a West Indies A invite that would have tied him to Caribbean
cricket. Once he had appeared for the Lions with success after his revival at
Sussex, it was inevitable that he would go on to senior honours. Although he
started nervously, he came back strongly and showed plenty of hostile intent,
raw speed and menace. All in all, he showed that he has the potential to be the
sort of shock weapon that Norman Cowans was in the 1982/83 Ashes, with the raw
pace to give batsmen the hurry-up. Jordan is also a useful batsman although,
logically, he found the extreme pace of Mitch Johnson a mystery initially, but
hung in there and scored some useful runs.
With Boyd
Rankin surely having tied down one of the four positions up for grabs (the XI
from Trent Bridge plus Tim Bresnan), it is likely that Jordan and Stokes are
competing for one spot in the main party, with the other in the shadow, Lions
squad. I see Stokes as a raw player who will benefit more from the regular
cricket that the Lions will offer, while Jordan could come in on the morning of
a Test and have a five-for by Tea.
With Monty
Panesar almost certain to be overlooked, James Tredwell had a chance to seal a
spot as second spinner. He now looks a much less credible option. His First
Class season has been dreadful, not helped by playing in a struggling side and
his few wickets have come at around 56 each. However, with Kerrigan looking
almost certain to be consigned to the Lions, the choice of second spinner has
become moot. It is not impossible that the selectors could return to Samit
Patel, although Adil Rashid, who will most certainly NOT be picked, has more
wickets at a better average (still comfortably the wrong side of 40). This has
been a poor season for spinners in general and who should shadow Graeme Swann
will be perhaps the most difficult decision. The selectors could even decide
not to name a second spinner and rely on whoever is in form in the Lions squad
to step in at short notice, if necessary, reasoning that Australia are unlikely
to deal up low, slow turners.
A lot of
discussion will focus on the batting reserves. If a spinner is picked, there
will, most likely, be only one batting slot open. Many people would like it to
go to Nick Compton and with it to see him open with Cook, with Joe Root going
back to #6, although the selectors show no signs of encouraging him that he is
still in their thoughts. With Jonny Bairstow in the squad there is no need for
another specialist wicket-keeper.
However, James Taylor is the most likely to be added as spare batsman and, if a
spinner is required, Scott Borthwick offers a spin option, as well as a
plentiful batting talent. A left field pick such as Gary Balance or Varun
Chopra is less likely.
Certainties: Cook, Root, Trott, Pietersen, Bell, Bairstow, Prior, Bresnan, Broad,
Swann, Anderson, Finn & Rankin
Probables: Taylor, Jordan
In the balance: Compton or Borthwick
No comments:
Post a Comment