Saturday, 19 August 2017

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


 

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

August 19th 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 2nd 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.

No comments:

Post a Comment