West Indies v England, 3rd Test, In Retrospect: Was this the real England?

 

West Indies v England

3^rd Test, In Retrospect: Was this the real England?

February 17^th 2019

 

The script was for an England side that always been chasing the game on this tour and that was in a fair degree of chaos, to stumble to a third defeat, bringing back shades of the ‘80s.

For the 3^rd Test there was yet another case of “all change”. The tour started with Anderson and Curran sharing the new ball and ended with England accepting that Anderson and Broad were the best pairing still. The fact that Anderson is already in his late thirties and could retire at any time and that Stuart Broad, although skilled, is clearly not the force that he was three of four years ago, shows just how unsuccessful England have been at finding adequate replacements. On this tour, Chris Woakes has been injured, although his form away from home has never shown the advances that his home form has and Ollie Stone was sent home injured, so neither got a chance to show what they could do. The inevitable conclusion though from what we have seen of Ben Stokes and Sam Curran is that the former is probably an excellent fourth seamer and the latter no better than fifth seamer away from home.

When, in three Tests, you play three different top threes, you know that you have problems. England’s decision to take just two specialist openers, both of whom were uncertain of their places, was probably conditioned by knowing that they would have almost no cricket outside the Tests for an extra opener, but it was rather like trying to cross the high-wire in a gale, without a safety net. That there are not many obvious candidates who have not been tried and that the Lions are having another poor tour, could also have conditioned the “cross your fingers and hope for the best” strategy.

At least there was some degree of logic to the Burns/Jennings/Denley configuration. By playing two specialist openers, Denly could play in his own, specialist position at #3. That meant that Moeen Ali and Jonny Bairstow could go back to the middle order, where they are undoubtedly more likely to score runs. Given that England’s strength in recent times has been the ability to hit back when the opposition have fired-out out three or four wickets cheaply, playing to that strength seemed at least, to be sensible.

The third Test, which I had to follow as best as I could from a meeting in the USA (sneaking glances at the score during the talks), provided a mixture of “more of the same” and big surprises. While the fans have, in general, been quite tolerant of Rory Burns’ hesitant start, the opprobrium for Keaton Jennings has been almost universal. However, England’s first innings provided a hint of just why the tour management were actually right to persist with both. Although the first wicket partnership was only 30, Burns and Jennings saw off the new ball and the new ball attack. Instead of being 30-3 from eight overs, England were 30-0 from 16, there were overs in the legs of Roach and Gabriel, who both ended up bowling a lot of overs  in the innings and the match and the openers had done the first part of their job at least.

Although Keaton Jennings fell, eventually, in the habitual way, driving without due care and attention, one detail of his tour has escaped the notice of his critics. Although there is a glaring lack of sufficiency in the “Runs” column against his name – 62 runs at 15.5 is most definitely insufficient – people have not looked at another column that is frequently ignored. When the critics were crying-out for batsmen to forget swinging the bat and just hang in there and tire the bowlers, who were the England batsmen who batted for most balls per innings during the series? The answer is surprising!

Ben Stokes	66 balls/innings
Keaton Jennings	65 balls/innings
Joe Root	60.3 balls/innings
Joe Denly	58.5 balls/innings
Jos Buttler	58 balls/innings

Although Jennings failed to capitalise, he was seeing-off the new ball. As has been pointed out, rarely does he fail to get a start but, once “in” does not stay in.

In the 1^st Test, England were 44-4 from 16.2 overs. In the 2^nd Test, it was 34-3 from 15.1 overs. Here, although the runs were coming in a trickle, crucially, the wickets were still intact. It was the thirty-third over when Rory Burns fell. For the first time in the series, Jos Buttler and Ben Stokes were coming in against an attack that was no longer fresh. It allowed the counter-attack to flourish. In the second innings it was even clearer: when Jennings fell, to leave England 73-2, it was the twenty-eighth over, the attack was a bowler short and Roach and Gabriel had each bowled more than thirty overs in the match already. For the first time in the series, England’s attacking middle order were coming up against tired bowlers who were not having things all their own way.

Although, in terms of runs, the total from the top three of 159 in the Test is far short of what England wanted, the 196 and 220 balls respectively that they survived in the two innings took up a total of just two minutes short of nine hours of play and helped to grind down the bowlers and make possible the match-winning contributions of Root, Buttler and Stokes further down the order. In a sense, England have got a sniff of the answer to their top-three conundrum. Of the top three, Burns averages 25 after twelve innings; Jennings averages 25.2 after thirty-two; and Denly 28 from four. None of them have made a solid case to play against Ireland, but there is just enough to suggest that Denly may be the #3 to play against Australia, making a success of the role and, if Burns gets runs against Ireland, he will get the full series. The biggest doubt is Jennings. While most fans and, to be fair, most of the pundits, think that he is unlikely to play against Australia, were he to make runs early in the season and other potential rivals, not, you can see why the tour management refuses to rule out Jennings continuing. Forget Denly as an all-rounder. At this level he is always going to bowl after Joe Root and mainly as a partnership-breaker, or to hurry-on the new ball but, just maybe, he can make a decent fist of batting at 3: even if he does not make big runs, to have someone in the Chris Tavaré role of blocking an end and tiring the bowlers, is a first step.

The other difference in this Test was the support bowling. After the initial thrust by Anderson and Broad was seen off, the openers had set a solid platform and England’s 277ao was looking well short of par, the change bowling changed the match. Not for the first time it was Moeen who made the breakthough but, this time, the support at the other end kept the pressure on when Moeen followed-up with a second, quick wicket. Maybe Mark Wood will never have such success again, but this time he was fit, he was eager and he was firing and, at least in the first innings, he was faster than Shannon Gabriel. Moeen picked the lock and then Mark Wood kicked the door down: his spell was 8-2-37-4, in sharp contrast to the rather gentle offerings of Sam Curran over the winter. When he came off, having racked his speed up to almost 95mph, the score was now 107-7 and England only had to wrap-up the tail, which they did. Despite the efforts of Shane Dowrich to steady the ship, once Broad knocked him over before he could do any great damage, Moeen and Mark Wood knocked-over the last two wickets in quick time.

With Toby Roland-Jones back bowling in the nets, if Mark Wood can stay fit, the Australians may find the England attack more hostile than they were expecting. Who knows though if Toblerone will get back to his best? Who knows if Mark Wood can stay fit? It is two very big ifs, but, like the top 3, there is just a hint that the answers may be coming.

Of course, this was a dead rubber. The West Indies were without their inspirational captain (and his stand-in was no better on over-rate) and their out cricket was flat and they lost one of their attack, injured. It is easy to write this off as a meaningless win. However, England’s rise to Ashes success in 2005 started with a “meaningless win” in a dead rubber in the 2002/03 Ashes. If the lessons have been learnt. If the right conclusions are drawn, momentum can grow quickly. The Australians have their problems too and are not the supermen of yesteryear… at least, not at the moment. It may look oh so different come September, but then, it might not. Back in 1989 Australia came to England having, in general, had much the worst of their matches against England through the ‘80s. The feeling was that England, most likely, would win the series and hold on to the Ashes. It ended 4-0 to Australia, with only the weather stopping them from winning the two, drawn Tests and England used 26 players over the six matches including, famously, their “eighteenth choice fast bowler” in the midst of a massive, late-series injury crisis.

 

West Indies v England, 2nd Test, Day 3: Awful England Crash Again

 

West Indies v England

2nd Test, Day 3: Awful England Crash Again

February 2^nd 2019

 

The relative batting performance for England and the West Indies can be summed-up in one statistic:

·        Seven West Indian batsmen got a start in their first innings, of whom, only two failed to reach thirty.

·        Seven England batsmen got a start in their second innings, of whom, only one reached twenty.

In a low-scoring Test, in which batsmen never felt in, the ability to grind-out a 30, or a 40 was fundamental. No one on either side got very close to Moeen Ali’s first innings 60, but all seven West Indians who got a start, passed 20 and enough of them chipped-in with 30s and 40s to take them past 300 and a total worth 500 to 600 on a better pitch.

In the 1^st Test, you could think of plenty of excuses: not enough practice, unfamiliar conditions, players a little over-confident, the wrong playing XI picked on the day, misreading of the conditions, etc. They would be switched-on and ready for the 2^nd Test. In fact, the margin in the 2^nd Test was probably even bigger than in the 1^st.

Much has been made of the relative difference in pace between the two attacks. In fact, it was not as great as it might seem:

England	Average Speed	West Indies	Average Speed	Difference
Anderson	81.7	Roach	81.6	-0.1
Broad	83.5	Gabriel	87.7	+4.2
Stokes	84.3	Joseph	85.3	+1.0
Curran	78.8	Holder	78.0	-0.8

Anderson and Curran were both slightly faster on average than their West Indian opposite number. Stokes was a fraction slower than Alzarri Joseph. The big difference was that the England pace attack had no one to compare with the pace of Shannon Gabriel. Although Gabriel only bowled around twenty deliveries in the England second innings that were above 90mph, the menace was always there. In contrast, 88mph was the absolute limit for the England bowlers, even with an effort ball (Ben Stokes bowled a couple of deliveries a little above 88mph, without ever threatening 89mph). Knowing that a really quick ball could come, the batsmen would always be a little tentative above getting into line, in case a ball came that exploded in their face in the way that the ball did to Joe Root in the 1^st Test.

One criticism was that the England bowlers were bowling the wrong length and line. Stuart Broad, in particular, beat the bat on dozens of occasions. Was he bowling too short? Would bowling straighter have helped?

Unfortunately, data is not available for the England first innings, but we can compare the line and length of Stuart Broad in the West Indian first innings and Shannon Gabriel in the England second innings. The comparison is interesting:

 

Gabriel only bowled 9 deliveries that pitched closer than 6m from the stumps. Broad pitched many more deliveries well up. Gabriel’s average length was about 7m from the stumps; Broad’s about 6.5m. Gabriel’s greater pace justified his slightly shorter length, but there is no good reason to say that Stuart Broad was consistently too short.

What about line? Gabriel’s average line to the right-hander was around seventh stump. Broad’s shows more dispersion, but was, on average, almost identical, although around half his deliveries were on the fourth/fifth stump line that Gabriel left almost unexplored. Gabriel pitched just one ball on the stumps; Broad just nine, one of them a toe-crunching Yorker on middle-and-off to the left-hander.

The biggest difference though was between Kemar Roach and Jimmy Anderson:

Anderson’s grouping to the right-hander was extraordinary, his deliveries landing in a box 4 metres long and about 4 stumps wide. The further up he pitched, the closer to the stumps the ball landed, making the batsman play. Roach tended to go much wider of off, tempting the batsman to have a go. In contrast, to the left-hander, Roach bowled more balls in line and was slightly tighter around off stump, with not a single ball down leg. In contrast about a third of Anderson’s deliveries to the left-hander were down the leg side, effectively eliminating LBW and bowled as modes of dismissal: in fact, around a third of his deliveries to the left-hander showed exactly the same tight grouping as he showed to the right-hander but, now, they were the wrong side of the stumps. This was the biggest single difference between the respective New Ball bowlers.

However, overall, there was not a huge difference between Anderson and Broad on one side and Roach and Gabriel on the other: Gabriel was that bit faster and could produce the 90+mph effort ball that was beyond Broad and Anderson’s line to the left-handers was significantly untidier, but there were not the abysmal differences in bowling between the two attacks that some critics perceived.

The big difference between the sides on a difficult pitch was:

(a)    Taking the chances that were offered. England missed too many.

and

(b)   The West Indian batsmen were far more determined to hang in there in difficult conditions and not to give it away. The West Indian batsmen sold their wickets at the highest possible price.

For the 3^rd Test, at Gros Islet, England are hoping for a better pitch because they have seen that, on pitches with life, the West Indians have a big advantage. It would be astonishing if the groundsman did not serve up another spicy pitch, with the West Indians going for the throat. That said, is there anything that England can do to give themselves a better chance?

Denly had two low scores and his one Test has produced 23 runs, compared to the 31 of Jennings. Neither has exactly covered himself with glory. It would be hard to drop Denly and bring back Jennings… and pretty unjustifiable. There might though just possibly be a reason to play both Jennings and Denly, with Denly opening and Jennings slotting-in at #3, where many pundits suspect that he may do better, long-term, although it would be better to go with Burns and Jennings opening and Denly in his accustomed place at #3. While Jennings has not exactly been full of runs, part of the opener’s job is to see off the opening bowlers and get the shine off the ball. That Jennings did do: he faced as many balls in his two innings in the 1^st Test, as Buttler, Foakes or Moeen Ali have in the two Tests combined and not many fewer than Bairstow and Stokes.

One reason to play Jennings would be if there is a second, attacking spinner, because his specialist fielding at Short Leg at least partly compensates a lack of runs. That would be if the selectors went with Jack Leach instead of Sam Curran. Curran is going at almost 4-an-over and has taken just a single wicket in 42 overs of generally quite innocuous seam and, although third in the batting averages thanks to a Not Out, has managed just 50 runs. One suspects that Jack Leach would be a much better foil to Moeen Ali than Adil Rashid, would offer more wicket-taking threat than Sam Curran and, even if he slightly lengthens the tail, that tail has hardly wagged so far in the series anyway, with the last three wickets falling for one run in the first innings and fourteen in the second, having fallen for sixteen and eighteen in the 1^st Test. Overall, Leach is likely to add far more value in total than Curran.

With Ollie Stone withdrawn from the tour and Chris Woakes injured, the Leach for Curran swap is the only one feasible in the attack. Who though might make way to allow Burns, Jennings and Denly to make up the top 3? Jos Buttler’s 55 runs in 4 innings, while not exactly any worse than his colleagues, is certainly no better and it looks as if his hands have been generously spread by some errant kiwi with what was, for my generation, termed “Britain’s favourite butter”. He is also batting at least one and possibly two places too high at #5 If Buttler were to make way, Jonny Bairstow would go back to #5, where he would be likely to make more runs and we would, at least, have a top five of specialists, batting in their specialist position, rather than a mixture of batsmen out of position.

So, although it would make some fans splutter over their morning toast, the following XI would do no worse than the two sides selected so far:

Burns

Jennings

Denly

Root

Bairstow

Stokes

Foakes

Moeen

Broad

Leach

Anderson

West Indies v England, 2nd Test, Preview: England Wield the Scalpel

 

West Indies v England

2nd Test, Preview: England Wield the Scalpel

January 30^th 2019

 

As many as five players might well have been hanging on news of the 2^nd Test squad. Sam Curran, Keaton Jennings, Adil Rashid, Ben Foakes and Moeen Ali might all have had reasons to fear the wielding of the axe. As it turns out, the selectors, sensibly, have chosen to make surgical changes, rather than play the axeman as some of the more radical fans would have them do. Sam Curran keeps his place in the XII, although it is possible that he will be the one left out tomorrow. The major change has been for Keaton Jennings to be dropped for the second and possibly final time in his career. Jennings has periods of form in which runs and centuries flow like a river in the spring thaw but, at Test level, seam bowling is finding him out. While, in County cricket, there are enough bad balls that he can make hay, at Test level the bowling is more persistent and less forgiving of errors. The point has been made though that the County game, which thirty years ago, offered exposure to the very best bowlers in world cricket (think of facing Michael Holding, Joel Garner, Richard Hadlee, Wasim Akram, Bishan Bedi, Muttiah Muralitharan, Imran Khan, Morne Morkel, Chris Cairns, …) now, due to the intensity of international tours, only features the very best players on an occasional basis and then, for a few weeks. It is no longer possible for a county such as Somerset to play stars of the class of Joel Garner and Viv Richards alongside Test players such as Ian Botham for the majority of games, season after season. There are many fine bowlers in County cricket but, for all the efforts of the two-division system to create intensity, the way that the Championship has been shunted into two halves, with early season games in April/May and late season games in late August and September, with hardly any games between, has not been conducive to developing all-round players. In a difficult situation, the selectors have taken a pragmatic, but highly risky approach in dropping Jennings with three games to go before the Ashes and replacing him with a non-specialist opener.

Joe Denly is a player who made a big impact early in his career. An attacking opener who broke into the limited overs set-up, playing 9 ODIs and 5 T20s in 2009/10, he was tipped for Test honours when at Middlesex, before he lost his way completely. Rescued by Kent, he averaged 40.9 in 2015, 38.6 in 2016, 55.5 in 2017 and then, 34.5 in 2018, supplemented by 23 wickets at 18.5. While his average in 2018 was affected by playing on some very sporty surfaces at home, playing a non-specialist as opener, who averaged under 35 last season in Division 2, is an extremely brave decision. If Denly were to fail, where do England go with just the match against Ireland before the Ashes? Alastair Cook has called the decision to bring in Denly “brave” and it is one that could backfire horribly. On the other hand, though, Denly is highly experienced and has gone through the mill. In a sense, he is regarded a safe pair of hands in a difficult situation. Not originally in the Test squad for Sri Lanka, he was drafted-in as a potential #3 and third spinner, but had a difficult time in the warm-ups and the plan was abandoned. What though is hard to understand, is England going to the Caribbean without a reserve opener given the pressure on Jennings and, to a slightly lesser degree, on Burns. However, it is an evident truth that there are no specialist openers crying-out for selection, although Sam Robson and Daryll Mitchell might disagree. The decision to go with Denly has a certain similarity to the promotion of a previous Kent specialist #3 to Test opener… a chap called Chris Tavaré, who made a decent fist of it in 18 of his 31 Tests.

The second change in the squad was widely expected, but has been dressed-up discretely. Adil Rashid was expected to lose his place, so has been given leave to return to the United Kingdom to be with his wife for the birth of his second child, due during the Test. Jack Leach, who should probably have been in the team for the 1^st Test replaces him. However, it is far from certain that Leach will play. England are likely to recall Stuart Broad and play four seamers, with Sam Curran dropping to fourth seamer. In this case, Moeen Ali will be the lone spinner, supported by the part-time tweak of Joe Root and Joe Denly. However, if the pitch, expected to be low and slow, looks likely to take spin, England could well drop Curran, who looked well off the pace both with bat and ball in Barbados and play three seamers and two specialist spinners. England misread the Barbados pitch; they cannot afford to misread this one.

What everyone – even the West Indies – is expecting is an England reaction. However, Caribbean cricket has been severely slighted by some of the pre-tour comments and would be quite inclined to serve up two shirt fronts on which a result would not be possible in six days, let alone five, to protect their series lead. Sir Geoffrey though, as is his want, has made light of his faux pas and suggested that the West Indians carry him around in their kit-bag to gee them up… it has worked here… in spades! England have to win both remaining Tests to win the series and have to make the pace in Antigua.

West Indies v England, 1st Test, Day 4: Implosion and the Fifteenth Largest Defeat by Runs in Test History

 

West Indies v England

1st Test, Day 4: Implosion and the Fifteenth Largest Defeat by Runs in Test History

January 26^th 2019

 

With England 215-4, five minutes before Tea and two set batsmen at the crease, England should have been setting their sights on taking the match well past Lunch on the last day. Victory was impossible, but an honourable defeat was well within reach. Who knows? Some rain and a bit of bloody-mindedness and an incredible escape might even be possible.

Reality was that two wickets fell to poor shots in twelve deliveries and England went to Tea knowing that it was all over bar the shouting.

The last six wickets fell for 31 runs in 71 balls. It was a miserable collapse on a pitch that had flattened-out, against a spinner who did not spin the ball.

The final margin was 381 runs. The largest ever margins of defeat by runs are listed here.

It was all so unnecessary. Burns and Jennings had continued where they had left off the night before. For fifty-two balls of the morning session, Jennings blocked-up an end and Burns accumulated busily at the other. It was the best opening partnership for a year and a half. Had it continued for an hour longer, the great escape could have become a reality. Burns looked set for a century. Jennings looked to have done the hard work and set up a big score for the taking. Leaden-footed waft. Thanks very much. And an end was open.

All the top six got starts, but only Rory Burns past 34 and he gave his wicket away too, just before the fifty partnership with Jonny Bairstow. Gave it away, as did all the top eight.

In the harsh light of a huge defeat, some fans are calling this the worst England side ever. It is not. This side beat India and Sri Lanka and had won six of its previous seven Tests. But it is a side with a couple of key weaknesses. And the team that was picked was not the one for this pitch. England misread the pitch completely and probably relied on winning the Toss and batting.

In the cold light of day, Sam Curran’s 14, 17 did not compensate for match figures of 29-4-133-1. Even had Stuart Broad scored a king pair, there is a feeling that he would have got much more out of the pitch than Sam Curran and kept down the West Indian first innings score. However, before we get all misty-eyed, Stuart Broad is not the player he was 5 or 6 years ago. He has brilliant performances with the ball, but they are becoming rarer. The fans have been questioning his continued selection for about as long as one can remember.

Probably Broad will play in Antigua, where a low, slow pitch is expected that will most-likely not suit him at all. Sam Curran’s selection was down to the idea that he could provide variety in the attack, a holding role, knocking-over wickets with the new ball and plenty of runs down the order. Now, the Curran bubble has burst: with his lack of speed, can he take wickets when not faced with a seaming, swinging greentop? Can he convert himself into a solid batsman in the lower middle order and fourth seamer?

We will never know what would have happened had Stuart Broad played. Maybe he would have had one of his nightmare matches in which he can find neither line nor rhythm. Or maybe he would have taken 6-20 on the first morning. You can play “what if” all you like.

The other two positions that are looking wide open for the 2^nd Test are that of Keaton Jennings and of Adil Rashid.

I am a fan of both, but it is hard to see how either can play at Antigua. England have three Tests before the Ashes and one of them is a four-day match against Ireland. The selectors have to cut their losses with Jennings and either say that he will play the 1^st Test against Australia WHATEVER HAPPENS, or play his replacement. It is just possible that Jennings will play the 2^nd Test and that a decision will be made after it, in which case, almost certainly Joe Denly – no longer now an opener – would debut in the final Test, unless a convenient injury allows an opener to be called-up from the Lions. Like so many recent openers for England, Jennings has trouble outside his off stump. Sam Robson was a classic example. Also, like so many openers tried by England, Jennings scored a century early in his Test career, seemed set for great things, and then faded away. There is something very Rob Key-like about Jennings: in his last 21 innings, he has reached double figures 17 times, but passed 40 just 4 times; his median score in those 21 innings is 17. In other words, Jennings is getting a start, getting in, almost every time, but then getting out. It is something that Rob Key did a lot – he had the occasional big innings where he broke big, but was never really in and could fall at any time.

However, for all his success last season in Division 2 on some frequently very difficult pitches, there is a feeling that it is too late for Joe Denly. I like him a lot as a cricketer and am delighted to see him back in England colours, but Denly would be another stop-gap as a non-specialist and a high-risk strategy. He was taken to Sri Lanka as a potential #3 and third spinner and proved to be so far off the pace that he could fill neither role, causing a change in selection strategy for the Tests.

The other decision is Adil Rashid or Jack Leach, although a case could be made for dropping Moeen Ali. Again, caution. Adil Rashid, like Moeen Ali, is polarising opinion. We forget that both have done great things for England and recently too. Adil Rashid will never be Shane Warne. He will always have innings and matches in which his control and direction simply do not exist. At the same time, he can bowl an awful spell, be sent into the naughty-boy outfield for three or four hours and then come back for a second spell and bowl a delivery that turns a match. England gambled on his ability to deliver a couple of explosive balls that change the momentum of a match.

Moeen, who has been messed around something rotten, shuffled up and down the order, is now on a bad trot with the bat. Even a return to batting at #8, where he has had some of his best innings, simply has not worked for him. He looks completely at sea. And, despite a spell with the ball in the second innings in which he briefly threatened to turn the match, he could not follow through. Moeen’s performances with the ball against India and Sri Lanka should make him un-droppable, but the fans are unforgiving… and have short memories… just ask Stuart Broad.

Would Jack Leach have done better than Adil Rashid? Would Rashid + Leach, Leach + Moeen, or Moeen + Adil Rashid have been the best combination? Going back thirty years, England had Edmonds and Emburey. Classic Slow Left Arm and Off-Break. They could attack, or bowl long holding spells and the fact that their stock ball went in opposite directions made them a powerful complementary force. It is not difficult to believe that Leach would have complemented Moeen better than Adil Rashid, even if he did not offer the prospect of that occasional, explosive ball. However, it is not hard to imagine that sooner, rather than later, Jack Leach will pair up with Dominic Bess in a Test in a partnership that could continue for fifteen years.

What to think of the West Indies performance? They were brilliant. They wanted it more. They out-played, out-fought and out-thought England. Despite years of conflict between players and Board. Despite cricket no longer being such a part of West Indian life. Despite First Class cricket in the Caribbean dying, brilliant cricketers come through. This time it has been 22-year-old Shimron Hetmyer with 81 in the first innings that set up a winning total for his side. Jason Holder, Kemar Roach, Shane Dowrich and Royston Chase have added their names to the long list of players who have bloodied England in recent series between the two sides. Will this be yet another false dawn for the West Indies? You would not bet against it, although fans would love it to be the start of a genuine, sustained resurgence of West Indian cricket. As was pointed out before the series, the West Indian attack has a fine record over the last year. We knew that they would test the England batsmen: that much was no surprise. The question is: can the dysfunctional WICB keep its young players and not lose the older hands? This is its biggest problem. World cricket needs a strong West Indies side, but governance has been so poor over the last decade that one wonders whether or not yet another new dawn for Caribbean cricket will turn quickly again into black night.

The questions for England are: do they twist or stick with selection and, can they get back into this series?

Right now, England are 1-0 down and need to win both remaining Tests to win the series. They have also shown enough vulnerability to encourage the West Indies to produce result pitches for those two Tests.

 

West Indies v England - 1st Test, Day 2: Nightmare in the Caribbean

 

West Indies v England

1st Test, Day 2: Nightmare in the Caribbean

January 24^th 2019

 

After the shenanigans with the new ball at the end of the day, it was hard to avoid the sinking feeling that England might have, yet again, fallen for a Caribbean sucker punch. Sadly, it did not take long for these suspicions to be confirmed. Time and again they have arrived with high hopes, had a nightmare start to the series and then been unable to make headway on a series of dead tracks designed for timeless Tests or, for those of a more conspiratorial disposition, to protect the West Indian series lead. The 2019 Caribbean tour took just four sessions to conform to that pattern. 30-1 at Lunch. All out and facing the Follow-on at Tea on Day 2. Yes, it’s good to be back in Barbados.

What was obvious was that the bowlers had to nip out the last two wickets quickly and retain the momentum because, if the West Indian bowlers found the same help that England had found, 280 might be an awfully useful-looking score by the end of Day 2. The sinking feeling was not helped by the way that young Shimron Hetmyer protected his partner, took the singles late in the over and hit what was there to be hit as the score crept up towards the 300-mark that should have been unattainable. An edge from a brutal Stokes bouncer flew past Ben Foakes’s desperate stretch, balls eluded edges, false shots fell safe. And all the while the wags were calling for Joe Root to throw the ball to Stuart Broad – yes, the same wags who have been calling for him to be dropped through most of his career. Huge outswinger from Stokes, nick, into the gloves, given… but nothing on UltraEdge on review. The bowlers could not bowl a maiden to Hetmyer to get a full over at Alzarri Joseph and when Ben Stokes finally did manage five consecutive dot balls, the last ball flew to the boundary to take Hetmyer into the 80s and the score ever-closer to the 300 that the West Indians wanted before the start. However, with Joseph in his sights, Jimmy Anderson made no mistake in the next over and a simple catch to Jos Buttler at 2^nd Slip gave him his twenty-seventh five-for. Five balls later, Stokes got Hetmyer to edge to Ben Foakes and the innings was over. For England, Anderson and Stokes were magnificent. For the West Indies, Hetmyer was immense: surely the WICB cannot manage to lose him to the Test side too through incompetence and mismanagement?

Once the tail had been dismissed, Jennings, Burns and Bairstow had to do their job. This was not going to be suitable for those of a nervous disposition. A confident start by Jennings strangely did nothing to calm nerves. Taking the lion’s share of the strike and doing almost all the scoring, he got a start, drove without due care and attention and was convicted at gully. Only three years ago, Haseeb Hameed and Keaton Jennings had wonderful Test debuts in India and England supporters were thinking that they had a ready-made opening pair for the next decade or decade and a half: Hameed’s fortunes have only gone downward since he left that tour with a broken finger and an average of 9.7 for Lancashire in 2018 makes one wonder how much longer his county career will last without a sudden change of fortunes. Jennings has had two golden streaks in County cricket, each followed by a prolonged run-drought: the fans have lost patience, how long will England’s last? There is no doubt that, having tried so many openers since Andrew Strauss retired, England do not want to chop and change again, but nor can they afford to start an Ashes series with an opener desperately short on form and confidence. Plan A is to support him in public and hope that he gets enough runs on the tour to stop wagging tongues. Plan B is to hope that someone on the County circuit gets a thousand runs before the end of May as an opener. Having got a start in 16 of his last 20 Test innings, a single score of 50+ - albeit a monumental one in Sri Lanka – is no kind of return, but suggests that the issue is as much psychological as technical.

That said, as England staggered from 30-1 to 77 all out, Jennings’s 17 was comfortably (uncomfortably?) the top score of the innings and the opening partnership of 23, by some way the largest of the innings (the next best was 12). Things were put in sharp perspective as the West Indian openers put on a fifty opening partnership. A cynic would have said that they already had more than enough of a lead to win, but this was “grind their faces into the dirt time”. The next stage of this process will be to provide England with two low, slow shirtfronts for the 2^nd and 3^rd Test: yes, we have been caught this way before. The England opening attack, at a gentle low-80s, just did not have the pace, or the height to exploit the devil in the pitch. As in the first innings, it took the introduction of Moeen Ali to break the opening partnership. The difference this time was that, suddenly, the rhythm was there, the ball started to turn and, suddenly, it seemed that Moeen was bowling hand grenades in a minefield. With Ben Stokes getting seriously wound-up, 52-0 became 61-5, with four wickets falling for one run in fourteen balls. You really wish that the bowlers had shown this fight before the West Indies batsmen had got away from them the previous day. However, as England had, the West Indian batsmen decided to apply the long handle to counter the clatter of wickets and, unlike for England, it worked.

The clatter of wickets had to continue for England to have any remote chance and that meant removing Hetmyer. Easier said than done. A second fifty partnership in the innings, including a brutal assault on Adil Rashid’s first over and any fantasists who harboured thoughts of a great escape were sadly disabused of their notions. With a lead of 339 going into Day 3, the West Indies will expect confidently to win around Tea tomorrow. It has been depressing to watch England implode, washing away all the successes against India and Sri Lanka. Make no mistake, England are going to lose and lose badly, but they desperately need to show some fight in the second innings and to bat a lot better, if only for their self-respect. Australia are watching England and are shaking in their boots, but it is with laughter, not fear.

Sri Lanka v England, 1st Test Day 3: Jennings Forces Checkmate

 

Sri Lanka v England

1^st Test Day 3: Jennings Forces Checkmate

November 8^th 2018

 

Let’s start with a few numbers to put in context Sri Lanka’s victory target of 462.

·       Over the seventeen years that Galle has been a Test match venue, this is the twenty-fourth fourth innings chase.

·       Six of those chases have resulted in wins but, although five of the six were by a margin of ten wickets (the other was by seven wickets), the largest successful chase at Galle is just 99.

·       Three sides have hung on for draws, most memorably, England, in 2003, with 9 wickets down, surviving 108 overs in total – the longest that a side has batted out for a draw at the ground.

·       More alarming for Sri Lanka is that twice sides have failed to chase a total under 80 and three more sides have failed to chase targets under 140.

·       The best-ever effort in a losing cause at Galle is Pakistan’s 300 in 114 overs in 2012. 

England have asked Sri Lanka to score a record fourth innings chase for Tests, or to bat out a minimum (assuming that the predicted rain again holds off) of 187 overs. This match can only be a draw if plenty of time is lost to rain.

In other words, barring major intervention from Jupiter Pluvius (other gods are available), Sri Lanka have to far surpass anything ever achieved at this ground to avoid a heavy defeat. And they have to do it with two, injured batsmen. Dinesh Chandimal is still severely hampered by a groin strain and cannot bat higher than #7, while Dhananjaya De Silva, who batted at #3 in the first innings, tried to stop a drive off his own bowling from Keaton Jennings, received a heavy blow on the thumb for his pains and, even though he did try to bowl again after treatment, managed just one ball before going off.

On the plus side, some comfort comes from the fact that the pitch is not the spitting cobra that Galle has been famous for in the past but, the England spinners are getting some help and can attack without worrying about runs. The two England seamers just got a single over each with the New Ball, but Jimmy Anderson enjoyed the luxury of no fewer than five slips. With the light meters out, the spinners came straight into the attack and we had the novelty of four different bowlers delivering the first four overs of the innings and five bowlers delivering the seven overs by the Close, with the batsman almost suffocated by close fielders. In the case of Silva, suffocated was the word, as a flick caromed off the shin pads of Keaton Jennings at Short Leg, into the hands of Ben Foakes, who threw down the stumps, with Silva well out of his ground: Silva managed to ground his bat just in time, but Sri Lanka were fortunate to get away with that one.

It is amazing how the marginal choices have dominated this Test. Had Alastair Cook not retired, Keaton Jennings would, most likely, not have been on this tour. His contribution to this Test has been 192 runs for once out. Similarly, Ben Foakes would not have played had first Jonny Bairstow not hobbled himself playing football, earning Foakes a call-up as cover and then Joe Denly hobbled himself with some seriously sub-standard performances in the warm-ups. Foakes has scored 144 runs and taken two catches and a stumping so far. With play tomorrow likely to resemble a close-catchers’ convention, Foakes may yet turn out to be a match-winner with the gloves, as the spinners attempt to apply pressure and the edges fly. Catches win matches and there is no doubt that a specialist ‘keeper, accustomed to standing up to spinners at The Oval, could make all the difference.  There are so many occasions in Tests when a stubborn stand develops and is only broken by a piece of individual brilliance behind the stumps; tomorrow may be such a day if the early breakthrough does not come.

That England are in this position is mainly down to a monumental innings of 146* from Keaton Jennings. He will not have convinced the critics, who will point to a Test average under 30, despite two centuries, but he was picked on the promise that he showed in India in 2016 and he has delivered when it was needed. Against India, during the summer, he was getting starts, but not capitalising. In the first innings, he reached the 40s and fell: in fact, in his last 7 innings in all cricket, he has reached 40 six times but, before today, had only reached 50 once in those innings. Today though, he rode his luck, reined-in his aggression and showed the sort of application that Alastair Cook would have approved of.

It was a tale of contrasting fortunes. Before the series, any fan worth his salt would have told you that Rory Burns would make stacks of runs, but that Keaton Jennings was living on borrowed time. In fact, Burns has made 9 and 23, taking his total to 98 in 4 innings on the tour and, in a situation in which he was under little pressure, seemed nervous and finally, inevitably looked for a run where none was available and ran himself out. However, in the context of an innings in which Sri Lanka needed quick wickets, an opening partnership of 60 – equalling the best England have managed in the last year and the best for England since July 2017 – was just what was needed.

When England went from 60-0 to 74-3, Sri Lanka were getting back into the game, with Moeen Ali (who averages just 14.5 in his four matches batting at first drop, against 29.9 batting at #8 and 44.9 batting at #7, surely cannot continue to be offered as a sacrifice in this position) falling cheaply again and Joe Root following him. Another quick wicket would have seen England in some trouble, but the bowlers simply could not keep up the pressure.

As Jennings sealed up one end, Ben Stokes played himself in carefully and then cut loose. From 23 from 64 balls, Stokes added 39 runs from the next 29 balls that he faced, including 3x6. Buttler did not quite get going, but still launched one straight back over Perera’s head, before Foakes came in and produced a brutal cameo, including sixes off consecutive balls as Joe Root indicated that the declaration was imminent. Even in that final slog though, England never really got away from the bowlers, with the exception of Dananjaya, who has been punished in both innings: match figures of 38.5-4-183-2 and a duck are not going to enhance his chances of playing at Kandy.

With Sri Lanka possibly needing to make four changes for the 2^nd Test – replacing the retiring Herath, quite possibly the two injured players too and, potentially, dropping Dananjaya – they could do with the morale-boost of a good fourth day here. History, though, is against it. You would expect the game to be over well before the scheduled Close. If it is not, the ever-present threat of rain at this time of year will lead to a very nervous final day of the match.

England v Pakistan: 2nd Test Preview - And the Winners are… Keaton Jennings and Sam Curran!

 

England v Pakistan: 2^nd Test Preview

And the Winners are… Keaton Jennings and Sam Curran!

May 30^th 2018

With England needing a win to avoid yet another series defeat and controversy raging over selection and the team’s under-performances, a call from Trevor Bayliss is enough to send the heart racing… mainly with fear of being the latest fall guy.

The recipients of phone calls this week have been Keaton Jennings – widely predicted to replace Mark Stoneman – and, less expected, Sam Curran. Keaton Jennings had scored 536 runs at an average of 107 in his last six innings and, completely predictably, that run ended as soon as he had received the call to return him to the ranks. Sam Curran gets the call thanks to his good County Championship form with the ball, to an injury to Ben Stokes and to the fact that he is a left-armer and adds some variety to the attack.

There are many possibilities. Ben Stokes may yet play as a specialist bat: the fact that England can now call on the useful bowling of Jennings could tempt them to go down that route. There could be a straight swap of Stokes for Woakes. Jonny Bairstow could move up the order, allowing Joe Root to bat at his preferred position of #4. Dom Bess could make way on the grounds that a spinner rarely wins matches at Leeds, with Malan and Root offering a few overs of spin, if required. Michael Vaughan would even drop Stuart Broad.

What is clear is that few members of the squad can be sure of their place. The top 5 are not getting runs. England are too often 30-2 and 40-3 and if you do not put up 400 regularly, you are not going to win many Tests. That said, all too often over the winter and against Pakistan, the bowling lacked punch and, even more, lacked variety. As was said of David Gower’s attack in his first match as captain, when you have four right-arm, medium pace, seam and swing bowlers and a flat spinner, you can change the bowlers, you can change the ends, but you cannot change the bowling.

That Sam Curran is preferred to Jake Ball, to his brother Tom, or to Craig Overton is revealing: where there is a choice, youth gets the call. Even in Jennings v Stoneman, it is the younger man who has the benefit of the doubt.

Jake Ball’s record – just three wickets in four Tests – has counted against him, while Tom Curran is regarded as lacking the pace to be effective at this level. With Sam Curran in the squad, England can drop Mark Wood and still retain an attack with a bowler who is different. In fact, it is not impossible that both Woakes and Curran will play.

What to do with the batting is more of an issue. The batsmen are clearly lacking in confidence and making poor decisions. Despite his score at Lord’s, there are still questions about Alaistair Cook and that average opening partnership of 18 between Cook and Stoneman was certainly not all Stoneman’s fault. Can Keaton Jennings awaken the sleeping giant in his partner? That said, can Jennings cope with high-class seam bowling more successfully than he did against South Africa when, admittedly, desperately out of form?

Huge England totals have usually been made around big scores by Cook and Root, but neither is quite on song. That is heaping pressure on Stoneman/Jennings and Malan. Dawid Malan responded brilliantly in Australia, but cannot buy a run now and knows that this may be his last Test for a while unless he can make a score. However, Malan’s job would be much easier if he were to come in at 200-3 instead of 40-3. For that to be possible, Cook and Jennings need to put up opening partnerships of fifties and centuries. Similarly, Bairstow and Buttler, both attacking batsmen, will do better against tiring attacks than against fresh ones that are scenting blood after an early collapse.

While it is too much to hope for that the England XI will show radical changes – although the call-ups for Buttler, Curran and Jennings show that the mantra is no longer so clearly “more of the same” – we are already diverging substantially from the XI played in Brisbane and more changes can be expected on Friday. All in all, the playing XI is quite unpredictable.