The Shockwaves Continue

 

 

Ashes 2013/14

 

Ghostly echoes of 2009

 

February 4^th 2014

 

The aftershocks from the disastrous Ashes tour continue. The Australians were not displeased to have destabilised England to the point of seeing Trott and Finn sent home and Graeme Swann into retirement. The Test series ended with rumours that, in an eerie echo of 2009, the coach had said “either he goes or I go”. Back in 2009, Peter Moores was sacked as England coach and Kevin Pietersen as England captain just two weeks before a tour to the Caribbean. England’s results had been depressing for several years and, rather than address the decline seen at the end of Duncan Fletcher’s reign, Peter Moores just seemed to make it worse. However, the killer was a massive personality clash between coach and captain that, rather than finishing one of the two, ended in a case of Mutual Assured Destruction.

Emergency captain – Andrew Strauss, who had just barely saved his England career in New Zealand – temporary coach and shot out for 51 to lose the 1^st Test and the series. Three months later, an Australian side who suddenly thought that England would be soft opposition, as in 2006/07, received a rude shock. By a happy chance England got the captain who they should have appointed in 2006 and the coach that they had needed desperately to harness the available talent. England would love to think that Mutual Assured Destruction (2014 version) will end as happily.

In an eerie echo of what happened five years ago, first the coach has gone and now Kevin Pietersen too, although this time not the same day. Pietersen will not be considered either for the limited overs tour of the Caribbean, or the World T20. In short, his career is over.

Much has been made of the fact that he was England’s leading runscorer in Australia, although he had a poor series, passing fifty just twice and averaging under 30, which was still five more than his captain averaged, while only Michael Carberry faced more balls in the series.

There are plenty of comments that Kevin Pietersen batted irresponsibly in Australia – not that many of the others have anything to boast about in that respect – and that he had been a divisive influence in the dressing room. However, no one has come forward with any details of what he did that was so destabilising to the team. When Andrew Flintoff was relieved of the captaincy in 2006, we heard the grisly details of his drunken exploits in a pedalo. During the textgate scandal, we found out probably more than we wanted to about KP’s texting. Now, we hear nothing apart from an unconfirmed report in an Australian newspaper (not above a little mischief-making, as we have seen) that Cook and Pietersen had a heated row in the members’ bar at the SCG on the eve of the 5^th Test – not the sort of place where you can have a discrete blazing row without anyone other than an Australian journalist finding out!!

It is fair enough that changes need to be made and that some unpleasant decisions have to be taken, but singling out one player without explaining why is hardly going to make things better.

The sound that you can hear is of twenty three million Australians laughing themselves sick as English cricket rips itself apart…

Pietersen As ODI Captain?

 

 

Ashes 2013

 

A chance to stop the rot

 

January 23^rd 2014

 

Two dead rubbers remain and Australia wish to ensure that, should England confound the sceptics and finally win an international match on this tour, it will be a hollow victory against a team of reserves. However, given the way that Australia have performed, it is not impossible that they have decided that the best way to humiliate England even further is by putting out their 2^nd XI and have it beating England too.

Many dead rubbers are essentially meaningless. This one is actually quite important for both sides. For England, there is a chance to regain some pride and start the re-building job with a win. As England lost the deciding ODI in September, a defeat tonight would extend the losing sequence against Australia to ten matches, equalling the sequences of international defeats in 1993 and 2001, something that Alistair Cook would be keen to avoid. For Australia, a win would consolidate them as the #1 side in ODI cricket, thanks to India’s consecutive defeats in New Zealand. If Australia lose, their reign as #1 side would end after a mere 24 hours.

In the absence of Boyd Rankin, Chris Woakes could come in, replacing James Tredwell. Michael Carberry’s chances of a return though look to be fading.

After the gut-wrenching defeat in the 2^nd ODI, the 3^rd showed just how much damage the loss had caused: there was almost no fight and just a tame acceptance that they would lose. For Alistair Cook the problem is to find a way to pick up spirits and persuade his side to stand and fight. If England win, it will be spun as a defeat against a team of reserves; if England lose, it will be thrown in his face as much as it was when, back in the ‘90s, the final of the end of series ODI competition was contested by Australia and Australia A, with England unable to inconvenience either even minimally in the qualifiers. A heavy defeat for a listless side would though add to the feeling that Alistair Cook is not the man to turn things around in any format.

Meanwhile the succession debate is underway. Right now, Alistair Cook is favourite to keep the Test captaincy for “there is no alternative” reasons, which are always unsatisfactory at best. As usual, debate centres around Kevin Pietersen and his role. Some people want him removed from the side completely, although there has been an attempt to defuse the situation with statements that there is no issue between Flower and Pietersen. Others suggest making him Vice Captain, or Senior Professional and getting him involved directly in tactics and in running the side.

There is even one left-field solution that suddenly becomes possible and that would be for Pietersen to take over as ODI captain, while Cook stays in charge of the Test side. However, as it was Pietersen’s captaincy in 2008/09 that led to explosion that left England without a coach or a captain before the 2009 tour of the Caribbean, a scarred administration may be reluctant to put Pietersen in charge of anything, although he would be working with another person from southern Africa – Flower is Zimbabwean – rather than Peter Moores. It would be a brave solution, but it might just work, with an engaged Keven Pietersen being brought into the system and judged on results.

Another Case Of England Mutual Assured Destruction?

 

 

Ashes 2013

 

Let the blame game start

 

January 9^th 2014

 

The series is finished. The whitewash is complete. The mental disintegration has been accomplished: Graeme Swann has gone; Jonathon Trott is out for the foreseeable future; Monty Panesar’s international future is in grave doubt, as is Steve Finn’s; Joe Root and Matt Prior have been dropped; and Jonny Bairstow simply has not made the grade. However, all the talk is about Kevin Pietersen, supposed dressing room malcontent and gadfly in the Flower power regime. Whatever happened in 2012, it is obvious that it is not forgiven and even less is it forgotten. Being the top runscorer in the series (albeit with fewer than 300 runs at an average under 30) is not enough to compensate the fact that the face does not fit and that if he refuses to use his degenerative knee injury as an excuse to retire, he may be pushed anyway, accused of not playing for the team.

Andy Flower is playing for his professional life. From a peak in 2011 when it seemed that he could do no wrong and the fear that he might decide to go after this tour was real, things have gone horribly downhill:

• 3-0 whitewash in the UAE v Pakistan
• 1-1 in Sri Lanka where a win in the second Test broke a series of four consecutive defeats.
• Win 2-0 v West Indies in England
• 2-0 v South Africa in England (England could have won the 2^nd & 3^rd Tests but did not and was comprehensively outplayed overall)
• Win 2-1 v India (after the 1^st Test, England’s 2012 record stood at 7 defeats in 12 Tests)
• 0-0 v New Zealand with England lucky to save the series
• Win 2-0 v New Zealand in the return series
• Win 3-0 v Australia at home
• 5-0 whitewash in Australia

Nine series, 4 won, 3 lost (10 of the 11 Tests were lost in those series defeats), 2 drawn.

A record of P 30, W 10, D 8, L 12, with ten of the twelve defeats coming in just three series.

It is not impressive. Something has gone seriously wrong. What is more, when England lose, they are losing very badly indeed.

Against Sri Lanka and against India, England managed to turn around series that had started with a defeat. However, the turnaround against India came in that same Test where, in the second innings, Cook and Prior were probably just an hour away from saving the game on the final morning, after an epic partnership. Although eventually England lost by 9 wickets soon after lunch, the Indian bowling was being ground down, it can be argued that India would have been unlikely to risk a chase of a target of 180 in 45 or so overs. Similarly, against Sri Lanka, a first innings deficit was turned into a rather more nail-biting win than Sri Lanka could have imagined as, first, only 87 runs for the last two wickets allowed Sri Lanka to set a challenging target and then Trott and Prior threatened to reach it. In both cases, England started the fightback in the third innings of the match.

What made the Australian series predictable was the meek surrender in the 1^st Test, where the fightback never came. When the 2^nd Test started the same way, a 5-0 result looked inevitable. England-watchers know that, if the fightback does not come quickly, it will not come at all.

There will always be comparisons with 2006/07, but a closer parallel is probably 1958/59, when England also went to Australia as holders of the Ashes after three consecutive wins, with an apparently strong side, but lost 4-0. In 1958/59, the batting failed and the bowling was too one-dimensional: sound familiar? In contrast, after three days of the 2006 Adelaide Test it looked as if England were going to be fiercesome rivals to Australia. After two days of the Test there were even suggestions that England were burying the career of Glenn McGrath (0-107) and Shane Warne (1-167), who had come in for some terrible punishment as England ran up a massive total of 551-6d. However meekly England surrendered after that catastrophic fifth day collapse, no one can say that they had not shown themselves capable of competing for four glorious days. In this series there has been no such consolation.

Fans, even cricket writers, are split. Fine, knowledgeable pundits such as George Dobell argue that Andy Flower should take the blame and that his methods are no longer working. The huge defeats against Pakistan, South Africa and Australia suggest that when Plan A fails, there is no Plan B. However much you say that it is the players who have failed in the middle, not the coach, such an obvious flaw in the preparation as the lack of a Plan B has to be blamed on the management. No one argues that Andy Flower has been even better than Duncan Fletcher at his best in taking England to the top but, like Duncan Fletcher, when things have started to go wrong he has failed to adapt and to keep England there. There are plenty of suggestions that the very high degree of control and discipline of the Flower regime are beginning to grate on some of the players, who are beginning to feel the need for some breathing space.

Australia, famously, had a discipline and homework regime and that ended in tears. More than one of the players attribute the turnaround in Australian fortunes to the relaxed and fun atmosphere that Darren Lehmann has installed in place of Mickey Arthur’s more aesthetic methods.

Andy Flower has said that he wants to lead England back to success and is planting the blame for the problems firmly at the door of one or two troublemakers for upsetting the dressing room atmosphere, with rumours that he is trying the “either he goes, or I go” tactic that led to the Mutual Assured Destruction of Peter Moores and Kevin Pietersen. The solution, apparently, is not a liberalisation of the regime, but the need for even greater control. There are already rumours that this is evolving into a power struggle with Paul Downton, a player who remembers the bad years of the ‘80s all too well. Maybe Hugh Morris knew what he was doing when he decided to get out now.

Not even Andy Flower can lay the blame with Kevin Pietersen for the squad taken to Australia having too many passengers and too many players who seemed like a good idea at the time: the blame for that lies firmly with the management. Neither was it the fault of Kevin Pietersen that the schedule that England agreed to was hardly ideal, with only a single two day game against what was little better than a School XI in an out of the way country outpost after the 1^st Test. And Kevin Pietersen is not to blame for the fact that Australia agreed to play strengthened squads in the warm-ups and then withdrew players and were allowed to do it, possibly because there was more than a suspicion that the ECB were not overkeen themselves to encourage counties to select credible sides against the Australian tourists in the summer and so were in no position to protest.

A strong manager would say “we screwed up – X, Y and Z seemed like a good idea at the time, but I got it wrong”. Admission of guilt and a promise to do better next time. That though is not exactly the line that is being taken. What is happening is a lot of infighting that will only weaken the team still further. The beneficiaries may be a Sri Lankan side who are proving difficult opponents for Pakistan and whose skilful seamers could just prove a handful when they arrive in June. Asian fans are already joking that it will be a major shock result if England manage to win that series.