A debate where debate is not needed

Happy new Test series!

Yes, the cold, grey skies - well, over Leeds they are; seems it's better in London - herald the onset of the English Test summer. The West Indies are the opponents for the first part of the summer and not expected to provide a huge amount of resistance. They arrive depleted for a number of reasons - politics, IPL, intransigence, disinterest - and as has become the norm when they arrive for Test matches in this country, the weather flatly refuses to be anything other than wintry. At least they don't have to go up to Durham this time, where the sight of a shivering Shiv Chanderpaul fielding at slip wearing every jumper he's ever owned is a pitiable one.

On the flip side, England are a happy and settled bunch after ending a pretty torrid winter with a much-needed and morale-boosting win. They've added Jonny Bairstow to the squad and he's expected to play, batting at six. The Todd Flanders look-alike is in fine form and has shown in county and international one-day cricket that he fears nothing. He'll come in for Samit Patel from the last time England played a Test with Matt Prior dropping down a spot as England revert to the four-man attack that's served them so well in every place other than south Asia.

Of that four man attack, Graeme Swann, Jimmy Anderson and Stuart Broad are givens. There should be no debate about the fourth either, and yet it seems a bone of contention. Yes, England are blessed with a number of different options, but one of those stands out so far above the others that it shouldn't be an issue. Steven Finn, Chris Tremlett and Graham Onions are all fine bowlers, of course, but how Tim Bresnan has become anything other than a first pick borders on the scandalous.

After 11 Tests - in all of which he has been on the winning side, lest we forget - Bresnan bats at over 40 and bowls at under 25. As a lower middle-order batsman alone, his figures would warrant discussion. As a bowler alone, he ought to be ahead of the others. As a package, he should be undroppable. As genuine all-rounders go, there's only Anthony McGrath Jacques Kallis that surpasses his figures. He offers so much more than stats though. His stereotypical willingness to keep running in is reminiscent of his fellow Yorkshireman Matthew Hoggard and that effort gets rewards. And yet the debate goes along the lines of 'and if there's an injury to one of your first three seamers, there's always Bresnan to come in'. 

He's done the hard miles for England, ploughing up and down motorways after being overlooked in favour of someone that the Prozone devotees determines is better horse for a particular course, missing chunks of county games as a result, but he still takes it on the chin and grinds through the overs for Yorkshire. The time has come, however, for him to be a mainstay of this England attack. He's proved himself. No longer should it be a case of 'if there's an injury, there's Bresnan to come in'. It should be 'who have we got if Bresnan is injured?'. The fact there's even a discussion over his inclusion is a debate that we need not have.

Put it away

England were skittled for 264 chasing 340 for an improbable win in Galle today, a ground where the highest successful fourth innings chase is still just 96. A trademark obdurate century from Jonathan Trott apart, it was a pretty miserable effort with all ten wickets falling to spin, six for Rangana Herath and four to Suraj Randiv, as England brought their form from the UAE with them to Sri Lanka.

Whereas in the Emirates they were undone by the unerringly accurate Abdur Rehman and the talent and mind-trickery of Saeed Ajmal, here there was no talk even of doosras, let alone teesras and carom balls. For all they are skilful bowlers, Herath and Randiv are not mystery spinners in the way Ajantha Mendis is. Neither are they prodigious spinners of the ball in the manner of a Muralitharan. At this particular moment, Sunil Narine looks - outwardly at least - fuller of tricks than this pair. Where they have flourished, however, is with a peculiarly English obsession with the sweep shot.

The curiosity arises because of the coach. Andy Flower was brilliant against spin and also a fine player of the sweep. However he succeeded there as he played the ball on it's merits and brought the sweep out where appropriate. The current England line-up use it in pre-meditated fashion and invariably end up getting out to it. It's a low percentage shot and perhaps indicative of the pressure England's batsmen are putting themselves under against the spinners. Tying themselves in knots playing straight the sweep is used to relieve pressure, the irony being that by playing it badly to balls that aren't there to sweep, it keeps getting them out and piles more pressure on the next man who then resorts to the sweep. It's a never-ending cycle, a self-fulfilling prophecy with an air of the inevitable that Sisyphus would think was a bit much.

England's loss here was down to many things - Mahela's brilliance, dropped catches, not polishing the tail off, one crucial no-ball, the continued absence of Tim "ten for ten" Bresnan - but taking the sweep shot outside and leaving it by the bins would be a good way to start putting things right.

England undone by the Emperor's New Delivery

It's a pretty hard bump that England have returned to earth with. After dismissing a fading India with disdain, an up-and-coming Pakistan have made them look like amateurs.


England's bowlers have played very well. Monty Panesar was brought back into the fold after they toiled with a lone spin option in the first Test and played very well on helpful pitches. Graeme Swann was effective, if a little overshadowed by the returning Panesar, while Stuart Broad and James Anderson both had exceptional spells in trying conditions for exponents of swing such as they. But no matter what the bowling unit achieved, they were persistently and consistently let down by the batting. The top six were just awful.

Ian Bell came into this series having finished third highest scorer in 2011 - behind Rahul Dravid and Kumar Sangakkara who had twelve and ten more innings respectively - and an average of over 118. He made 51 runs at 8 in the UAE. Kevin Pietersen fared slightly better making 67 at 11 and Eoin Morgan averaged 14 in making 82 runs in the series. Jonathan Trott has been the most successful of the top six batsmen out there, but he only made 161 runs at a snip under 27 each. All of them have found a variety of ways of getting out and much of that is down to a piece of confidence trickery from Saeed Ajmal before anyone turned their arm over.

The teesra, he claimed, was a new delivery he'd been working on and was ready to show it to England's batsmen. It's a brilliant ball, and the real cleverness of it lies in the fact that it doesn't exist.

Ajmal genuinely turns it both ways - not by much, but that's hardly the point. Like all spinners, he's also got one that goes on with the arm. By inventing a non-existent ball, he added an extra level of uncertainty into the minds of the batsmen. Already uncertain as to which direction it was turning, they were all waiting for this mystery ball that never arrived. They couldn't take risks against Ajmal, so were forced to against the unerringly consistent Abdur Rehman and the seamers who all weighed in with decent contributions. Ajmal was picking up wickets with stock off-breaks, players failing to read it from the hand, in flight or off the pitch, mesmerised by his insistence that he'd created something when what he had in fact invented was the Emperor's New Delivery.
 
This is a triumph for the art of deception. Test cricket is an much a test of mental fortitude as it is of technique and the clear winner in the mind games stakes is the Derren Brown of cricket, Saeed Ajmal.

Letters to my late father #1

Hi Dad.
You'd have liked this. Proper, attritional Test cricket. There's something there for the bowlers, which would be new to you, or at least a throwback. Moreover, bowlers are being rewarded, far more than you were used to before... well, y'know.

You'd probably have hated the DRS when it was first mooted. My fear too was that it would undermine the on-field umpire, but after a few teething troubles, it's pretty much won me over. I dare say that the BCCI's intransigence on this has emboldened my stance, but I'd have to consider myself pro-DRS now whatever the reasons. It's definitely had an effect on umpires and what they will and will not give out. TV evidence has shown that things they'd never give previously are indeed as out as you and I always suspected they were. No longer can you get away with plonking your front pad five feet down the track and expect to get away with it.

The art of spinning the ball is back with a vengeance as a result. So is the art of reading it, out of the hand and off the wicket. For all England are ranked number one in the world - no I'm not kidding - there's an alarming lack of ability to read spin. Ian Bell looks absolutely clueless and Kevin Pietersen is trying his usual approach of trying to hit the slow bowlers into submission. Predictably, it rarely works.

203 for 16 today. Just like three-day county games on uncovered pitches. You'd have bloody loved it. Well, right up until England sent out a nightwatchman to protect their number eight batsman. That, beyond all the batting incomptences, made me really bloody angry.
 
 
 
BACKGROUND: My dad died just over three years ago. He brought me up on cricket and we'd spend hours watching it together. Good times. When I moved away, we'd still chew the cud over the day's play and when cricket moved onto Sky, I'd call him at lunch, tea and/or close to relate what had happened. The first England Test after he died, I found myself reaching for the phone to call him. I was half way through dialling when I remembered he wouldn't be there. I still find myself doing it now. Instead, I'm going to start writing him these letters.

Five reasons England should be worried

England are soon to go into battle against Pakistan on neutral ground in the Arabian desert. With a fine 12 months behind them - well, excepting the 50-over format - England are widely fancied to win the series and maintain their number one ranking, increasing the gap while they're at it. But for all that they will start favourites, it behoves us all to take a moment to consider five reasons why Pakistan are nobodies pushover.

1. Experience of conditions
The UAE presents a new experience for all the England players. Pakistan, by contrast, are embarking on their third 'home' series played there. The pitches are laid on top of clay from Pakistan and have proved to be quite sub-continental in their make-up - slow, low turners. Swing tends to work - England have the edge there, for sure - but there is a great change in character between the old ball and the new and that is something new for the England batsmen to deal with.

2. Spin
England have the best spin bowler in the world at the moment. What Pakistan have is options. Saeed Ajmal has been superb on these desert tracks while Mohammad Hafeez, Azhar Ali and Asad Shafiq are more than useful part-timers. By contrast, England look certain to be going in with Swann and the part-time option of Kevin Pietersen. If the Pakistan batsmen get after Pietersen and knock him out of the attack, England have a problem. If the England batsmen knock one of the Pakistan spinners around, there are three more waiting in the wings.

3. No fear
While spinners will play a big part with the old ball, pace and swing are key up front. Pakistan may have lost two of their finer exponents to Her Majesty's pleasure, but they keep turning up young tyros who can wang it down at speed and with control. Aizaz Cheema and Junaid Khan are the latest pair, a right-arm/left-arm combo, and both had successes against Sri Lanka where they bowled at some true greats of the game without any fear. They won't care what the England top order's career records look like. They'll just got out and knock you over - literally or metaphorically, either is fine.

4. Revenge
Statements to the press may say otherwise, but after what happened on their last tour of England there's more than an element of revenge in the air ahead of this one. Accusations flew this way and that and nobody in that party escaped suspicion. Since the verdicts came down, Ajmal and Shahid Afridi (not playing in the Tests, but back for the ODIs and T20s) emerged as anti-corruption heroes. Misbah-ul-Haq has presided over a new-look side untainted by the stench of what went before and now this is an opportunity to show everyone they can beat the best without any hint of it not being totally legitimate. That's a powerful incentive.

5. Tim Bresnan
The Yorkshireman only deals in Test victories. In ten matches for his country, England have won ten times. Indeed, the closest that the opposition has come in this time is either the 181-run or 8-wicket wins over Bangladesh. 40% of the time that Tim Bresnan plays for England, they win by an innings. He averages 45 with the bat and 24 with the ball, so it's far more than coincidence. Moreover, he provides a great deal of the balance to the team. Despite the impressive figures, they may be exaggerated by dint of having played so few games and it takes a leap of logic to suggest he's a genuine all-rounder rather than a bowler who can bat. See also Graeme Swann and Stuart Broad, but add all three of those together and you have the equivalent of a genuine all-rounder, just spread over three different individuals. Bresnan is hugely important to how England set up and he is a big loss.

Trott's fault

More criticism for Jonathan Trott in the light of his 69 off 105 balls against Ireland in the one-dayer at Clontarf, a strike rate of 66.

And yet... Strike rates aren't everything and Trott top-scored in the innings, eventually seventh man out as England made 201/8 in a rain-affected innings. And the fact it was rain-affected it probably says it all. Rain or shine, Trott has the ability to judge a pitch and play every single ball on it's merits - he averages over 50 in ODIs precisely for this reason - unlike his colleagues who keep getting out to pre-meditated shots that the situation simply doesn't warrant.

Anyone expecting Trott to go berserk and send fireworks shooting into the sky clearly hasn't seen the lad's approach. But he is someone around whom an innings can be built and when he does go to 80, 90, 100, the strike rate is pretty close to a run a ball. And, frankly, if half the other England batsmen had as much determination to keep their wicket intact, the side would be far higher up the rankings already.

The old adage says that you can't score runs whilst sat in the pavilion and it's only survived so long because it's true. 69 runs at 66 is a hell of a lot better than 14 from 26 balls (Kieswetter, the supposedly explosive one) or even 13 from 12 (Samit Patel), particularly on a tricky pitch in tricky conditions against a pretty decent attack.

The one thing about Trott is that Alistair Cook's approach in ODIs is just about the same. With Cook a guaranteed starter as captain, is there room for both? Possibly not, but there is value in a Trott if only because you know that whatever his approach to an innings is, it's probably the right one. Watch and learn.

The Bell epoch

A number of questions come about from the bizarre non-dismissal of Ian Bell at Trent Bridge. The main one is: how hungry was he? He was off for tea like a shot, before anyone else was really aware of what was happening. Was he that determined to beat a hungry-looking Jonathan Trott to the sandwiches? That Trott looks like a man who'd be difficult to shift from a buffet table. Either way, Dhoni/Fletcher's subsequent recalling allows Bell to get away with some grade A fuckwittery while completely emasculating Dhoni, the lily-livered lightweight. You really have to see these things through once you start down that path. Fair enough that he should appeal as we all know wicket-keepers are the biggest set of lying bullshitters* known to man and their word should never be taken without a substantial heap of salt.
Sadly, Bell then failed to be consistent when nicking one to VVS Laxman later on. He could at least have checked for the no-ball.

Personally, I blame Shakoor Rana.


* - Kumar Sangakkara notwithstanding

Open and shut case

Kevin Pietersen has gut knack and is off home from the World Cup early. This leaves England with a bit of a predicament. It's not as though the experiment of opening with Pietersen was a raging success, but at least it looked like giving us one opening partnership that will last a tournament. Instead, the English tradition of an unsettled pairing at the top of the order continues.

Eoin Morgan comes into the squad to replace Pietersen, but it's unthinkable that the impish Irish genius will go in first up. The recent attempt at making Matt Prior an opener failed - again - and can't be allowed to happen again. Luke Wright has opened for England in the past, but he's hardly likely to be taken off drinks-carrying duties in the foreseeable future as he's doing such a great job there. Instead, there's one other man that's done the job in the recent past and that's Ian Bell. He's done the job pretty well to boot and if the current trend of opening the bowling with spinners continues, he's unlikely to be flummoxed by it.

Pietersen's ability to add another spin option to the side will be missed and may prove a reprieve for Michael Yardy who has been throwing pies so far. Unless Ravi Bopara and Jonathan Trott can finagle a few overs of medium pacery between them, the Sussex skipper will presumably remain a feature of this side's make-up unless, in an Escape To Victory style, someone repeatedly slams Luke Wright's arm in a door so we can call up Adil Rashid.

Whichever way England go, Pietersen's departure will mean I'll have to find a new phrase to shout at the radio when England are playing now. Far too often in this tournament, I've found myself yelling "KP you fucking moron" as he finds new and interesting ways to get out to left-arm spin.

5 reasons why Chris is wrong and Australia will win the Ashes

I like my colleague Chris. His Ashes piece the other day was a reasoned article, well balanced and a good read. He's dead wrong though. England won't win the Ashes and here are five reasons why not.

1. It's all going far too well

England have gone about things calmly, professionally, almost to the point of ruthlessly. They've had good plans throughout, have won all their tour matches in convincing style and even the back-up bowlers are hitting their lengths, getting movement through the air and off some fairly lifeless pitches. Meanwhile, Australia have been scratching around playing some appalling cricket and their Test players sent back to play state cricket have been pisspoor at best.

It simply can't last. I was hoping Australia A might force a reality sandwich down the throats of England fans, players, staff and media, but it hasn't happened. We're being set up for a massive fall and when James Anderson's first ball at Adelaide sails over second slip's head and away for four byes, I'll be the one to say "I told you so".

2. Too many options

We all thought we knew England's starting XI. The batsmen pick themselves and the bowling unit looks settled. Or at least it did right up until the Australia A game where Chris Tremlett, Tim Bresnan and even Monty Panesar all bowled really well. The pick of the bowlers there was Ajmal Shahzad who isn't even in the official Ashes touring party. He's in the performance squad, but has suddenly put his name up for serious consideration for Brisbane. The temptation to tinker with something that works may prove too strong.

3. Lack of alternatives

By contrast to the bowlers, the batting looks strangely thin. Watching Alastair Cook over the last 12 months has been so awful that showing his technique to terrorism suspects in order to extract confessions has been barred on grounds that it's simply too cruel (Simon Katich was going to be used by the USA until Dick Cheney decided it was going way too far over the line). If he fails, there is no other option at the top of the order. So convinced in their selection over the last few months, England have taken just the two openers with them. That move could be exposed if Australia get into Cook early on.

4. Australia simply aren't that bad

They've not been great - that much is obvious - but one glance at the Test records of the Australian side is enough to show what they can do. Ricky Ponting is undoubtedly one of the all-time greats and they've a battery of seamers who bowl at a seriously rapid pace. Moreover, they use the Kookaburra ball week in, week out as opposed to the Duke which Anderson and co were hooping around the bemusement of Bangladesh and Pakistan through the summer. Cricket Australia has also managed to pull off the impossible - convince everyone that Shane Watson is a Test opener. And if they can do that, anything is possible.

5. It'd just be bloody typical

Even people who only started watching cricket on the back of the 2005 Ashes know enough about English cricket to understand that dizzying highs are inevitably followed by spirit-crushing, soul-destroying lows. The comedown from an English Test series win is far worse than you'll find from any class A narcotic. The last big one was the 2006/7 Ashes and some people are still rocking themselves to sleep, bathed in cold sweat at the thought of Steve Harmison's first ball. It's not just the big tickets either - it works in microcosm. For every Michael Vaughan swivel-pull for yet another graceful boundary, there's Shane Warne's ball to Michael Gatting. You say Botham launching it into the Headingley confectionery stall, I say Peter Taylor (who?) taking six-for.

It would be typical of England to muck this up every bit as much as it'd be typical of Australia to shrug off their recent woes and deliver yet more pain to the long-suffering England fans. It's happened too bloody often.



Obviously I hope I'm wrong, but unlike the rest of you, I'm not turning my expectations up to eleven. Therefore I'll take more joy in victory and less pain from defeat.

5 reasons why (I think) England will win the Ashes

Here's my (mammoth) piece of conjecture spun into an ashes preview (of sorts):

1. Form

You might say that going into an Ashes series, this matters little, but the diverging fortunes of the two sides in the last year can’t pass without at least some comment. Yes, England could have played against more taxing opposition recently and yes, their most recent test opponents were a complete shambles, mired in ugly spot-fixing allegations, but they still performed admirably to defeat those sides largely comprehensively. And not forgetting the draw in South Africa at the turn of the year in a compelling series against one of cricket’s best sides (the true test of just how good this current India side are will come in England next summer).

Australia, by contrast, have had a wretched time, losing a test series to Pakistan in England in June, losing in India and then losing a home one-day series to Sri Lanka. In days of yore, even the best Aussie sides struggled in India but they never, ever lost at home. When we talk about the idea of the Ockers losing their ‘aura’ case for the prosecution begins with their home form; This is backed up by sluggish ticket sales for this series which gives an indication of the confidence (or lack thereof) of the usually bullish Aussie punter.

2. Pressure

Ricky Ponting is a man under pressure. He does not, under any circumstances, want to be the captain who loses the Ashes three times (and lets England win on Australian soil for the first time in 25 years). Cricket Australia is under pressure, as can be seen from the recent reshuffling in the selection panel and all the little arguments that must surely have occurred for this to have taken place.

Marcus North is under pressure; He has been talked about as ‘captaincy material’ and a potential successor to Ponting – a number of players have been vocal in their support for the left-hander and he is clearly a popular character, yet after a good start in 2008/9 he has seriously under-delivered with bat in hand and this series is surely his last throw of the dice. Similarly Michael Hussey, the lynchpin of the One-Day side, has had a rotten last 18 months and the public is losing patience with ‘Mr Cricket’. Neither player has scored meaningfully in state cricket recently, and they are both having their positions squeezed by batsmen who have; Most notably stylish New South Wales left-hander Usman Khawaja and Callum Ferguson.

England will have a degree of expectation themselves, having been talked up much prior to jetting down under and enjoying a profitable warm-up schedule. They will be the most confidant Ashes squad for some time, so they must ensure they are not overawed by the occasion or pressurized into errors by the Aussie bowlers. But Andrew Strauss is a shrewd, respected captain and Andy Flower clearly has a very good idea of his favoured starting XI. In this respect, things bode well.

3. The game-breaker

Graeme Swann is no shrinking violet, and seemingly revels in the label of being England’s “go-to” wicket-taking bowler. The Nottinghamshire offie simply has a knack of taking big wickets at the right time, and has demonstrated that he does not need helpful pitches to do so (South Africa is hardly renowned for its dustbowl pitches yet he positively thrived there last winter). Australia tried to target Swann last year, with precious little success, and he will be expected to be a pivotal figure once again. Also capable of delivering valuable runs down the order, it seems fair to assume that, if Swann bowls well, England stand a hugely improved chance of winning. By contrast, Nathan Hauritz is a widely derided choice of spinner for the Aussies, who appears to possess neither the guile nor the appreciable turn Swann can deliver in spades. Young Leggy Steven Smith is a popular choice to replace him, but it is likely the selectors, traditionally a conservative bunch, will stick with Hauritz barring a disaster early on. Quite simply, for once spin is an area where England have the edge over their great rivals.

4. A settled attack

What is Australia’s first-choice bowling attack? Mitchell Johnson, for all his faults, appears a shoo-in, but who should join him? Doug Bollinger has been a regular, but is racing to be fit in time for the first test and, if he succeeds, will be understandably rusty; Ben Hilfenhaus swung the ball in England but is not always threatening; Peter Siddle is another one coming back from a succession of injuries. Without Brett Lee, there is a notable lack of fear in that attack. Then there’s the unknown quantities, such as beanpole Peter George (who toiled in India, but then who doesn’t, on debut?) and Ryan Harris, who has taken lots of wickets this season but is untried in test cricket. The Aussie selectors face a tough task getting a settled attack together and fitting them around a spinner.

By contrast, it seems fairly clear that England will go in with one spinner (Swann) plus, at least to begin with, Broad, Anderson and Finn. The concerns about their ability to swing the Kookaburra ball have been allayed by their form in the warm-ups, and the back-ups seem reasonable; Chris Tremlett is fast and will extract bounce; Shazhad is a dangerous reverse swing merchant and Bresnan takes wickets too. This has been the case throughout the last 6 months or so. England look to have a more settled, consistent bowling attack and, if anything, Broad and Anderson have improved since 2009.

5. Run-scorers

Going into the tour the main concern for England was the batting form of Messrs Cook, Pietersen and Collingwood. All valid points – Pietersen without a test century since March 2009, Collingwood enduring a wretched 2010, Cook looking nervous and tentative in his footwork. The omens from the warm-up are initially positive; All have made runs, Pietersen is still clearly not 100% at his best but, if he can raise his game against anyone, it is the Australians. Cook scored a much-needed hundred in the South Australia warm-up game; Collingwood has the mental toughness to see off any lapse in form and of course made a memorable double ton on his last Ashes tour. All three, while not at their best, could not be described as ‘horribly out of form’ as a result and Pietersen especially should prosper in Australian conditions.

Add to that the reliable accumulation of Strauss, Trott and Matt Prior (yes, I know, I can’t believe it either, but he’s done well recently) and you have a relatively positive outlook. Trott’s importance as a gritty competitor can’t be underestimated; The sort of player that, wearing the baggy green, would have infuriated England in the past.

On the Australian side, expect Shane Watson to prosper and Simon Katich to enthral us all with his gorgeous technique (yeah right – but he’s effective) and the returning Brad Haddin can usually provide some middle order muscle. Australia’s problem essentially is not so much form as a worrying tendency to give their wicket away; Ponting, Hussey, North and Clarke have all been guilty in the recent past of getting starts then getting out. This was exposed in 2009 by Broad et al first of all, and does not appear to have been rectified. Of course, on their day the likes of Ponting and Clarke can still punish bowling attacks, but recently those days have become further and further apart. Plus, England have their wildcard; Improvising, rubber-wristed little genius Eoin Morgan, who so irritated the Aussies in the one dayers last year.

Prediction

Australia are not to be written off (even though it would appear I’ve done just that) but England have enough in their arsenal to win, if they play to the level we know they can. 2-1 win for England and a memorable retention of the urn.

England

1. Sporadically successful mens cricket team comprised of a variety of nationalities (it used to be Sub-continentals, West Indians, New Zealanders and Australians, now it's Irish and South Africans). Mainly dreadful. Available for sale to anyone willing to park a helicopter on the square at Lord's.

2. Extremely successful womens cricket team made up of English women. Don't expect to hear much about that though.

Bangladesh's problem summed up in four words

Too many one-dayers.


Simple, really. Watching the Bangladesh batsmen struggle against England at the moment, the rashness of the shots is the key to it all. There isn't much opportunity for the Tigers to play the longer forms of the game domestically and nobody seems to want to play them in Test matches too often either. That creates a vicious circle and it looks difficult, if not impossible, to address it as the riches on offer in a game of wham-bam-thank-you-mam outstrip Test glory.

Mind, that Tamim Iqbal can play.

What's the difference...

...between Iran and the England cricket team?

Iran eventually got rid of the Shah.

Back To The Future

So, after the calamity at Headingley last week all eyes turn onto the Oval for the decider in the 2009 Ashes series. After some pretty piss poor efforts ((C) The 12th Man) with the bat it's Panic Time in the ranks of the media and the public.

The figures weren't pretty.

Bopara 1 & 0 (Although, granted he got a shocker in the 2nd innings)
Bell 8 & 3
Collingwood 0 & 4

So they decide to throw some of these boys back into Country Cricket for the lastest round and Bell and Bopara have scored a grand total of 2 runs between them. Jonathon Trott, touted to replace His Fredness before the last test only got 15 in his knock so far.

Owais Shah who was dumped by England earlier in the year hasn't impressed to far this year and he only contributed 8 in his latest knock.

Now Graham Gooch has lept to the defence of Bopara and has questioned why the captain Andrew Strauss isn't in the Middlesex team as they host Bopara's Essex. Strauss contributed 3 & 32 at Headingley and it wouldn't have done him any harm to have a run in this weekend.

So the knives are out and it's time for the big cull if you believe half of the media. The only problem is would seem that Doc Emmett is going to be needed as England seem to be stepping back in time to club a team together to wrestle the urn away from the Criminals.

Funnily enough. the DeLorean was last seen on Wheldon Road in Castleford heading towards Headingley for the Super League clash that is taking place this friday night.


Anyway I digress

So who is in the frame then........

Rob Key - He's dreaming of an Ashes recall. He hasn't played for England since 2005.

Mark Ramprakash - He'd be thrilled to be a part of it. For god's sake he's 40 in September, has won a dancing competition on the telly and hasn't been in the test arena since 2002.


Marcus Trescothick - Hasn't played for England since doing a runner from the 06/07 Ashes Series in Australia because of a stress related illness. Gotta admit though, this guy is the form horse if he can overcome his demons. He's had 5 centuries in the County Championship so far this season, the last at late as last week against Warwickshire.

Owais Shah - No chance I'm afraid. This bridge has been burned and I can't see the selectors going back there that quickly

Johnathon Trott - Well, they wouldn't chuck him in at Headingley do you really think they'll throw him in at the Oval?

Still, we'll no doubt find out at the weekend when the squad in announced in what is a must win game for England, otherwise that urn will be with Ricky Ponting when he returns to Australia after the game at the Oval.

Also there is the shadow of Brett Lee looming for the Criminals as well as he has recovered from an injury that has hampered his tour so far.

Twenty20 warm-ups: what we learned

Two twenty over games for England ahead of the World Championship and two wins, against Scotland and the West Indies - well it had been a full week since we'd played them. England have never had a coherent selection policy or plan of attack in the shortest form of the game and, with just these two outings ahead of Friday's opener against the Netherlands which gets the tournament underway, time was short in trying to get it right.

But this is new England and, while Andy Flower never played the short form in his illustrious career, he's clearly seen enough to make certain judgements on the methodology required. England rather laboured to victory over Scotland after restricting them to 136 for 5, failing to use the first six overs before kicking into gear late on with Eoin Morgan playing an enterprising little innings alongside mainstay Kevin Pietersen who looks fully recovered from his Achilles injury. The bowling was inventive, though Adil Rashid's promising first spell in an England jersey was rather undone by one over that went for 17 as Scotland's batsmen threw the bat at him. Stuart Broad employed a devious tactic, bowling round the wicket to the right handers at the death. The angle meant that backing away to leg wasn't an option and Scotland scored just two runs off the 20th over. Some of the deliveries were borderline wide at best, but it's an interesting development that is worth further experimentation.

Against the West Indies, we learned that they still can't be arsed. We also learned that their running between the wickets is still as comical as ever. And we learned that Shivnarine Chanderpaul bowls leg spin: Luke Wright had to ask him. The Broad tactic was effective again, though Denesh Ramdin and Lendl Simmons had managed to get some of them away after a few swing-and-misses. The main thing to take away from it was a burgeoning opening partnership between Wright and Ravi Bopara. Bopara is in fantasatic touch no matter what format of the game he's playing and while Wright struggled early in his innings, he smashed Keiron Pollard for three consecutive, and increasingly big, sixes kick-started him as he ended unbeaten on 75. His approach may not pay off every time, but it's entertaining and he's giving himself a chance of clearing the field, especially in those early overs. Rashid and Graham Swann both played and, though it'll be a brave tactic to play both against, say, Australia, it's nice to have the options.

England won't win it, but they look better able to make a decent fist of things in a major tournament for the first time in a long time.

England v WI test review

What did we learn from the decidedly one-sided two-test series between England and the West Indies?

Well, first of all we all learnt (if we didn't know it already) that on a decent pitch offering the bowlers even a modicum of help, the West Indies crumble. Which explains their success on the placid tracks of the Carribbean. We also saw a wicket-taking, if expensive, seamer in Graham Onions make his debut and impress, although I am no more knowledgable on Tim Bresnan after two test matches than I was before after his meagre contribution (not his fault, mind).

James Anderson led the bowling attack with aplomb and Graham Swann made Devon Smith his bunny. Shivnarine Chanderpaul was not quite his adhesive self although the likes of Sarwan and Denesh Ramdin intermittently impressed. Brendan Nash's honeymoon period in test cricket is over, he makes Paul Collingwood look like Mohammed Yousuf.

In England's batting, the obvious stand-out is Ravi Bopara, who put some decidedly average fast bowling to the sword. Fidel Edwards, first day at Lords apart, played up to his erratic reputation and he went down in a few people's opinions with his antics against James Anderson at Durham. Kevin Pietersen looked out-of-sorts (he'll probably complain about being tired again) while Paul Collingwood showed understandable signs of rust having not been played in the IPL. Alistair Cook an Andrew Strauss showed good form in patches but Cook still looks a little suspect against the swinging ball.

In all you cannot draw too many conclusions with regards to the ashes because the windies were by and large so ordinary. However, England were professional in their approach and commendably ruthless with the ball. Graham Swann, certainly, looks to be the real deal and the premier spinner for the upcoming tests.

Too much cricket

County cricket is best described as a treadmill for most players. It is a gruelling schedule at the best of times, with players rest times squeezed further by the introduction of Twenty20 (however successful that has been). On Monday, Kent were convincingly beaten by Middlesex at Canterbury in what was their 12th day of competetive cricket out of the previous 14 days. That is, so early in the season, nothing short of madness. No wonder top players like Wayne Parnell, Justin Kemp and Joe Denly looked jaded in the field. I'd be bloody shattered.

The simple solution is to reduce the amount of cricket played. Unfortunately opinion seems to be divided on how to do this. I've already had numerous arguments about this with people already, but it hasn't shaken me from my position - That the Pro40 league should be axed.

It seems, to coin a phrase from the excellent Coen Brothers film O Brother Where Art Thou?, the acme of foolishness to continue with a domestic competition that does not mirror one played at international level. Twenty20 is now played globally, the Friends Provident trophy has its 50-over big brother and obviously the county championship is stretched out over five days. There is no international 40 over tournament. Opponents of this view point to the fact it gives the fans a bit more for their money than Twenty20 and yet still finishes early enough so that a whole day is written off. Yet I've already been to 2 Friends Provident matches this season which kicked off at 10.45 and finished at between 6 and 6.30 - hardly the dead of night and you see 100 overs of cricket.

The other advantage to, in my view, stretching out the FP trophy into a bigger competition to usurp the Pro40 is that it incorporates exactly the same rules as international 50 over cricket, such as the Fielding Powerplays. It is useless, in my opinion, to bring in promising young english players and then only pay early-season lip service to a competition that some of them will be playing for their country in the future.

To persist with Pro40, in the packed schedule that county players endure, is madness and will only lead very quickly to player burnout. If Twenty20 must be accomodated (which, for all my grumbling, it must) then something has to give. It makes no sense for any of the other competitions to lose out.

Marvellous

England win test inside three days by 10 wickets and Lancashire beat Warwickshire by 6 wickets.

Can't ask for much more than that.

English Test summer begins

You can tell by the rain in the air that today heralds the start of the English Test summer. Fortunately it's stayed away from Lord's so far and we're two sessions in to the first Test against the West Indies.

After snacking on Indian Premier League for a couple of weeks or so, it feels good to be sitting down to a balanced, square meal such that Test match cricket represents. Nobody is proud of themselves after a superficial diet of take-outs and fast food, and neither am I after a smorgasbord of IPL cricket dominating the TV schedules chez moi. No more DLF maximum bollocks - and Robin Jackman, I'm coming for you after you committed the heinous crime of using 'DLF' as a verb, to whit "he's DLFed it out of the ground" - instead the monotonous ramblings of Nasser and pals on Sky's increasingly annoying coverage.

And what of the cricket so far? Well, we've only had two sessions and Kevin Pietersen has transferred his IPL form to the bigger stage by getting a first baller, a superb delivery from Fidel Edwards who continues to impress, and Ravi Bopara is the latest to look at least fleetingly good at number three. Early days yet, but he's gone pretty well. England line up with Graham Onions and Tim Bresnan on debut in a long tail and I really never thought I'd see the day when Bresnan got a Test cap. How he's made it into the side ahead of his much more impressive team-mate at Yorkshire, Adil Rashid, is one of those mysteries of life that future generations will shake their heads at in disbelief. Meanwhile for the West Indies, someone really needs to tell them how to catch small red balls. If they'd hung on to catches, then they'd be batting already.

The big difference between this and the crash, bang wallop in South Africa is over rates. There is no reason why sides should not be able to go at fifteen overs per hour. Rates of thirteen and lower are pathetic. Some time ago, Chris wrote about flat pitches beating the living daylights out of Test cricket. So are slow over rates. The fines aren't working. Either they need to be upped, and upped significantly, or penalty runs brought in. Or both. Oh, and suspensions for captains.

Flower set for England job

Andy Flower is expected to be confirmed as the new coach of England today, after a winter in which we managed to go on two tours and not win a single test match. There's no denying that Flower was a great player in his day, and in interviews he comes across as an intelligent, charismatic man, but the transition to England coach is a big one and his first tour, of the West Indies, was notable more for the organisational bungling of the WICB and Kevin Pietersen's ongoing 'I'm tired and I want to leave so I can go home for a week and then bugger off to the IPL' briefings than actual good England displays.

Its not going to get any easier for the Zimbabwean either, as there is a return series agains the West Indies coming up before the ICC World Twenty20 in June (a competition we're rubbish at) and then of course the Ashes in July. There is little doubt the Australians are not as strong as they were but England seem at such a low ebb themselves that expectations have been significantly lowered in anticipation. Granted, the dead tracks in West Indies made life difficult for them but one is not filled with confidence going into a summer facing the best side in the world.

One can also not help but wonder whether Flower himself was ever first choice. Various big names were linked and then ruled out of the running, such as Mickey Arthur, Tom Moody and Gary Kirsten (all more experienced than Flower) while Ashley Giles was told he was too inexperienced and Graham Ford, perhaps the most qualified candidate having coached both at county and international level, withdrew citing the overlong nature of the application process.

Regardless, Flower's first priority is to address the parlous state of England's seamers, with Steve Harmison looking uninterested as usual, Ryan Sidebottom unfit, James Anderson inconsistent yet capable and Andrew Flintoff injury-prone. Depth is unquestionably an issue and a few good early season County Championship matches could see the likes of Graham Onions, Saj Mahmood or even Matthew Hoggard thrown into the fray.

Flower might also wonder how to deal with the monumental ego of Kevin Pietersen, although that particular rubix cube can perhaps be put on the back burner for now as he is Ray Jennings' problem for the next three weeks.