Sometimes we focus so much on what is wrong with Test cricket that it is easy to forget the joy it continues to provide, never more so than in this particularly frenzied period of Tests.

The recent series between India and Sri Lanka may have been too batsman-friendly but it provided some extraordinary passages of play. Who could not have wished to see Virender Sehwag’s assault in the third Test, elegant and brutal in equal measure? For Sri Lanka, Tillakaratne Dilshan’s innings were also moments when you had to bin ideas of work and focus on some ball-by-ball Test cricket. There were personal narratives too – Sreesanth, suddenly the grounded, almost geeky bowler of immaculate line and length, Murali suddenly lacking in fizz and accuracy. And Angelo Mathews – doing an Atherton when on 99 and in sight of his first Test hundred.

Read the rest of this entry »

England’s line-ups for the two warm-up matches in South Africa made me feel like Kevin’s parents in Home Alone. There was something missing, something left behind. But what? Did I turn off the coffee? Yes. Did I lock up? Yes. Did I close the garage? Yes. Hmm. Was it Ronnie Irani? No.

It was the rarest of rare thoughts that brought the answer. An England ODI batting line-up looking reliable. You knew exactly what to expect from each batsman; you also had faith in them to deliver. Then it hit. The reason for that reliability was Owais Shah. Or rather his absence.

Read the rest of this entry »

Any amateur psychologist will tell you that you shouldn’t necessarily take gestures or comments at face value. The boy and girl at school who were ostentatiously arguing in the playground were invariably also making up and kissing behind the bikesheds. The man who is not openly ridiculed by his friends often has most cause to worry about his popularity.

The same rules apply to Ian Bell, who is probably criticised more than any of the current England team – but behind most of the criticism lies respect for, and frustration with, an abundant natural talent. Not since David Gower has an Englishman so gifted proved so exasperating. Bell will never elicit quite the same level of trust as more mundane, blue-collar batsmen like Paul Collingwood, because the nature of his talent is so unusual to us and more difficult to comprehend, but that does not mean his underachievement is relished. Quite the opposite. It is simply that many feel he does not have the will to go with his grace.

Two contrasting innings on consecutive Fridays in this one-day series summed up the Bell problem. In the first, at Headingley, he played execrably for a boundaryless 69-ball 35. In the second, at the Oval, he played exquisitely for 73 from 77 balls, with 11 fours and a six.

That innings was the only time to date, in 22 innings, that Bell had scored in excess of 90 runs per 100 balls while opening in an ODI – an appalling ratio and much more relevant than his oft-cited problem of converting one-day fifties (15) into hundreds (one). The issue seems not whether he has the requisite talent to do so, but whether he has the correct role. Paradoxically, Bell’s role needs to be both tightened and freed up: the former in terms of exactly what he is trying to achieve and the latter in terms of the liberties he is allowed to take.

There has been much talk in this series of Bell being asked to anchor the innings, to bat through for 120 not out as Dessie Haynes once did; that perception was supported by the way he played at Headingley – and even more so by the way in which he went back into his shell at the Oval: having reached 58 from 43 balls, he then scored 15 from the final 34.

Yet the notion of the one-day anchorman is hideously antiquated. As average scores have got higher and batting line-ups longer, the desire to have somebody bat through the innings has not only been removed but also exposed as illogical. With eight batsmen and only 50 overs, it is logical to have punisher after punisher after punisher, each man looking to score at a minimum of 90 runs per 100 balls. Besides, why would you want Ian Bell batting in the last 10 overs when you could have Andrew Flintoff and Kevin Pietersen?

Similarly, why would you want somebody playing cagily at a time when there are significant field restrictions? It’s akin to pecking someone on the cheek at an orgy. The Powerplay overs are Bell’s time, when his class allows him to pierce or clear the field through orthodox cricket shots. In that thrilling innings at the Oval, he did not play a single stroke that would have looked out of place in five-day cricket.

Bell should not strive to be England’s Dessie Haynes but their Mark Waugh and Sachin Tendulkar: a quality player given license to just go out and play. If he does that, the brickbats will disappear, and there will be only bouquets.

Rob Smyth is a freelance journalist

9. Matt Prior – six catches and 45*, England v South Africa, 2nd ODI, Trent Bridge, 26th August 2008

“Having craved a wicketkeeper who averaged in excess of 40, England found the grass wasn’t necessarily greener on the other side. His butterfingered keeping and ham-fisted sledging started to rub people up the wrong way … “

So wrote Wisden of Matt Prior’s ill-fated opening year of Test cricket, providing further evidence of why the England wicketkeeper stands behind only the credit-crunch and Peaches Geldof as an inducer of national angst.

Given the chance to make the position his own, Prior’s failings with the gloves outweighed tangible success with the bat and he was sent back to his county. Fortunately for Prior, while Tim Ambrose showcased all the charisma and ability of Iain Duncan-Smith, he was making the sort of runs (841 at 56.06) in the County Championship that made a prolonged absence impossible. Equally importantly, with the runs came positive noises from Hove about improving glovework and attitude.

When Ambrose could manage only 97 runs at 16 as England lost the Basil D’Oliveira Trophy, Prior’s return was inevitable and he was named in the squad for the ODIs, an audition for the winter tours in all but name.

Luck plays a large part in the career of a cricketer and that Prior’s return coincided with the positive feelings of Pietersen’s first few games as captain was a definite break.

Ironically his keeping has impressed more than his batting over the first two games, as a scratchy 42 and a quickfire 45 not out have failed to dispel the thoughts that he does not hit straight enough to open in the one-day game– he has scored one half-century in 25 attempts.

But, that should not detract from the near-faultless glovework that brought six catches at Trent Bridge – equalling Alec Stewart’s English ODI record. There is work to be done still to repair his reputation but the way he held on to dismiss Graeme Smith, diving one-handed far to his left, showed athleticism and guts. If he had dropped it, the old knives would have come out, but he didn’t and the praise reverberated around Nottingham.

His captain was pleased too: “He’s turned up a different bloke and he’s been brilliant. Fair play to the guy because he could have gone away and felt sorry for himself but he’s scored hundred after hundred for Sussex.

“I was pleased he finished not out with six catches. It’s brilliant because it has been a headache for however long with our wicketkeeper but let’s hope it stays good because he’s a hell of a batsman.”

Sam Collins is web editor of www. thewisdencricketer.com

Tell you what we’re losing interest in: runs.

Don’t get us wrong, we’ll still exclaim ‘shot!’ when Andrew Flintoff pops a drive straight back past the bowler. We’ll still produce a confused laugh of joy and fear when Shahid Afridi pans the ball into the stands playing across the line while standing on one toe. The feeling has lessened though. It’s to do with inflation. A four just isn’t as valuable in today’s cricketing climate.

Big, long, turgid innings aren’t a new invention and to be fair, today’s high scores are usually more spectacular than the exact same scores from years gone by, but bigger bats, shorter boundaries and flatter pitches mean runs are as plentiful as empty beer bottles in your embarrassingly full recycling box.

We notice it most in one-day cricket. Quite often we get the feeling that a one-dayer isn’t decided by the team that bats (or even bowls) better. It’s decided by who cashes in the most. Batsmen don’t merely try and put away bad balls. They work out just how many good balls they can dispatch.

The current one-day series between Sri Lanka and India has been refreshing. In three matches, the highest score has been 237-9. High scores are supposed to be more exciting, but lower totals typically offer closer matches and there’s nothing better than a close finish.

Whether batting or bowling, you’re never quite out of it when batting’s difficult. One good partnership and you can make a massive dent in your target. One wicket and things might all fall apart for the batting side.

So we’ll tell you what we love more by the match: wickets.

See King Cricket’s regular blog at www.kingcricket.co.uk. King Cricket is a cult figure in the world of cricket blogs and was TWC’s first Best-of-blogs winner in April 2008.

The next few months spell the first crucial phase of Peter Moores’ England tenure, with the ODI series against world No2’s South Africa followed, in theory, by the Champions Trophy in Pakistan. Already 18 months into the four-year cycle leading up to the next World Cup, after an initial upturn in fortunes under the new coach if anything England appear to be regressing as a one-day outfit. With a new captain and his new ideas, England must show against the South Africans that they are at least moving in the right direction before some serious questions are asked of Moores and his staff.

Here, our panel pick their best England ODI XI, conveniently ignoring selectorial omissions and Paul Collingwood’s ongoing ban.

Read the rest of this entry »

The 50-over game may be the poor relation of the English cricket family, but its voice carries significant weight. Results in one-day cricket cost Alec Stewart his job as Test captain in 1999, despite his relatively good record. Duncan Fletcher and Nasser Hussain were both forced out of their jobs in charge of the Test team on the back of one-day results; in Hussain’s case, they weren’t even results over which he presided. In terms of punishment fitting the crime, it’s barely removed from David Brent firing Dawn for stealing post-it notes.

Peter Moores is extremely unlikely to lose his job this year – that won’t happen till after the Ashes (three of the last four England coaches have had their final Test series against the Aussies) – but if, as seems likely, England lose the upcoming series to South Africa and have a poor Champions Trophy, a hitherto benevolent media will surely turn on Moores for the first time.

In the beginning, one-day cricket cut Moores significant slack. A poor Test defeat at home to India last summer and an understandable one in Sri Lanka were largely forgiven because of the fact that the one-day side won both series – historically so in Sri Lanka – and seemed to be making genuine progress.

Since then, they have gone backwards, and Moores’ overall ODI record is now 10 wins and 12 defeats, to go with an indifferent Test record (eight wins and five defeats, but one win and four defeats against top-six opposition). There is a tendency to overestimate the disappointment of defeat to New Zealand, who beat England 3-1 home and away earlier this year; though abysmal in Test cricket at the moment, they are a consistently handy one-day side. But what was more disconcerting than the defeats themselves was the manner of them, with so many of the failings that have characterised England’s lost one-day years of 1992 to 2008 still in evidence: impotence with the bat in overs one to fifty, impotence with the ball in overs one to fifty and, most of all, a palpable lack of forward planning.

After each failure in the last four World Cups, England have promised that never again would they enter the tournament so ill-prepared. But it keeps on happening. It makes the boy who cried wolf seem like a paragon of honesty. We are already 18 months into a four-year World Cup cycle, and England are still experimenting with every aspect of their team.

We cannot be certain of England’s exact batting order in yesterday’s abandoned ODI against Scotland but, if reports are to be believed, only Nos 1 and 11 (Ian Bell and James Anderson) were in the same position as in the previous ODI, against New Zealand in June. Some change is understandable in view of injuries (Ryan Sidebottom), a new captain’s ideas (moving Owais Shah to No3) and the quality of the opposition, but nine positional or personnel changes it at least five too many.

The confusion is best reflected by the wicketkeeping issue, and its inevitable externalities. In the last three series there have been three different keepers, each involving a positional change. Phil Mustard opened away to New Zealand; Tim Ambrose batted (sic) in the middle order at home to New Zealand; and now Matt Prior will open at home to South Africa, even though he has made only one fifty in 21 innings as an ODI opener.

Prior feels unnatural in a role that demands a lot more than the brazen machismo that serves him so well in the middle order in first-class cricket. Mustard fits the position perfectly, and was developing nicely over the winter, but was dropped on the woolly grounds that England wanted the same keeper in both forms of the game.

It is not just the keepers who have been affected. Luke Wright, who has enough on his plate convincing people he is international class (a personal opinion is that he probably is as a death-hitter but not as a pinch-hitter), has been thrust up and down the order depending on where the wicketkeeper bats.

It’s a mixed blessing, but Prior and Wright might as well enjoy it while they can. Because if results continue as they are, the Sussex contingent may lose a significant dressing-room ally sooner rather than later.

Rob Smyth is a freelance journalist. Rob is part of a group running 10 miles (which is 9.9 more than he’s ever run before) for the Laurie Engel Fund in London on August 31. To sponsor him, click here; to read why he’s doing it, click here; or to join in the run, email Rob.

“If we play like we played this week, we’ll beat Australia” – Kevin Pietersen

I was there KP, I saw it with my own two eyes, when I wasn’t dozing off, it wasn’t special.

It was a dead rubber test, against a team already in holiday mode.

And it wasn’t a drubbing.

Get off the Angel dust son, if you play like you did this week against an Australian side, especially one that is clawing onto their No.1 mantle, you are going to get D Feated.

Hard.

There was nothing in this performance that said to me, England are going to win the Ashes.

And I don’t think Sri Lanka will be overly worried either.

Let’s look at the current English side.

Cook: Still could be a 10-year player, but can’t make big scores, has a pretty ordinary average in current terms, and averaged 27 against Australia last time.

Strauss: Will not be playing next Ashes.

Bell: Has the tools to be a Test-match No.3 but nothing else. If he bats three, Australia will jump for joy. In 13 Tests he has never made a hundred at three.

KP: Can seriously play. But yet to show he can seriously captain. Being positive is a great start, but if positive reinforcement worked on its own, every second kid would become successful.

Collingwood: Will not be playing next Ashes.

Flintoff: Still doesn’t take enough wickets, still doesn’t make enough runs, but he only needs one or two big wickets to fire up the whole team in an Ashes. Will his body hold up for a whole year to get there?

Ambrose: Will not be playing next Ashes.

Broad: I think Australia would be reasonably confident playing against Broad, he still averages over 40 with the ball. And I think any Test side would prefer to face him than Simon Jones. I doubt he will be there.

Harmison: A week is a long time in Harmy-land. A year is a freakin eternity. Maybe this is the third coming, maybe this isn’t. In his current form, Australia wouldn’t mind facing him, because he still isn’t 2005 Harmy, yet.

Anderson: Improving all the time, and Australia don’t do swing. But with all the ups and downs of his career so far, will he still be in this form next summer?

Monty: Australia will have faced Harbhajan and Kumble in India by the time they get to England, Monty won’t give many nightmares, and who is to say that England won’t find a snappy new spinner by then. OK, that won’t happen.

So, to recap, there are four or five players who probably won’t be in the side next summer, playing a dead rubber test against a side that hasn’t beaten Australia since who can remember when.

South Africa has yet to play this new Australian side. India, Sri Lanka and the West Indies have already tried and failed.

The one thing that I thought KP would bring to this side would be less Ashes related nonsense.

England were going on about the Ashes while they were struggling against New Zealand and while South Africa de-trousered them.

No Test should be less important that the Ashes. And I would have thought a South African would know that. India are hard to beat at home at any time. West Indies are getting better every series. And Sri Lanka are the team of the moment.

Beat all three and I’ll start saying you can win the Ashes as well.

7. Makhaya Ntini – 7 for 149 (match figures), England v South Africa, 4th Test, The Oval, August 7-11 2008

From the flat bowler at Lord’s who was as harmless as a Harmison in Australia, to the canny operator who took the only five-for of the series last week at The Oval – Makhaya Ntini’s transition over the last four Test matches is remarkable.

At Lord’s it was hard to believe: this was a man who had 344 wickets from 87 matches. Yet he was sending down the sort of predictable straight stuff that ridiculed the pre-match hype about South Africa’s unforgiving quartet of quicks. From 29 wicket-less overs Ntini leaked 130 runs at Lord’s.

He was only marginally better at Headingley, and had Dale Steyn not been ruled out for the final two Tests then Andre Nel may well have replaced Ntini.

What bounce is to Morkel, what swing is to Kallis, angle is to Ntini. He makes batsmen play because the ball is searing in at them (or across for the left-hander). At Lord’s he was criticised for not using this commodity.

Ntini duly made use of the bowler’s crease, and things steadily improved. Three wickets at Headingley, four more at Edgbaston.

Then The Oval. Ntini bowled wide of the crease, then straighter, and even sometimes from around the wicket. Variety brought results. His five-for included England’s top four, and the fifth was Stuart Broad, who was averaging 80 in the series. Ian Bell’s second-innings dismissal, though a poor shot, was a virtue of angle: a ball pitched outside off which took out leg stump.

The series was a study in Ntini’s endurance as a cricketer. And it explains the career stats which seemed so baffling when England were piling up 593 at Lord’s.

Benj Moorehead is editorial assistant of The Wisden Cricketer

I like laughing at a terrible fielder as much as the next man.

Watching MacGill run was a guilty pleasure of mine.

And I would prefer to watch Tufnell drop a catch then Symonds perform another athletic dive.

But the Monty stuff has gone too far.

He isn’t really funny.

He seemed to have this reputation before he came into the English side of being the world’s worst batsman and fielder.

Neither are true.

He can hold a bat, sometimes he may forget which end to hold, but I’d back him ahead of Chris Martin or Courntey Walsh, and I’d prefer to watch Murali or Ntini bat.

Sure he misfields more than Paul Collingwood and he is not as agile as Jimmy Anderson.

But he does stop the majority of the balls that come to him, sure with a few drops – not a comical amount, like say Michael Vaughan or Matt Prior.

And his arm may be made of porcelain but he gets the ball back to the stumps, eventually.

At The Oval he was treated like some sort of revered comical god.

They worked themselves into a rapture every time he went near the ball and if I squint and look like I am thinking hard, I can maybe remember only one really bad attempt at fielding

I’d rather watch KP and wait for him to expend energy by raising his hands above his head.

I have always thought Monty’s persona of being a comical hero was forced upon him.

His press conferences are cold, dead cold.

His public utterances induce snooze.

His record is average.

And he seems to have a personality similar to someone who wears red socks.

People can’t stop looking at the socks, mentioning the socks, and judging him on the socks.

It’s just a shame that the rest of him is a navy blue suit with a white shirt.

Jrod is an Australian cricket blogger, his site Cricketwithballs.com won July’s Best of Blogs in TWC