Soft England must prepare for a hard landing

For a team which has been so umimpressive at one-day cricket, it seems a bit much for England to keep on insisting that it will all be alright on the night, and that they will flick a switch and start playing properly now that they are to face up to some of the big names. For the wearied English sporting fan, it's all starting to look a bit like that other World Cup last summer; our footballers scraped past some very ordinary teams in a dreadfully unconvincing manner, while all the while maintaining that the big performance was just around the corner. More worrying for for the cricketers, it seems that said big performance which has thus far eluded them is not around the next corner, but was in fact left behind at the last crossroads, where, after a winter of discontent, fans briefly basked in a Collingwood wonderland.

Citing complacency as a reason for another sluggish display against Ireland just does not wash; if they cannot raise themselves for a World Cup, even against a lesser team, then what is the point of being there in the first place. The importance of momentum cannot be underestimated. Ricky Ponting knows that; following a painful Ashes defeat, his team won ten out of ten Test Matches in the run up to the next series, and steamrollered England, whose run-in had been beset by injury and poor form. Likewise, following 5 consecutive one-day defeats prior to this tournament, Australia used their group games as a springboard to get themselves back into form and demolish fancied South Africa. They now look as strong as they ever did. England, on the other hand, depsite the scheduling gift of three consecutive easy games have muddled through, doing just enough to avoid embarassment, while never dominating and building confidence. They should be hitting the ground running for tomorrow's big game, yet they approach it in no better shape than they did the first game against New Zealand.

We know that England have it in them to beat anyone on their day; beating Australia in their own backyard proved that (and don't listen to moaning Aussies blithering on about fatigue - England had played a mirror schedule). What is so frustrating is that there is no way of knowing whether they will produce the goods; it is by no means beyond the realms of doubt that James Anderson could wreck the much vaunted Sri Lankan top order and win the game there and then. He has it in him, the ball should swing for him. But that is a possible; Australia know that they will get a fast start; even if Hayden and Gilchrist fall, the runs will keep coming form Ponting, Symonds, Clarke and Hussey. England are dealing in possibles; good enough to win a game, any game indeed, but not the currency which will win a tournament, especially as long a one as this.

As far as tomorrow's game is concerned, it may not be do or die for England, but lose, and they will be on a slippery slope. Australia follow, refreshed by a week-long break, on Sunday, and should that not go England's way they are in a situation where they would realistically need to win their last three games. This would be achievable against Bangladesh, and in the last game against a West Indies side which will be out of cotnention by then. The much meatier filling to that flimsy sandwich will be the stumbling block though, in the match-up against South Africa. England have not played them since the winter of 2004-5, and a 5-1 thrashing then reflects the still cavernous gap between the two sides in the shorter form of the game.

A win is what England need from these next two games; just one win, which would be much better achieved at the earlier opportunity, which might give hope of a positive result against Australia, which would all but secure qualification (wow... you can wake up now). Their best chance is to bowl first and take early wickets, exposing the Sri Lankan middle-order, unproven under pressure, to a newer ball. For all the power in the top four, there is a soft underbelly to this Sri Lankan side, especially with Marvan Atapattu kicking his heels on the sidelines. If the new ball bowlers do well, Flintoff and Panesar finish the job and the Sri Lankans are restricted to a manageable total, then that would put England in the run-chase scenario which Pietersen in particular thrives on. Most of all they must nail Jayasuriya early; let him get a flier and he will more than not make you pay for the duration. That is why England must be bold in selecting Anderson's new ball partner (not Mahmood - that would be stupid) and go for Plunkett. As much as he is generous with wides, he has the ability to take key wickets with the new ball, wickets which could win England the game.

Of course the run chase will be no doddle, especially bearing in mind the for of England's top order. Against Ireland, Ed Joyce saw a straight ball dance naked in front of him and still decided to let it go. A second misjudgement, this time of a catch in the field (his second easy drop of the tournament) could see him relegated in favour of Andrew Strauss. Good player that he is, he has no runs (or games) behind him, and is not exactly a one-day player anyway. Don't hold your breath for a change in fortune. We are still waiting for Michael Vaughan to score some runs; sadly, it seems that the cool, calm brain which has so often seen England through in tight corners, falls out of his head when a bat is put in his hand and a set of pajamas handed to him. Someone needs to tell him that it is his job to see off the new ball, and hang around long enough to unleash some of those wonderful cover drives and pull shots, which make him the most pleasing England batsman to watch when on song. Thus far, it has been left to the phlegmatic Collingwood and a slightly pumped-down Kevin Pietersen to shoulder the burden of five, not two. Should the arrogant swagger and busy shuffle be absent from England's innings until the 20th over tomorrow, then there is cause for hope.