Australia, and particularly their batsmen, have dominated cricket, international and domestic, for the best part of two decades. The list of Australian batsmen who have been the envy of all other nations from Allan Border on seems endless: since his mid-eighties pomp, they have been able to boast the likes of David Boon, Mark Taylor, Steve and Mark Waugh, Ricky Ponting, Damien Martyn, Langer and Hayden, Adam Gilchrist, and latterly a man who is upstaging even those eminent peers, Michael Hussey. What is more incredible is the number of batsmen who have been unable to force their way into the side due to the weight of talent. English county cricket has been the main beneficiary, accommodating the likes of Stuart Law, Matt Elliott, Michael Bevan, Michael DiVenuto, Brad Hodge and Greg Blewett when Australia could not find room for them, which was often. But good and successful as those batsmen have been for their states and counties, there is one primus inter pares, a man who has scored more runs than any other in Sheffield Shield cricket and possesses a better batting average for Yorkshire than Hutton, Boycott or Sutcliffe - Darren Lehmann.
But while high-class Australian batsmen have been commonplace recently, happy endings have not, a constant throughout cricket history. And that seemed the way Lehmann's career was going to conclude, after he suffered deep-vein thrombosis followed by an Achilles injury which led to him tearfully announcing his retirement last week. But the great champion of modern domestic cricket had one last flourish left, striking joyous centuries in both his final List A and first class games, within days of each other. His state South Australia are in crisis, something which his retirement can only deepen, but he has given them a fitting farewell, just as he did for Yorkshire with 339 in his last game to ensure their survival in Division 1 of the Championship. It is an irony that Lehmann, denied the chance to spend his career lording it with the Australian Test team, has instead devoted himself to salvaging lost causes, not without success, as his key role in Yorkshire's 2001 title-winning side showed.
His statistics speak for themselves yet leave so much unsaid: a first class average of over 57, 82 centuries and trailing only Hick and Ramprakash, over 1500 innings between them, in terms of runs scored. Nevertheless, that was not enough to earn him a long-lease on a spot in the Test side, winning just 27 caps despite an average touching 45, a figure which extended over 50 in his comeback phase in 2002-4, after he had squandered his initial chance in 1998. It was in ODIs where he had more opportunities, notching up over 100 caps and playing in two World-Cup winning sides. His power and adaptability made him perfect for the middle-order and overs in one-day cricket, not to mention the handy left-arm spin, with which he gathered well over 50 wickets, averaging 27 in both Test and ODI cricket. Having stepped aside to allow Michael Clarke the chance, poor form eventually saw the end of his Test career, although the Australian selectors might have been regretting their folly months later, as the Australian batsmen struggled in the conditions which Lehmann had become accustomed to during his time at Yorkshire. Lehmann reinforced the message the next Australian summer, with his best ever season for South Australia.
But it was his personality and character which endeared him to fans on both side of the world as much as his titanic run-scoring feats. One of the dwindling number from the generation for whom fitness was a tertiary concern, Lehmann was definitely a member of the "balanced diet is a pie in each hand" brigade, and could frequently be seen on balconies indulging his nicotine habit. Now we have fitness coaches and a smoking ban - for Lehmann the booze and fags just added to his allure. And that is not to mention the sheer brilliance of his batting; hitting the ball joyously hard, treating the best spinners as he would have his own bowling, the sweetest of slashing square cuts. He managed to twin those oft unhappy bedfellows- scoring runs and entertaining the crowd. Lehmann never bored; he seldom failed.
Yorkshire had, of course, only acquiesced to the idea of overseas players (with overseas concerning the South of England as much as South Australia) in 1992, and had had mixed experiences with Sachin Tendulkar, Richie Richardson and Michael Bevan. Yet after a career short by the standards of Yorkshire legends, not even the most grudging of broad acre curmudgeons could have criticism for him, and he was duly included in a Yorkshire Post greatest ever XI, the native of Gawler standing tall alongside the likes of Geoffrey, Wilfred and Sir Leonard. Having fallen short of George Hirst's 100 year old record for the highest score by a Yorkshireman, his reaction was typical: "George was a better batsman than me anyway." For any other born outside Yorkshire to have made an attempt on the record would have been seen as heresy; yet for Lehmann, an exception would have been made. He had won over the hardest-to-please fans in the world, and for that alone he deserves his place in history.
Saturday, 24 November 2007
Sunday, 11 November 2007
All quiet on the Kallis front
It is not difficult to name the almost universally agreed greatest ever all-rounder, a title which sits as easily upon the shoulders of Garry Sobers as the sobriquet of best batsman fits Bradman. Identifying the modern player whose statistics can match, and even shade Sobers, is a tad more troublesome. After all, you knew Jacques Kallis was good, but really that good? In numbers, at least, Kallis' Test career bears a remarkable resemblance to that of the great West Indian. Their Test averages differ by just 0.04, while Sobers has more wickets (from fewer games) and a better economy rate, while Kallis possesses the superior average and strike rate. There, as they say, the comparisons end, but not without serving to show just how underrated and high-achieving Kallis is in the pantheon of the modern game.
As South Africa's best batsman since re-admission, he is their top run-scorer, having just gone past 9000 Test runs with 186 against New Zealand. Only the three best seamers since 1992 - Donald, Pollock and Ntini - can better his haul of 219 wickets. Yet as neither batsman nor all-rounder has he achieved pre-eminence. Ponting, Lara, Tendulkar, Inzamam and Dravid are at least five who would be considered above him in an evaluation of the best batsmen since 2000, yet only the first can improve on his Test average of 57.74. He has a better bowling average and economy rate than Andrew Flintoff, his only contemporary in the genuine all-rounder capacity. Style plays some part - his strokeplay, while withering, is neither elegant nor dashing - there also lingers the suspicion that he only shows real willingness to bowl when there is something in it for him. Nevertheless, he is capable of producing good pace and movement, and four 5 wicket hauls in Tests mark him out as more than just a steady customer in the role of 5th bowler. Being from South Africa - a cricketing nation which has achieved excellence yet remained perennial bridesmaid in the modern age - is a contributing factor. Of the many high-achieving and talented South African players since 1992, stardom has only really visited itself on one, in Allan Donald, while often the focus on great South Africans is biased towards the generation to which circumstance denied the chance to make a mark on Test history.
It seems indicative of the Kallis paradox that one has to resort to endless statistics to prove his worth. With a player of his stature, this should not be necessary, but it is only in the numbers that the extent of his achievements are truly apparent. It is not necessary to know, or even refer to the Test average, or number of centuries of a Lara or Tendulkar. Their greatness is obvious on the field, the statistics fall neatly in line behind them; with Kallis it seems rather to be the other way around. To suffer at the hands of Kallis is not unexpected, yet the extent of his abilities seems only to be clear after he has made the fielding team sick of the sight of him; a knowledge which is stored at the back of the mind, rather than seared indelibly into the consciousness. Yet for all this semi-anonymity, Kallis is a singular, in ways unique player. Most of the great all-rounders have been primarily bowlers - Miller, Imran, Hadlee, Botham, Dev - who would take the new ball and bat in the lower-middle order. Even Sobers, like Kallis a batsman first, tended towards the middle rather than top of the order. Yet Kallis, who cannot offer anything approaching their bowling record, is a top 4 batsman, while his haul of over 200 Test wickets means he cannot be relegated into the batsman who bowls category.
That he is someone who profits by pillaging against the lesser teams is an accusation frequently leveled against him and not without foundation. Still, he is by no means alone in this, and all of his three centuries against Zimbabwe came when they were far from the token presence they have since become. An average of 48.53 in Australia and a mark of 64.6 in the three main subcontinental countries shows he is adaptable to all conditions. That his average is greater and he has more of his centuries away from home is indicative of his importance to South African cricket.
What is more, he has seemed to improve with age. In the second part of his career, his average has been 65; batting at 4, a position he assumed permanently in early 2002 and where he has batted for half of his Tests, that rises to over 70. Ominously, he is not yet a month past his 32nd birthday, while four centuries in three Tests this season show an intent uncommonly strong even in a man like Kallis. Next year, South Africa make their 5-yearly tour of England, Kallis' third and likely final visit. His record there is patchy, an average of just 37 with a solitary century, although he did bowl his team to victory at Headingley in 2003. Should he continue his current run of form, his contribution to the series could be vital in attempting to win the series in England, something South Africa have not done in their three trips since re-admission. Achieve that and maybe he will start to receive the sort of recognition which his talent and record deserve.
As South Africa's best batsman since re-admission, he is their top run-scorer, having just gone past 9000 Test runs with 186 against New Zealand. Only the three best seamers since 1992 - Donald, Pollock and Ntini - can better his haul of 219 wickets. Yet as neither batsman nor all-rounder has he achieved pre-eminence. Ponting, Lara, Tendulkar, Inzamam and Dravid are at least five who would be considered above him in an evaluation of the best batsmen since 2000, yet only the first can improve on his Test average of 57.74. He has a better bowling average and economy rate than Andrew Flintoff, his only contemporary in the genuine all-rounder capacity. Style plays some part - his strokeplay, while withering, is neither elegant nor dashing - there also lingers the suspicion that he only shows real willingness to bowl when there is something in it for him. Nevertheless, he is capable of producing good pace and movement, and four 5 wicket hauls in Tests mark him out as more than just a steady customer in the role of 5th bowler. Being from South Africa - a cricketing nation which has achieved excellence yet remained perennial bridesmaid in the modern age - is a contributing factor. Of the many high-achieving and talented South African players since 1992, stardom has only really visited itself on one, in Allan Donald, while often the focus on great South Africans is biased towards the generation to which circumstance denied the chance to make a mark on Test history.
It seems indicative of the Kallis paradox that one has to resort to endless statistics to prove his worth. With a player of his stature, this should not be necessary, but it is only in the numbers that the extent of his achievements are truly apparent. It is not necessary to know, or even refer to the Test average, or number of centuries of a Lara or Tendulkar. Their greatness is obvious on the field, the statistics fall neatly in line behind them; with Kallis it seems rather to be the other way around. To suffer at the hands of Kallis is not unexpected, yet the extent of his abilities seems only to be clear after he has made the fielding team sick of the sight of him; a knowledge which is stored at the back of the mind, rather than seared indelibly into the consciousness. Yet for all this semi-anonymity, Kallis is a singular, in ways unique player. Most of the great all-rounders have been primarily bowlers - Miller, Imran, Hadlee, Botham, Dev - who would take the new ball and bat in the lower-middle order. Even Sobers, like Kallis a batsman first, tended towards the middle rather than top of the order. Yet Kallis, who cannot offer anything approaching their bowling record, is a top 4 batsman, while his haul of over 200 Test wickets means he cannot be relegated into the batsman who bowls category.
That he is someone who profits by pillaging against the lesser teams is an accusation frequently leveled against him and not without foundation. Still, he is by no means alone in this, and all of his three centuries against Zimbabwe came when they were far from the token presence they have since become. An average of 48.53 in Australia and a mark of 64.6 in the three main subcontinental countries shows he is adaptable to all conditions. That his average is greater and he has more of his centuries away from home is indicative of his importance to South African cricket.
What is more, he has seemed to improve with age. In the second part of his career, his average has been 65; batting at 4, a position he assumed permanently in early 2002 and where he has batted for half of his Tests, that rises to over 70. Ominously, he is not yet a month past his 32nd birthday, while four centuries in three Tests this season show an intent uncommonly strong even in a man like Kallis. Next year, South Africa make their 5-yearly tour of England, Kallis' third and likely final visit. His record there is patchy, an average of just 37 with a solitary century, although he did bowl his team to victory at Headingley in 2003. Should he continue his current run of form, his contribution to the series could be vital in attempting to win the series in England, something South Africa have not done in their three trips since re-admission. Achieve that and maybe he will start to receive the sort of recognition which his talent and record deserve.
Sunday, 4 November 2007
Rivals prepare for rebirth of old enemy
As the fortunes of England during and since the period of 2004-5 have shown, it is not the ascension to the peak that takes the most effort - although that itself is substantial - but the ability to stay king for more than just a day. And that is why Australia, for whom the 2005 insurgence was a rare pinprick in a 12 year regime, will be remembered as a team for the ages, just like the all-conquering West Indians before them. Furthermore, despite the loss of their two best bowlers and 172 Tests worth of batting experience in the form of Justin Langer and Damien Martyn; the players selected for their first Test series since their zenith of the Ashes whitewash last year look perfectly capable of ensuring it is some time yet before the Antipodean empire crumbles.
Regeneration is the cornerstone of any dynasty, and it is what Australia have shown themselves annoyingly good at over the course of the last 15 years. Surely there could be none like Allan Border, long Test cricket's most capped player, highest run-scorer and most experienced leader as well as the man almost uniquely credited as the facilitator of Australia's rise to greatness. But then came Steven Waugh: more Test appearances, centuries and victories as captain than his illustrious predecessor bar the one that was Mark Taylor, who oversaw the transition from a team who could scrap with the best to one which was utterly dominant. Waugh is now long gone, but his ghost still lingers, in the hard-nosed leadership of Ponting and the steel-willed batsmanship of Michael Hussey. The elegance of his brother Mark and Damien Martyn is also now missing, but in it's place they can boast the dashing strokeplay of Michael Clarke, whose excellent Ashes series last winter confirmed the promise previously hinted at by his century on debut in India and impressive showing in 2005, when he was Australia's least experienced batsman, and often their best.
And it is personal, as well as personnel renaissance which has been a mark of this Australian outfit. Ricky Ponting picked himself up off the floor of a Sydney nightclub in 1999 and came out the other side of drink counselling to become the foremost batsman of his generation and a leader who, after an aberration in 2005, now looks every bit as formidable as the three who came before him. Matthew Hayden returned after his first stab at Test cricket yielded an average of less than 30 to become one of the best attacking openers the game has seen; in one-day cricket, he was out of the team for over a year, but came back just before the World Cup to record the fastest ever century by an Australian in ODIs, and is currently, without doubt, the best opener in the world.
The retirement of Warne and McGrath, a unique pair of bowling predators, was always foreseen as a watershed moment by those wondering quite when the Australian dynasty would tail off. And although Australia's bowling attack will lack that same incisive edge, lent as much by reputation as reality, the talent is still there to keep them top of the tree. Stuart Clark and Brett Lee will take the new ball, something both have earned, although Lee, at least, still has to convince in the role of leading strike-bowler without the crutch of the ever-reliable McGrath. With Shaun Tait's injury, something which is increasingly becoming habitual, the role of third-seamer goes to Mitchell Johnson, a rapid left-armer who has produced the goods in ODIs and is there on merit as much as promise, although his first-class returns indicate he still has something to prove. He will be given the chance, although the presence of Ben Hilfenhaus as Tait's replacement is a threatening one to all the pace attack, especially if Hilfenhaus, that rare commodity of a swing bowler in Australia, can go some way towards matching his mammoth 60 wicket haul in last year's domestic competition. Stuart Macgill has long been Warne's No.2, and has managed 40 Tests along the way, sweeping up almost 200 victims with his outrageous side-spin, although verging on 37 and with a suspect knee, it remains to be seen whether he has withered too long on the vine. Brad Hogg, whose ODI record and strong showing in the Pura Cup game which served as an audition, has earned him a squad place alongside Macgill, although the selector's preference for the leggie will probably override Hogg's superior recent record and the all-round option he offers with useful batting and fielding.
For Langer's replacement, Australia have the remarkable reassurance of being able to select, for only the third time, the left-hand dynamo Phil Jaques. He has been down the Hussey road of success in county and Australian domestic cricket, and already has 10,000 FC runs and 32 centuries to his name. It is the privilege of the current Australian selectors to replace talent and experience at Test level with equivalent long-standing in domestic competition. Still on the sidelines are David Hussey, brother of Mike and with a FC average almost identical to Jaques' and with just one less century, and Brad Hodge, seemingly destined never to secure a permanent Test position, despite his average of 58.42 from his 5 games so far. Hodge's desperate attempt to reinvent himself as an opener shows the difficulty of forcing a way into the Australian batting line-up, while a player of his talent would be long into a Test career with any other country. In view of that, Andrew Symonds can maybe count himself somewhat lucky, with rather less flattering statistics. In one-day cricket, he is the kingpin, with an astonishing record since the 2003 World Cup. Yet only twice has he broken free in Tests, smashing a 70 against South Africa before finally reaching three figures at Melbourne in the Ashes. As much as that innings is being regarded as an epiphany, it must be said that England's bowling plan to him, the theory of which was left on the floor of the pavilion bar, was horrendous, allowing him to play the innings as he would in an ODI. The idea of Symonds, as a destructive batsman, livewire fielder and auxiliary fifth bowler, is a good one, so crucial in the shorter form of the game, which is why the selectors have shown faith over equally deserving specialist batsmen. But Symonds must make his mark in the near future; Australian selectors give only so much leeway, while Shane Watson, long since earmarked as the man to fill the No.6 slot, cannot stay injured forever.
It is 9 months since Australia last played a Test, delivering the crushing denouement to England at Sydney. In the next 7 months they play 13, taking on four different Test nations. That should be a sufficient period for any gremlins which have sneaked into the system to be ironed out and the results will show to what extent the loss of Warne and McGrath will hurt them. Do not hold out too much hope for a change; this team looks set to retain the hydra like qualities which have led to such sustained success over the last 12 years and they are far from finished.
Regeneration is the cornerstone of any dynasty, and it is what Australia have shown themselves annoyingly good at over the course of the last 15 years. Surely there could be none like Allan Border, long Test cricket's most capped player, highest run-scorer and most experienced leader as well as the man almost uniquely credited as the facilitator of Australia's rise to greatness. But then came Steven Waugh: more Test appearances, centuries and victories as captain than his illustrious predecessor bar the one that was Mark Taylor, who oversaw the transition from a team who could scrap with the best to one which was utterly dominant. Waugh is now long gone, but his ghost still lingers, in the hard-nosed leadership of Ponting and the steel-willed batsmanship of Michael Hussey. The elegance of his brother Mark and Damien Martyn is also now missing, but in it's place they can boast the dashing strokeplay of Michael Clarke, whose excellent Ashes series last winter confirmed the promise previously hinted at by his century on debut in India and impressive showing in 2005, when he was Australia's least experienced batsman, and often their best.
And it is personal, as well as personnel renaissance which has been a mark of this Australian outfit. Ricky Ponting picked himself up off the floor of a Sydney nightclub in 1999 and came out the other side of drink counselling to become the foremost batsman of his generation and a leader who, after an aberration in 2005, now looks every bit as formidable as the three who came before him. Matthew Hayden returned after his first stab at Test cricket yielded an average of less than 30 to become one of the best attacking openers the game has seen; in one-day cricket, he was out of the team for over a year, but came back just before the World Cup to record the fastest ever century by an Australian in ODIs, and is currently, without doubt, the best opener in the world.
The retirement of Warne and McGrath, a unique pair of bowling predators, was always foreseen as a watershed moment by those wondering quite when the Australian dynasty would tail off. And although Australia's bowling attack will lack that same incisive edge, lent as much by reputation as reality, the talent is still there to keep them top of the tree. Stuart Clark and Brett Lee will take the new ball, something both have earned, although Lee, at least, still has to convince in the role of leading strike-bowler without the crutch of the ever-reliable McGrath. With Shaun Tait's injury, something which is increasingly becoming habitual, the role of third-seamer goes to Mitchell Johnson, a rapid left-armer who has produced the goods in ODIs and is there on merit as much as promise, although his first-class returns indicate he still has something to prove. He will be given the chance, although the presence of Ben Hilfenhaus as Tait's replacement is a threatening one to all the pace attack, especially if Hilfenhaus, that rare commodity of a swing bowler in Australia, can go some way towards matching his mammoth 60 wicket haul in last year's domestic competition. Stuart Macgill has long been Warne's No.2, and has managed 40 Tests along the way, sweeping up almost 200 victims with his outrageous side-spin, although verging on 37 and with a suspect knee, it remains to be seen whether he has withered too long on the vine. Brad Hogg, whose ODI record and strong showing in the Pura Cup game which served as an audition, has earned him a squad place alongside Macgill, although the selector's preference for the leggie will probably override Hogg's superior recent record and the all-round option he offers with useful batting and fielding.
For Langer's replacement, Australia have the remarkable reassurance of being able to select, for only the third time, the left-hand dynamo Phil Jaques. He has been down the Hussey road of success in county and Australian domestic cricket, and already has 10,000 FC runs and 32 centuries to his name. It is the privilege of the current Australian selectors to replace talent and experience at Test level with equivalent long-standing in domestic competition. Still on the sidelines are David Hussey, brother of Mike and with a FC average almost identical to Jaques' and with just one less century, and Brad Hodge, seemingly destined never to secure a permanent Test position, despite his average of 58.42 from his 5 games so far. Hodge's desperate attempt to reinvent himself as an opener shows the difficulty of forcing a way into the Australian batting line-up, while a player of his talent would be long into a Test career with any other country. In view of that, Andrew Symonds can maybe count himself somewhat lucky, with rather less flattering statistics. In one-day cricket, he is the kingpin, with an astonishing record since the 2003 World Cup. Yet only twice has he broken free in Tests, smashing a 70 against South Africa before finally reaching three figures at Melbourne in the Ashes. As much as that innings is being regarded as an epiphany, it must be said that England's bowling plan to him, the theory of which was left on the floor of the pavilion bar, was horrendous, allowing him to play the innings as he would in an ODI. The idea of Symonds, as a destructive batsman, livewire fielder and auxiliary fifth bowler, is a good one, so crucial in the shorter form of the game, which is why the selectors have shown faith over equally deserving specialist batsmen. But Symonds must make his mark in the near future; Australian selectors give only so much leeway, while Shane Watson, long since earmarked as the man to fill the No.6 slot, cannot stay injured forever.
It is 9 months since Australia last played a Test, delivering the crushing denouement to England at Sydney. In the next 7 months they play 13, taking on four different Test nations. That should be a sufficient period for any gremlins which have sneaked into the system to be ironed out and the results will show to what extent the loss of Warne and McGrath will hurt them. Do not hold out too much hope for a change; this team looks set to retain the hydra like qualities which have led to such sustained success over the last 12 years and they are far from finished.
Saturday, 3 November 2007
Taking aim
It rarely does much good for a public figure to rile the media, as many a sportsman, coach and manager will lament. Exhaust your small supply of favour with them and the only protection left to you can be the shield of success. And it is as good a testament to Duncan Fletcher as any, that only now he has been six months out of the job and had his autobiography serialised, the hacks have truly bared their fangs. True, the reaction to England's Ashes and World Cup debacle last winter was vitriolic, as well it might have been, but only with the publication of his memoirs have the press truly let loose.
The main rumpus has arisen from his account of Andrew Flintoff's drinking exploits as captain. Yet while this has been largely heralded as a betrayal, in fact the "revelations" are nothing new. Immediately following the events during the World Cup, which showed he had rather lost sight of where the undrawn line of acceptable behaviour resides, rumours began to circulate about his drinking exploits in Australia. All that is new are the details which have furnished the multiple tabloid headlines on the subject. Indicting Flintoff in such a way, an act akin to pouring a bucket of cold water into boiling oil, was always going to bring criticism onto Fletcher, for he is not the national hero, yet it is his right. Unlike Mike Catt and Lawrence Dallaglio, Fletcher has left a reasonable cooling-off period, while an expurgated account of events would have been of use to no-one. Geoffrey Boycott has suggested that two years should be the arbitary waiting time, although this shows a surprising lack of awareness to the time/money ratio to one normally assosciated with commerical astuteness.
The more disturbing aspect to this issue is the reason expressed for awarding Flintoff the captaincy, essentialy that he hoped it would curb his more reckless habits; that is weak and muddled reasoning, and a fair criticism. Also interesting is his comment, "The problem was, in the absence of Vaughan, there were so many unknowns." Here he shows how important the relationship between him and his captain was. Twice he forged successful alliances, first with Nasser Hussain and then Vaughan, and it is surely no coincidence that England's slide in Test cricket coincided with Vaughan's continued absence from the scene. Some of his statements show a curious lack of certainty and leadership in one who had appeared often so confident and autonomous. He failed to deal with a divsive issue at a crucial time, and for that he must shoulder blame. However, it is still hard to escape the conclusion that the extent of the media reaction is as much down to their having been cut out of the loop first time around as the gripe itself.
His comments on certain characters have also led to a considerable response, not least from those personally singled out, some of whom have taken the opportunity to respond in kind, only serving to make themselves look as petty and grudging as they accuse Fletcher of being. He is not the first to call Ian Botham useless as a selector and damaging as an influence; Geoffrey Boycott a pest and hypocrite; and David Graveney a weak Chairman of Selectors, with his excessive desire to keep all concerned happy often ending up with the opposite outcome. Wihtout doubt, there is something of the grudge-merchant in Fletcher, reflected in the way he has gone about writing the book. Yet he is by no means the first to have gone down this road, and it seems that some of the criticism arises from personal issues people had with him during his tenure, which they did not have much scope for expressing, given the general success of the England team.
What of course gets forgotten amongst the lurid details and loud personalities, is the great work Fletcher did over the course of his first six years with England and how he helped turn England from the worst Test team to one which beat the undisputed best. His account of that is what the genuine cricket fans want to read, and, with such publicity, Fletcher and his friends at the relevant tabloid newpaper have ensured that there will be a fair number of buyers; meaning that, once again, it is Fletcher who can walk away with the wry smile.
The main rumpus has arisen from his account of Andrew Flintoff's drinking exploits as captain. Yet while this has been largely heralded as a betrayal, in fact the "revelations" are nothing new. Immediately following the events during the World Cup, which showed he had rather lost sight of where the undrawn line of acceptable behaviour resides, rumours began to circulate about his drinking exploits in Australia. All that is new are the details which have furnished the multiple tabloid headlines on the subject. Indicting Flintoff in such a way, an act akin to pouring a bucket of cold water into boiling oil, was always going to bring criticism onto Fletcher, for he is not the national hero, yet it is his right. Unlike Mike Catt and Lawrence Dallaglio, Fletcher has left a reasonable cooling-off period, while an expurgated account of events would have been of use to no-one. Geoffrey Boycott has suggested that two years should be the arbitary waiting time, although this shows a surprising lack of awareness to the time/money ratio to one normally assosciated with commerical astuteness.
The more disturbing aspect to this issue is the reason expressed for awarding Flintoff the captaincy, essentialy that he hoped it would curb his more reckless habits; that is weak and muddled reasoning, and a fair criticism. Also interesting is his comment, "The problem was, in the absence of Vaughan, there were so many unknowns." Here he shows how important the relationship between him and his captain was. Twice he forged successful alliances, first with Nasser Hussain and then Vaughan, and it is surely no coincidence that England's slide in Test cricket coincided with Vaughan's continued absence from the scene. Some of his statements show a curious lack of certainty and leadership in one who had appeared often so confident and autonomous. He failed to deal with a divsive issue at a crucial time, and for that he must shoulder blame. However, it is still hard to escape the conclusion that the extent of the media reaction is as much down to their having been cut out of the loop first time around as the gripe itself.
His comments on certain characters have also led to a considerable response, not least from those personally singled out, some of whom have taken the opportunity to respond in kind, only serving to make themselves look as petty and grudging as they accuse Fletcher of being. He is not the first to call Ian Botham useless as a selector and damaging as an influence; Geoffrey Boycott a pest and hypocrite; and David Graveney a weak Chairman of Selectors, with his excessive desire to keep all concerned happy often ending up with the opposite outcome. Wihtout doubt, there is something of the grudge-merchant in Fletcher, reflected in the way he has gone about writing the book. Yet he is by no means the first to have gone down this road, and it seems that some of the criticism arises from personal issues people had with him during his tenure, which they did not have much scope for expressing, given the general success of the England team.
What of course gets forgotten amongst the lurid details and loud personalities, is the great work Fletcher did over the course of his first six years with England and how he helped turn England from the worst Test team to one which beat the undisputed best. His account of that is what the genuine cricket fans want to read, and, with such publicity, Fletcher and his friends at the relevant tabloid newpaper have ensured that there will be a fair number of buyers; meaning that, once again, it is Fletcher who can walk away with the wry smile.
Thursday, 18 October 2007
Flawed England caught between two stools
With the volume of one-day cricket England have been involved in over the last month or so, it seems quite a long time since they last played a Test match. And for what must be the first time in a significantly longer period, there is greater confusion over the composition of the Test, rather than one-day side. Since the Ashes victory in 2005, their Test record has been distinctly average, bordering on poor. Away from home, just one Test has been won since the tour of South Africa in 2004-5, while seven out of eleven have ended in defeat. Even at home, where until this summer they had not lost a series for six years, results have suffered: in addition to the loss against India, they failed to put away a Sri Lanka side in the springtime climes which are as unfamiliar and unfair to the islanders as the conditions this England side will be facing in the forthcoming series. Wins were achieved against West Indies and Pakistan, but the former was against such inferior opposition as to render it a non-achievement, while Pakistan were unable to field their three frontline seamers while the series was at stake.
England still, just, rank as the second best Test team behind Australia, although that gap is as cavernous as their margin over the chasing pack is slim. It seems fitting somehow, that they should find themselves in Sri Lanka at the crucial stage, scene of one of England's greatest modern triumphs as Nasser Hussain led a team comprising the talented yet misguided bunch who had suffered repeatedly througout the 1990s to a series victory after a thumping defeat in the opening match of three. That victory, along with the earlier success that winter in Pakistan and the previous summer's demolition of West Indies, was the high-point for an underachieving generation and can be seen as the genesis for much happier times in the first half of this decade. And while Hussain's legacy was converted by Michael Vaughan into an elusive Ashes victory, the ill fortune surrounding that team has meant that, while it should still be that same unit powering towards the next home Ashes in 2009, only four players will go to Sri Lanka guaranteed a starting place.
Where England have struggled is bringing together the remnants of that team and the new faces to form a team capable of beating all-comers, as was the 2005 vintage. Far from the smooth transition as envisaged and planned for by Duncan Fletcher and Michael Vaughan, injureis and loss of form have meant that new players have had to be thrown in. Some, notably Alistair Cook and Monty Panesar, have prospered and nailed down places. However, such a situtation meant an inevitable painful struggle for some; Liam Plunkett and Sajid Mahmood are two such- extremely talented bowlers, neither was anywhere near the level required for Test cricket. The raw material was there, but they had been given no time to develop consistency and nous, two of the more crucial weapons for bowlers in the era of flat pitches and turbo-charged bats.
Indeed the composition of the bowling attack will be casuing most headaches for David Graveney and his selection panel as they thrash out the options for the touring squad to be announced tomorrow. In 2005 the balance was perfect, with Flintoff's presence at 6 allowing a five-man attack with variety in the seam bowling and the stoicism of Ashley Giles combining to form a potent arsenal. Since then, that unit has disitegrated almost completely. Flintoff and Simon Jones, the two stand-out bowlers in 2005, are both hostage to a chronic injury and conceivably neither will play another Test match. Harmison's form has dropped off markedly; no longer can he repeatedly find that awkward length to make the ball rise at the batsman's chest and throat and more worryingly he has lost his line as well, essaying the leg-side far more often that is expected of an experienced international bowler. Hoggard alone remained unbowed in the period between Ashes series, but since even he has fallen foul of injury, which permitted him to play in only the most meaningless Test of the seven last summer. Harmison, after a shocking start to the West Indies series in which he improved but did not assuage doubts, was also injured for the India tie, meaning that England fielded an attack with not a single Ashes winner, the varied success of which has made picking a four man attack a minor nightmare now old opening pair Hoggard and Harmison are back fit.
A quick perusal of the domestic averages might persuade one that the old allies should be instantly re-united. Harmison comes in at 3rd, his wickets at 16; Hoggard 7th with an average of 20. However, especially in the case of Harmison, there are statistics which come under the auspices of damned lies. Most of his wickets came early season, which paved a way for him to lead the attack in the early summer Tests. Yet for the large part of the four match series he was hopeless, and with injury claiming the latter half of his season, he has no form behind him. To address this, he has signed a short-term deal with a South African province, which will give him two first-class games in which to make a point. His reputation and central contract should guarantee his place in the touring party, but his form does not justify a starting place, and he has much to prove. Less so Hoggard, who has made a habit of not letting England down, and is an automatic selection as the most consistent seamer as well as the most experienced and successful in the subcontient. The focus then shifts to the trio who held the fort well against India: Anderson, Sidebottom and Tremlett. Sidebottom, who had the worst series statistically against India, is nevertheless at the head of the queue, in view of his excellent one-day series and the variation he offers with his left-arm bowling. Tremlett and Anderson are then left in a scrap with Harmison for the third seamers slot, should that be the balance chosen. Anderson has a good claim both as leading wicket-taker against India and in vbiew of his consistent performances with the one-day side and recent experince of the conditions. However, what may count against him is the wish to play one of the skyscraping seamers, which also brings Stuart Broad into the equation. He would add batting prowess, but his bowling still appears too fragile for Tests, especially in Sri Lanka as part of a four-man unit.
Monty Panesar will take care of spinning duties, although the excellent performances of Graeme Swann on international recall have guaranteed his selection in the squad. Ideally, as is their wont in Asia, England would like to play him as second spinner. However, previously there has been a pace-bowling all-rounder - Craig White then Andrew Flintoff - allowing a good balance of spin and seam. Opting for two spinners out of four bowlers is a high risk strategy, as Pakistan recently discovered to their cost, and the reality for Swann is that he will be reserve barring injury to Panesar or extreme conditions. That is sad, as Swann is an attacking off-spinner, capable of giving the ball a good rip, and would also give the batting security at no.8, the Giles- sized void yet to be filled.
And while the composition of the bowling attack is a puzzle, the batting positions are also far from decided. Five players - Cook, Vaughan, Bell, Pietersen and Collingwood - can feel safe, although the identity of the last man in will have significant bearing on how they line up. Andrew Strauss has not missed a Test match since the tour of Pakistan in late 2005, and that was compassionate leave to allow him to be present at the birth of his child. Since his astonishing debut in summer 2004, when he ended the career of one stalwart, Nasser Hussain, and displaced the captain Michael Vaughan from the opening slot, his place has never been directly threatened. However, following his turbo-charged entry to Tests, encompassing the summer and an amazing debut tour, averaging 72.88 in South Africa, his results have depreciated. He has not averaged 40 in a calendar year since 2004, and this year he has not managed even 30 and has gone without a century in 8 Tests. Much has been written on the causes and reasons for such a slump, not least on this blog; what remains to be said is that he has expended the period of grace given to a player of quality without justifying the faith shown in him - nor has he made his case through county cricket, scoring his runs for Middlesex at 35 in 7 Championship games. What is more, he has failed to establish a successful alliance with Alistair Cook, and with Cook having runs and youth on his side, Strauss will lose that battle, and in all likelihood his place in the team and possibly the squad.
There is no shortage of players fighting over the final batting place. Owais Shah looks to be the best bet; he backed up success with the ODI team with runs for Middlesex, and is a cert for the party of 16, if not the starting XI. Ravi Bopara also made a case with an excellent summer with Essex, while his bowling would be a bonus in the absence of Flintoff. But it is the situation regarding Shah's former county team-mate Mark Ramprakash which has caused the most recent debate. His county form, with two 2000 run, 100 average seasons behind him is historically unmatched. What counts against him is his age, 38, and his Test average, 27, a figure reached after 52 Test matches of struggle over the course of 11 years. The first figure can be partially disregarded; despite his advanced years for a sportsman, he is still a consummate athlete and his Surrey contract takes him up to the summer of 2009, judgement day for this current England side. It is a Test average, which he has doubled in first-class cricket, and faulty temperament which are harder to explain away. His demeanour at The Oval over the last few season suggest a man who is significantly more relaxed, and he attributes that and a small change of technique to his monumental run-scoring. There is a good chance that Ramprakash, if recalled, would succeed, and it would be a nice symmetry for one of the most precocious young talents in history to make a comeback in his cricketing dotage and have the dominance once expected of him at Test level. However, it seems unlikely that the selectors will take a risk on a 38 year old, and although sentiment would dearly love Ramprakash to return and succeed, cold logic seems set to carry the day, and that is probably the right decision.
The wicket-keeping slot is an area of debate (of course), but on this occasion it seems an area which the selectors are unwilling to make a battle-ground, and Matt Prior should get the nod after missing out through injury in the ODIs. Phil Mustard did not make much of his opportunity in his stead, while he was never ordained to be a Test player anyway. The likes of Tim Ambrose and Steven Davies will bear consideration at some point, but for now it seems best to stick with Prior, who deserves at least the winter Tests to prove one way or another whether his century on debut was the sign of things to come or a false dawn. And at the midway stage between two home Ashes series, England's thoughts will be very much on the same lines.
England still, just, rank as the second best Test team behind Australia, although that gap is as cavernous as their margin over the chasing pack is slim. It seems fitting somehow, that they should find themselves in Sri Lanka at the crucial stage, scene of one of England's greatest modern triumphs as Nasser Hussain led a team comprising the talented yet misguided bunch who had suffered repeatedly througout the 1990s to a series victory after a thumping defeat in the opening match of three. That victory, along with the earlier success that winter in Pakistan and the previous summer's demolition of West Indies, was the high-point for an underachieving generation and can be seen as the genesis for much happier times in the first half of this decade. And while Hussain's legacy was converted by Michael Vaughan into an elusive Ashes victory, the ill fortune surrounding that team has meant that, while it should still be that same unit powering towards the next home Ashes in 2009, only four players will go to Sri Lanka guaranteed a starting place.
Where England have struggled is bringing together the remnants of that team and the new faces to form a team capable of beating all-comers, as was the 2005 vintage. Far from the smooth transition as envisaged and planned for by Duncan Fletcher and Michael Vaughan, injureis and loss of form have meant that new players have had to be thrown in. Some, notably Alistair Cook and Monty Panesar, have prospered and nailed down places. However, such a situtation meant an inevitable painful struggle for some; Liam Plunkett and Sajid Mahmood are two such- extremely talented bowlers, neither was anywhere near the level required for Test cricket. The raw material was there, but they had been given no time to develop consistency and nous, two of the more crucial weapons for bowlers in the era of flat pitches and turbo-charged bats.
Indeed the composition of the bowling attack will be casuing most headaches for David Graveney and his selection panel as they thrash out the options for the touring squad to be announced tomorrow. In 2005 the balance was perfect, with Flintoff's presence at 6 allowing a five-man attack with variety in the seam bowling and the stoicism of Ashley Giles combining to form a potent arsenal. Since then, that unit has disitegrated almost completely. Flintoff and Simon Jones, the two stand-out bowlers in 2005, are both hostage to a chronic injury and conceivably neither will play another Test match. Harmison's form has dropped off markedly; no longer can he repeatedly find that awkward length to make the ball rise at the batsman's chest and throat and more worryingly he has lost his line as well, essaying the leg-side far more often that is expected of an experienced international bowler. Hoggard alone remained unbowed in the period between Ashes series, but since even he has fallen foul of injury, which permitted him to play in only the most meaningless Test of the seven last summer. Harmison, after a shocking start to the West Indies series in which he improved but did not assuage doubts, was also injured for the India tie, meaning that England fielded an attack with not a single Ashes winner, the varied success of which has made picking a four man attack a minor nightmare now old opening pair Hoggard and Harmison are back fit.
A quick perusal of the domestic averages might persuade one that the old allies should be instantly re-united. Harmison comes in at 3rd, his wickets at 16; Hoggard 7th with an average of 20. However, especially in the case of Harmison, there are statistics which come under the auspices of damned lies. Most of his wickets came early season, which paved a way for him to lead the attack in the early summer Tests. Yet for the large part of the four match series he was hopeless, and with injury claiming the latter half of his season, he has no form behind him. To address this, he has signed a short-term deal with a South African province, which will give him two first-class games in which to make a point. His reputation and central contract should guarantee his place in the touring party, but his form does not justify a starting place, and he has much to prove. Less so Hoggard, who has made a habit of not letting England down, and is an automatic selection as the most consistent seamer as well as the most experienced and successful in the subcontient. The focus then shifts to the trio who held the fort well against India: Anderson, Sidebottom and Tremlett. Sidebottom, who had the worst series statistically against India, is nevertheless at the head of the queue, in view of his excellent one-day series and the variation he offers with his left-arm bowling. Tremlett and Anderson are then left in a scrap with Harmison for the third seamers slot, should that be the balance chosen. Anderson has a good claim both as leading wicket-taker against India and in vbiew of his consistent performances with the one-day side and recent experince of the conditions. However, what may count against him is the wish to play one of the skyscraping seamers, which also brings Stuart Broad into the equation. He would add batting prowess, but his bowling still appears too fragile for Tests, especially in Sri Lanka as part of a four-man unit.
Monty Panesar will take care of spinning duties, although the excellent performances of Graeme Swann on international recall have guaranteed his selection in the squad. Ideally, as is their wont in Asia, England would like to play him as second spinner. However, previously there has been a pace-bowling all-rounder - Craig White then Andrew Flintoff - allowing a good balance of spin and seam. Opting for two spinners out of four bowlers is a high risk strategy, as Pakistan recently discovered to their cost, and the reality for Swann is that he will be reserve barring injury to Panesar or extreme conditions. That is sad, as Swann is an attacking off-spinner, capable of giving the ball a good rip, and would also give the batting security at no.8, the Giles- sized void yet to be filled.
And while the composition of the bowling attack is a puzzle, the batting positions are also far from decided. Five players - Cook, Vaughan, Bell, Pietersen and Collingwood - can feel safe, although the identity of the last man in will have significant bearing on how they line up. Andrew Strauss has not missed a Test match since the tour of Pakistan in late 2005, and that was compassionate leave to allow him to be present at the birth of his child. Since his astonishing debut in summer 2004, when he ended the career of one stalwart, Nasser Hussain, and displaced the captain Michael Vaughan from the opening slot, his place has never been directly threatened. However, following his turbo-charged entry to Tests, encompassing the summer and an amazing debut tour, averaging 72.88 in South Africa, his results have depreciated. He has not averaged 40 in a calendar year since 2004, and this year he has not managed even 30 and has gone without a century in 8 Tests. Much has been written on the causes and reasons for such a slump, not least on this blog; what remains to be said is that he has expended the period of grace given to a player of quality without justifying the faith shown in him - nor has he made his case through county cricket, scoring his runs for Middlesex at 35 in 7 Championship games. What is more, he has failed to establish a successful alliance with Alistair Cook, and with Cook having runs and youth on his side, Strauss will lose that battle, and in all likelihood his place in the team and possibly the squad.
There is no shortage of players fighting over the final batting place. Owais Shah looks to be the best bet; he backed up success with the ODI team with runs for Middlesex, and is a cert for the party of 16, if not the starting XI. Ravi Bopara also made a case with an excellent summer with Essex, while his bowling would be a bonus in the absence of Flintoff. But it is the situation regarding Shah's former county team-mate Mark Ramprakash which has caused the most recent debate. His county form, with two 2000 run, 100 average seasons behind him is historically unmatched. What counts against him is his age, 38, and his Test average, 27, a figure reached after 52 Test matches of struggle over the course of 11 years. The first figure can be partially disregarded; despite his advanced years for a sportsman, he is still a consummate athlete and his Surrey contract takes him up to the summer of 2009, judgement day for this current England side. It is a Test average, which he has doubled in first-class cricket, and faulty temperament which are harder to explain away. His demeanour at The Oval over the last few season suggest a man who is significantly more relaxed, and he attributes that and a small change of technique to his monumental run-scoring. There is a good chance that Ramprakash, if recalled, would succeed, and it would be a nice symmetry for one of the most precocious young talents in history to make a comeback in his cricketing dotage and have the dominance once expected of him at Test level. However, it seems unlikely that the selectors will take a risk on a 38 year old, and although sentiment would dearly love Ramprakash to return and succeed, cold logic seems set to carry the day, and that is probably the right decision.
The wicket-keeping slot is an area of debate (of course), but on this occasion it seems an area which the selectors are unwilling to make a battle-ground, and Matt Prior should get the nod after missing out through injury in the ODIs. Phil Mustard did not make much of his opportunity in his stead, while he was never ordained to be a Test player anyway. The likes of Tim Ambrose and Steven Davies will bear consideration at some point, but for now it seems best to stick with Prior, who deserves at least the winter Tests to prove one way or another whether his century on debut was the sign of things to come or a false dawn. And at the midway stage between two home Ashes series, England's thoughts will be very much on the same lines.
Wednesday, 17 October 2007
All change please
It is unusual to accuse any sportsman under the age of 30 of being a resident of the last chance saloon. Yet for two former England players who both today left the county which reared them it seems fitting. The reasons for the continual absecne of Simon Jones and Rikki Clarke from the international scene are, of course, polar opposites; however, both find themselves in the same situation as regards their future - a hard road with only a small chance of reward at the end.
Clarke, announced today as the new Derbyshire captain, has been living in a comfort zone at The Oval for a few years now, not the first promising player from that club to fall into such a trap in recent times. Ever since his first taste of international cricket in 2003, he has failed to make a realistic claim for a regular spot with domestic runs and wickets, and his chances have generally come when the selectors have been raking up the dregs to make up numbers in the one-day side. With Andrew Flintoff now absent and possibly never to return, the need for a pace-bowling all-rounder is keenly felt; but the call comes at possibly Clarke's lowest ebb - last term his runs came at less than 25, the wickets at over 40. From stand-in captain in the opening game, he first slipped down the averages, and then out of the team, as old attitude problems began to flare up and a move away from Surrey has been forecasted since mid-season. He is still only 26, and the chance to both captain and act the role of star player is a wonderful opportunity for Clarke to realise his multi-faceted talent and make his pitch for a role in a future without Flintoff if that should arise. Peter Moores has shown his willingness to select those who impress at county level; Derbyshire have shown faith in his cricketing skill and a personality which has been questioned on more than one occasion. Now Clarke must fulfil his side of the bargain and bring home the bacon; he owes it to his new county, and in truth he owes it to himself and the potential which is a few wrong steps away from being perpetually unfulfilled.
When Simon Jones made his England debut five summers ago, in the same series as Steve Harmison, it seemed to herald a new era in English pace bowling. He picked up 4 wickets in his first Test, not before he had blasted a quickfire 40 as a warm-up. He was still, to use the technical term, "wild and wooly", but had all the attributes to be a top fast bowler, foremost the ability to bowl at a genuinely express pace. But that same winter, the world which had appeared to be at his feet came crashing down about his ears, as he snapped cruciate ligaments in Brisbane having just picked up his first Ashes wicket. It looked career threatening, but Jones pulled through, and was finally rehabilitated on the 2004 tour of the Caribbean, as England triumphed 3-0, and the fast bowling quartet which was to be the basis for a perfect year was born. Progress thereafter was somewhat stilted; he did not hold down a place in the return series that summer, and has a largely miserable tour of South Africa with Michael Vaughan seemingly unwilling to bowl him for extended periods. As the Ashes series loomed, he was definitely regarded as the weak link in England's attack. No-one, English or Australian, could have predicted the magnitude of that series or indeed Jones' significant contribution in it. He was the creator of so many great moments in a contest littered with them, the best perhaps a massive hooping reverse-swinger to which Michael Clarke shouldered arms to give those watching the best view of his off-stump being uprooted. Cruelly, in the middle of being architect for Australia's demise at Trent Bridge, and handed the new ball for the first time, his ankle gave way. He did not bowl again in that Test, although at the time it was hoped he would recover for the decider. 26 months later, and that is still his last match for England. His ankle problem mutated into a knee injury which kept him out until the beginning of 2007, with attempts to rush him back just leading to setbacks. The season just gone was supposed to be a renaissance one for Jones; as it turned out, he picked up just one wicket in Championship cricket in 89 overs of bowling. His knee would not let him alone to bowl; by all accounts, he did not look fit even when he turned out, and had none of the zip which knocked over 17 Australian wickets in 2005. Now he has turned his back on Glamorgan, and been offered refuge by Worcestershire. Perhaps a move away from the county which is his home in every sense is the best thing for Jones now, although his chances of a full recovery seem negligible. He will take comfort from the progress of Michael Vaughan, who recovered from a similarly low ebb in summer 2006 to play a full programme of Tests the next year. And while there is a long queue of prospective Test seamers, the positions are not nailed down; there is still a place for a fully fit Jones if he can recapture his best. But that is several galaxies away as we stand; hopefully he will be able to use the winter to work on the knee and at least get some overs behind him next season. For unlike Clarke, there is only so much that he can do.
Clarke, announced today as the new Derbyshire captain, has been living in a comfort zone at The Oval for a few years now, not the first promising player from that club to fall into such a trap in recent times. Ever since his first taste of international cricket in 2003, he has failed to make a realistic claim for a regular spot with domestic runs and wickets, and his chances have generally come when the selectors have been raking up the dregs to make up numbers in the one-day side. With Andrew Flintoff now absent and possibly never to return, the need for a pace-bowling all-rounder is keenly felt; but the call comes at possibly Clarke's lowest ebb - last term his runs came at less than 25, the wickets at over 40. From stand-in captain in the opening game, he first slipped down the averages, and then out of the team, as old attitude problems began to flare up and a move away from Surrey has been forecasted since mid-season. He is still only 26, and the chance to both captain and act the role of star player is a wonderful opportunity for Clarke to realise his multi-faceted talent and make his pitch for a role in a future without Flintoff if that should arise. Peter Moores has shown his willingness to select those who impress at county level; Derbyshire have shown faith in his cricketing skill and a personality which has been questioned on more than one occasion. Now Clarke must fulfil his side of the bargain and bring home the bacon; he owes it to his new county, and in truth he owes it to himself and the potential which is a few wrong steps away from being perpetually unfulfilled.
When Simon Jones made his England debut five summers ago, in the same series as Steve Harmison, it seemed to herald a new era in English pace bowling. He picked up 4 wickets in his first Test, not before he had blasted a quickfire 40 as a warm-up. He was still, to use the technical term, "wild and wooly", but had all the attributes to be a top fast bowler, foremost the ability to bowl at a genuinely express pace. But that same winter, the world which had appeared to be at his feet came crashing down about his ears, as he snapped cruciate ligaments in Brisbane having just picked up his first Ashes wicket. It looked career threatening, but Jones pulled through, and was finally rehabilitated on the 2004 tour of the Caribbean, as England triumphed 3-0, and the fast bowling quartet which was to be the basis for a perfect year was born. Progress thereafter was somewhat stilted; he did not hold down a place in the return series that summer, and has a largely miserable tour of South Africa with Michael Vaughan seemingly unwilling to bowl him for extended periods. As the Ashes series loomed, he was definitely regarded as the weak link in England's attack. No-one, English or Australian, could have predicted the magnitude of that series or indeed Jones' significant contribution in it. He was the creator of so many great moments in a contest littered with them, the best perhaps a massive hooping reverse-swinger to which Michael Clarke shouldered arms to give those watching the best view of his off-stump being uprooted. Cruelly, in the middle of being architect for Australia's demise at Trent Bridge, and handed the new ball for the first time, his ankle gave way. He did not bowl again in that Test, although at the time it was hoped he would recover for the decider. 26 months later, and that is still his last match for England. His ankle problem mutated into a knee injury which kept him out until the beginning of 2007, with attempts to rush him back just leading to setbacks. The season just gone was supposed to be a renaissance one for Jones; as it turned out, he picked up just one wicket in Championship cricket in 89 overs of bowling. His knee would not let him alone to bowl; by all accounts, he did not look fit even when he turned out, and had none of the zip which knocked over 17 Australian wickets in 2005. Now he has turned his back on Glamorgan, and been offered refuge by Worcestershire. Perhaps a move away from the county which is his home in every sense is the best thing for Jones now, although his chances of a full recovery seem negligible. He will take comfort from the progress of Michael Vaughan, who recovered from a similarly low ebb in summer 2006 to play a full programme of Tests the next year. And while there is a long queue of prospective Test seamers, the positions are not nailed down; there is still a place for a fully fit Jones if he can recapture his best. But that is several galaxies away as we stand; hopefully he will be able to use the winter to work on the knee and at least get some overs behind him next season. For unlike Clarke, there is only so much that he can do.
Monday, 15 October 2007
A game in flux
Exits, farewells, downfalls. These have been the staple of one of the busiest ever years of international cricket, at the end of which it is hard to refute the suggestion that the generational shift which must occur in every cycle has come about, and that a mini golden-age has come to an end. Australia, as they have for the last decade or more, have led the way, both in terms of success and goodbyes. The Ashes whitewash and third consecutive World Cup title were epoch making, while the departure of Warne and McGrath marked the end for two of the supreme practitioners of their respective arts and the cessation of one of the greatest ever bowling partnerships. Other luminaries were denied the glorious ends which their careers and talent deserved; Brian Lara, his batting talent matched by none of his era and few of any, suffered a miserable denouement, a reflection on the decline of West Indies cricket over the course of his international career, which only his genius could transcend. Inzamam Ul Haq, who combined the lifestyle of a 1980s cricketer with the demands of a modern one and whose batting was a unique mixture of bulk and deft touch was given a contrived end to his 120 Test career, but fell 3 runs short of eclipsing Javed Miandad's record. The bell has also begun to toll for Shaun Pollock, dropped for the first time in 107 Tests and 12 years, while for Sanath Jayasuriya and Adam Gilchrist, an opening partnership which would grace any all-time ODI XI, 73 combined years of experience suggest the end is not too far off.
And it is not just great players who are on the way out. Captains have been on the merry-go-round, with India, Pakistan, New Zealand and England all under different leadership in at least one form of the game. Coaches too are in transit after a longish period of continuity: gone are Fletcher, Buchanan, Moody, Chappell and, tragically, Woolmer. In come Moores, Nielsen, Bayliss and Lawson. Household names none, reputations very much to be proved. Even the form of the game being played is under question, especially when one views the respective successes of the 50 and 20 over tournaments.
Perversely, it could be Australia who are hit hardest by the changing of the guard. Gone are Warne and McGrath, the magnitude and greatness of whose efforts cannot be explained ed or rationalised in words. The cold, harsh reality is that their two most consistent matchwinners are no longer available; include the retirement of opener Justin Langer, and it is well over 300 caps which have waltzed off into the sunset. Langer's position should be the easiest to fill, although the identity of his successor is open to question. One option is to promote the next opener in line, probably Phil Jaques. However, were they to reassign Mike Hussey to his original calling at the top of affairs, it would open up a middle order spot whose owner could be chosen from a larger pool, including Brad Hodge and the younger Hussey David. With Hayden probably looking no further than 2009, it might be a shrewd move to promote Hussey to the top, leaving at least one experienced hand when the second half of the modern game's greatest opening partnership calls it a day.
The composition of the bowling arsenal will spark much more debate and is the more vital issue. Warne and McGrath cannot be replaced in kind; the latter a once in a generation bowler, the former a once in a lifetime. But Australia do have formidable seam resources ready to fill the breach. Stuart Clark is at the forefront after a stupendously successful beginning to his Test career; he is not as much a McGrath clone as is generally claimed, but that does not stop him from being an extremely fine bowler, well capable of continuing to take lots of cheap wickets. Brett Lee will also have to make the step-up from support shock bowler to leading man, a role which previous experience has suggested he would be better served acting with guitar rather than ball in hand. If he struggles he could soon find himself cast aside, with his wonderbollocks reputation threatened on two fronts, gunslinger Shaun Tait and scourge of India Mitchell "magic" Johnson. English fans will have happy memories of Tait, who suffered when thrown in at the business end of the 2005 Ashes; his run-leaking spells and Kevin Pietersen's aerial assualt on his fine-leg boundary at The Oval are what will be boorishly recalled, although not to be forgotten the sort of delivery which sent Geraint Jones' off-stump on a walk long enough to warrant sponsorship for Sir Ian Botham's Leukemia Research. Less is known about Johnson, but he has turned in enough matchwinning performances in his short ODI career to put Dennis Lillee's much heralded comments about him in the valley of possibility. Alongside these sleek, flashy new motors is a relative tractor, Tasmanian brickie Ben Hilfenhaus. His state of origin may be less fashionable, the name lent less to an easy headline, but Hilfenhaus could well turn out to be the best of the bunch. His persistent outswing earned him 60 wickets last Australian season and his state Tasmania their maiden Championship, reward mostly achieved on the surfaces at the Bellerive Oval in Hobart, about the most unforgiving in the country.
And that is just the seamers. The question of who would replace Warne has been the most loaded in Australian cricket for a few years now, and still there is no heir apparent. And, conceivably, there will never be, not in this lifetime. Staurt MacGill will do a good job for a few years, or Bradd Hogg if the selectors' patience with MacGill's temperament has finally expired. But beyond the near future, no-one is poised to step into the breach. The two most likely are off-spinner Dan Cullen and leggie Cullen Bailey, both of South Australia, but neither has a particularly flattering First Class record. The simple truth is that bowling spin in Australia is an ever more difficult task, and that the Australian bowling attack will have to recalibrate itself to the setting of pace, with the spinner more an interlude than the symphony Warne continually produced.
Australia are not alone in experiencing a transitional phase. England may be seen by many as the second best Test side, but they have won no real series of note since 2005, victories against Pakistan and West Indies both mitigated by the weakness of the opposition. The attempt to meld the remaining Ashes winners with the new guard has produced a result which still shows the fissure-lines of its formation, and injuries and the absence of key players continues to drag them down. India defeated them away from home, a significant achievement, albeit with England's entire first-string bowling missing. However, the power trio of Tendulkar, Ganguly and Dravid have begun to look tired and out of place. A new Test captain is needed, while the one-day side has really suffered, defeated unexpectedly in England and thumped at home by Australia. Pakistan are similarly struggling to compete in the brave new world without Inzy and Shoaib, while Sri Lanka have glimpsed the future without Muralitharan and with Jayasuriya and Vaas struggling.
The uncertainty does bring some excitement to the international game, and the chance for the first time in a long time to challenge the Australian dominance. However, this will be well achieved; without Warne and McGrath they will win fewer games but defeating them will still be a formidable proposition. But, nevertheless, the new ingredients have been tossed into the melting pot, and it remains to be seen whether this heralds an exciting new dawn, or just longing for what has now been and gone.
And it is not just great players who are on the way out. Captains have been on the merry-go-round, with India, Pakistan, New Zealand and England all under different leadership in at least one form of the game. Coaches too are in transit after a longish period of continuity: gone are Fletcher, Buchanan, Moody, Chappell and, tragically, Woolmer. In come Moores, Nielsen, Bayliss and Lawson. Household names none, reputations very much to be proved. Even the form of the game being played is under question, especially when one views the respective successes of the 50 and 20 over tournaments.
Perversely, it could be Australia who are hit hardest by the changing of the guard. Gone are Warne and McGrath, the magnitude and greatness of whose efforts cannot be explained ed or rationalised in words. The cold, harsh reality is that their two most consistent matchwinners are no longer available; include the retirement of opener Justin Langer, and it is well over 300 caps which have waltzed off into the sunset. Langer's position should be the easiest to fill, although the identity of his successor is open to question. One option is to promote the next opener in line, probably Phil Jaques. However, were they to reassign Mike Hussey to his original calling at the top of affairs, it would open up a middle order spot whose owner could be chosen from a larger pool, including Brad Hodge and the younger Hussey David. With Hayden probably looking no further than 2009, it might be a shrewd move to promote Hussey to the top, leaving at least one experienced hand when the second half of the modern game's greatest opening partnership calls it a day.
The composition of the bowling arsenal will spark much more debate and is the more vital issue. Warne and McGrath cannot be replaced in kind; the latter a once in a generation bowler, the former a once in a lifetime. But Australia do have formidable seam resources ready to fill the breach. Stuart Clark is at the forefront after a stupendously successful beginning to his Test career; he is not as much a McGrath clone as is generally claimed, but that does not stop him from being an extremely fine bowler, well capable of continuing to take lots of cheap wickets. Brett Lee will also have to make the step-up from support shock bowler to leading man, a role which previous experience has suggested he would be better served acting with guitar rather than ball in hand. If he struggles he could soon find himself cast aside, with his wonderbollocks reputation threatened on two fronts, gunslinger Shaun Tait and scourge of India Mitchell "magic" Johnson. English fans will have happy memories of Tait, who suffered when thrown in at the business end of the 2005 Ashes; his run-leaking spells and Kevin Pietersen's aerial assualt on his fine-leg boundary at The Oval are what will be boorishly recalled, although not to be forgotten the sort of delivery which sent Geraint Jones' off-stump on a walk long enough to warrant sponsorship for Sir Ian Botham's Leukemia Research. Less is known about Johnson, but he has turned in enough matchwinning performances in his short ODI career to put Dennis Lillee's much heralded comments about him in the valley of possibility. Alongside these sleek, flashy new motors is a relative tractor, Tasmanian brickie Ben Hilfenhaus. His state of origin may be less fashionable, the name lent less to an easy headline, but Hilfenhaus could well turn out to be the best of the bunch. His persistent outswing earned him 60 wickets last Australian season and his state Tasmania their maiden Championship, reward mostly achieved on the surfaces at the Bellerive Oval in Hobart, about the most unforgiving in the country.
And that is just the seamers. The question of who would replace Warne has been the most loaded in Australian cricket for a few years now, and still there is no heir apparent. And, conceivably, there will never be, not in this lifetime. Staurt MacGill will do a good job for a few years, or Bradd Hogg if the selectors' patience with MacGill's temperament has finally expired. But beyond the near future, no-one is poised to step into the breach. The two most likely are off-spinner Dan Cullen and leggie Cullen Bailey, both of South Australia, but neither has a particularly flattering First Class record. The simple truth is that bowling spin in Australia is an ever more difficult task, and that the Australian bowling attack will have to recalibrate itself to the setting of pace, with the spinner more an interlude than the symphony Warne continually produced.
Australia are not alone in experiencing a transitional phase. England may be seen by many as the second best Test side, but they have won no real series of note since 2005, victories against Pakistan and West Indies both mitigated by the weakness of the opposition. The attempt to meld the remaining Ashes winners with the new guard has produced a result which still shows the fissure-lines of its formation, and injuries and the absence of key players continues to drag them down. India defeated them away from home, a significant achievement, albeit with England's entire first-string bowling missing. However, the power trio of Tendulkar, Ganguly and Dravid have begun to look tired and out of place. A new Test captain is needed, while the one-day side has really suffered, defeated unexpectedly in England and thumped at home by Australia. Pakistan are similarly struggling to compete in the brave new world without Inzy and Shoaib, while Sri Lanka have glimpsed the future without Muralitharan and with Jayasuriya and Vaas struggling.
The uncertainty does bring some excitement to the international game, and the chance for the first time in a long time to challenge the Australian dominance. However, this will be well achieved; without Warne and McGrath they will win fewer games but defeating them will still be a formidable proposition. But, nevertheless, the new ingredients have been tossed into the melting pot, and it remains to be seen whether this heralds an exciting new dawn, or just longing for what has now been and gone.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)
.jpg)