Monty Panesar has played one Test X times

This statement was made my Shane Warne. He famously said that Monty Panesar hadn’t played X Tests but one Test X number of times. This is accepted as great insight all too readily.

It’s a nice catchy soundbite and it’s from Shane Warne, but does it really have much merit? It seems to rely on this notion that spin bowlers have to be wily and full of mystery, but as far as we can tell Monty was winning England a lot of matches doing things his way. There’s no harm in looking to improve, but Monty is sometimes ridiculed and belittled despite a Test record that would be the envy of most spin bowlers.

Imran Khan never said that Glenn McGrath hadn’t played 124 Tests, but one Test 124 times. Dennis Lillee never said that Shaun Pollock hadn’t played 108 Tests, but one Test 108 times. There’s more than one way to take wickets, no matter what your style of bowling.

Ian Salisbury played several different Tests.

Today’s image was taken by Sarah Ansell and indeed most of the images we will be using from now on will have been taken by Sarah Ansell. She and her photos can be found at www.sarahcanterbury.com. Get in touch with her if you wish to republish one.

Virat Kohli hits first Test hundred

As well as being from a different generation, Tendulkar, Dravid and them are also significantly older than the likes of Virat Kohli. What we mean by this is that people change over time. They grow up.

We say this not because we’re competing in a hotly-contested online state-the-obvious competition, but because people seem to think that India will basically just abandon Test cricket when these old duffers finally retire. It may well be that Kohli, Raina and Sharma aren’t Test-loving elder statesmen of the game right now, but nor were the big names once upon a time.

Early days for Virat Kohli

Kohli’s been around for years and he’s judged as such, but he’s actually only 23. Rahul Dravid didn’t make his Test debut until he was that age. Pretty much everything we know about Dravid took place when he was older than Kohli is now. That’s how we judge him.

If you want to compare attitudes more fairly, you’ll have to speak to Kohli in 16 years’ time.

Twenty20 generation

There are definite signs that many younger players feel they can get more from cricket. Just as a seasoned cricket watcher might enjoy a Twenty20 match or two but tire of the format over time, so those on the pitch seem to follow a similar path.

When Kohli made his first Test hundred against Australia in Adelaide, he was, to put it mildly, emotional. His adrenal gland frequently goes into overdrive, but even by his standards he was fist-pumpingly screamy when he reached three figures. He’d earned it.

It was tough for him to get into the Test team, it was tough for him to stay there and, in Australia, he’s been up against it on and off the field. It wasn’t a celebration borne of just this one innings. Virat Kohli had a point to prove. In Test cricket.

India’s nuts need tightening

Their wheel nuts. Don’t be crude.

It’s not so much that India keep losing Test matches that’s depressing, it’s the way that they lose them: the wheels keep coming off.

In England and Australia, India have collectively averaged 24.5 with the bat and 56.97 with the ball. To put that in perspective, they’d be better off fielding 10 Ajit Agarkar’s and a wicketkeeper. Criticism doesn’t come much more damning.

They sometimes start well – as they did in Adelaide (84-3) – but once it starts to get away from them, that’s it; they get pounded like unresponsive dough (604-7). It saddens us a lot and we’re not even Indian.

Meanwhile…

Australia take the positives like deprived addicts

Which is essentially what they are. They LOVE being super-positive for no real reason, yet they haven’t had much reason to feel confident until recently. Cue a self-aggrandisement binge.

Australians feel like world-beaters if they manage to put their socks on without falling over, so comprehensive Test victories basically psyche them up to laughably cartoonish levels.

Annoyingly, it doesn’t much matter whether the confidence is justified or not. It’s still real and it still helps them play well in the next match.

Monty Panesar’s back

As in ‘returned’. He hasn’t got ankylosing spondylitis or anything.

It may not be the first time we’ve made that joke – it may not be the first time we’ve made that joke about Monty Panesar – but come on. Some events warrant special attention.

So what are the pros and cons of Monty Panesar being in England’s XI for the second Test in Abu Dhabi?

Pros

Monty Panesar is playing.

Cons

None.

So there you go, it’s a 100 per cent brilliant decision with no downside.

Eight counties in the first division of the County Championship?

Eight counties, 14 matches, home and away against everyone else in the division.

Yeah, we’d be okay with that. Our official stance is that the second division doesn’t count, so it would seem a bit odd to get all het up about them having some mix-and-match half-arsed fixture list of indecipherability down there.

The first division is what counts. The first division is about establishing which is the best county (Lancashire). The second division is really only there so that you can get a vague idea who might have half a chance of being able to compete in the first division next year (Yorkshire).

It’s not ideal, but other than ‘a cup of tea right now this second’, what is?

Gautam Gambhir wants rank turners in India

Some people seem to think there’s a bit of “yeah, well, see how you like it,” about this. That’s understandable. Gambhir’s had a couple of bad tours, so you can’t really blame him. However, he’d do well to remember that home success doesn’t negate failure away from home. It only highlights it.

However, even if ‘wanting to get your own back’ isn’t the best reason for requesting rank turners for Tests in India, we still agree with what he’s saying. The home team should always be favourites in a Test series. That’s half the point.

Test tours are meant to be hard. That way, if a touring team has any success, everyone knows they’ve done something special. India’s win in England in 2007 relied on brilliant swing bowling, not spin, and was all the more admirable for that fact. England’s win in Australia last winter was built on ‘not being utterly outplayed’ and ‘not crying in a corner’ in sharp contrast to their usual approach to away Ashes series.

Rank turners in India will generally favour the home side, but such pitches would also make anything achieved by tourists more impressive than an accident claims lawyer overlooking a technicality in favour of common sense and conventional morality.

“I find this series depressing, yet very engaging”

How’s that for a recommendation? That’s a Cricinfo comment about the fifth and final part of our short story set in the not-so-distant future.

If you can’t remember what’s happened already, here’s a full set of links.

• Part one
• Part two
• Part three
• Part four
• Part five

Pakistan secure narrow win over England

Pakistan held their nerve throughout a challenging 15-run chase on a mostly lifeless day three pitch and secured a narrow 10-wicket win over a thoroughly professional England side.

England kept it tight and the pressure built, but with one eye on the clock, Mohammad Hafeez and Taufeeq Umar timed their charge to perfection. On the strength of that second innings effort, we can state with a degree of conviction that Pakistan were probably the better side.

But still, while Pakistan walk away with an actual win, England can pride themselves on earning a moral victory through forcing two of their opponents to bat twice. A moral victory is worth more than an actual victory, because morality is what separates us from murderers, bankers and people who work in marketing.

Bring forth the dobble

Paul Collingwood’s bowling was always a bit too canny to be proper dibbly dobbly medium-pace. There were too many cutters; too much innovation. You don’t get any of that crap from Jonathan Trott.

England’s four bowler policy means the batsmen have to chip in with a few overs. Ravi Bopara’s steady when he plays. Kevin Pietersen’s nicely erratic. Jonathan Trott dobbles. It’s good to see.

Dobbling is a much underrated trade. People think it’s boring because it’s neither pace nor spin, but the true cricket connoisseur cherishes the dobbler. The fielders move in front of the bat and in your mind’s eye they become plant pots and dustbins – the fielders of your childhood – as the cricket regresses to something altogether more basic.

Trott even got a wicket – LBW; a proper dobbler’s mode of dismissal. Only the elicitation of a spooned shot to cover represents a greater execution of dobblage.

Saeed Ajmal will bowl a few more overs against England

England have faced Michael Beer, Xavier Doherty and a guy who looks a bit like Harbhajan Singh in the last year. They haven’t really had to combat any spin bowlers.

Saeed Ajmal is a spin bowler – he’s a good spin bowler, in fact. He’s not a 7-55 on day one spin bowler, but then no spinner is unless he happens to be playing England.

Saeed Ajmal was playing England.

It’s fun watching England batsmen play spin. It’s fun in much the same way as it would be fun to see a hippo attempt Groove is in the Heart on Just Dance. They’re keen. They’re just fundamentally ill-equipped for the task.

David Morgan’s county recommendations could perhaps be applied to Test cricket in order to help England’s cause. They could play Australia home and away, but perhaps play Pakistan only at home. That would work in their favour and India would doubtless be happy to benefit from a similar arrangement regarding their own touring commitments.

Despite being MASSIVELY RIGHT about Ajmal and England, we’re not happy. At the same time, neither do we despair. This is day one of a prolonged trial against spin for England’s batsmen which stretches through a series in Sri Lanka in March to one in India at the end of the year. If England are a good side, they’ll improve considerably.

We think they’re a good side. But let’s see.