England cricket news
It’s not dead yet, but let’s take our cleaver and dice it anyway. It’s only a matter of time.
No Kevin Pietersen, the man of the tournament the only time England won a big competition, so who’s going to pick up the slack?
Well not Joe Root. He’s got a broken thumb. Since breaking it, he’s scored a hundred and taken a wicket in his first over while opening the bowling, but you really don’t want to risk valuable young cricketers when they’re injured. That leaves us with something like:
- Michael Lumb
- Alex Hales
- Luke Wright
- Eoin Morgan
- Jos Buttler
- Ravi Bopara
- Ben Stokes
Of those, we are very, very happy with Morgan, Buttler and Bopara, but anticipate flakiness from the other four. Hales is in credit, but seems happier against fast bowlers, who might not be so plentiful on Bangladesh’s pitches. It’s a similar story with Wright. After 44 T20 international innings, he averages 18 and his four fifties were scored against New Zealand (two), Afghanistan and the Netherlands. He doesn’t inspire confidence.
This is where things look really wonky. In fact, most of the bowlers aren’t actually bowlers – they’re all-rounders. We know that it’s all about having ‘options’ but you also want things to go well once you’ve taken one of those options. Where are the specialists?
Well there’s James Tredwell, whose one-day economy doesn’t seem to translate so well to the shortest format and there’s Chris Jordan whose economy rate in domestic T20 is a worrying 8.59. There’s Tim Bresnan, who’s nice and sensible and there’s Jade Dernbach, who we’re not even going to bother passing comment on. Finally, there’s Stephen Parry who’s the non-spinning spinner no-one’s heard of who will probably outbowl everyone. England like to find a new one of those for each World T20 tournament.
There may or may not be Stuart Broad. England’s captain is out of the current series, but they’re giving him a knee injection. He doesn’t seem certain whether it’s his fourth or fifth.
It makes sense considering:
“It’s just gradually got worse throughout the winter with the amount of bowling I’ve been doing – no real break – so it’s something I need to act on now to make sure I’m fit and firing for that World Cup.”
As we said earlier, sometimes you have to risk valuable young cricketers even when they’re injured. Wait. What did we say earlier?12 Appeals
‘How about we put together a nice cosy environment where everyone goes along with everything Alastair says?’
Imagine we’re not talking about cricket for a second and put yourself in a position where someone’s just said that to you. How do you feel? Do you think that sounds like a good idea? Some bloke called Alastair? Does he know best?
As ever, there’s the fact that we DON’T KNOW ANYTHING AT ALL, but if you overlook that minor detail and read the words of yesterday’s ECB statement, that first paragraph feels like the subtext.
“We must invest in our captain Alastair Cook and we must support him in creating a culture in which we can be confident he will have the full support of all players, with everyone pulling in the same direction and able to trust each other.”
No. You earn support. You earn support by making good decisions. Did England lose because the captain didn’t have the full support of his team, or did the captain not have the full support of the team because they were losing?
People should be challenged. Leaders, in particular, need to be challenged – if only because they tend to be the kinds of people who think they know best. The kinds of people who see themselves as leaders are, by and large, less open to other opinions than your average sentient human.
We’ll be honest, our opinion is coloured by our own experiences, but we’ve been in enough work situations where someone has demanded loyalty to know that it is almost always a sign that they have lost control – usually because that person doesn’t really know what they’re doing.
The disappointing part is that we’d kind of warmed to Alastair Cook’s captaincy. Back when he was the anointed one, we were far from onside, but the more Shane Warne slagged him off, the more we thought he was doing plenty right. The on-field tactics were often a bit wobbly, but that’s the kind of thing you can pick up over time. The off-field stuff’s harder and Cook appeared to be keeping things together.
That view would now appear to be massively, massively wrong. A week or so ago, we really felt like this winter battering might have been the making of Cook. They say what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger, but apparently it can also make you weaker and a little bit insecure.28 Appeals
In our experience, the employees most likely to be considered ‘team players’ are the obedient, unquestioning ones. Management may make great show of inviting feedback – and they may honestly believe that they’re open to it – but the truth is that no-one makes a decision thinking it is the wrong one.
Most of us, when our thinking is questioned, are liable to grow defensive. We’re also likely to somewhat take against the person who is challenging us. A manager might think: “Why are you trying to undermine me? Why can’t you be more of a team player, like Alan or Deano?”
This sort of situation is compounded when the questioner reads social situations badly and when the person being criticised is feeling vulnerable anyway. We wonder to what extent this might be what happened with Kevin Pietersen, Alastair Cook and Andy Flower in Australia.
Motives and execution
The Telegraph is reporting a Pietersen ‘rant’ about Andy Flower during a players’ meeting. You can easily imagine that he might have gone about things the wrong way, but was what he was saying really so radically different to what the rest of the players were feeling?
Cook and Prior called the meeting because they felt they were relying too heavily on Flower. It seems Pietersen was of a similar mind, but felt that this was Flower’s fault. This is a distinction, but his motives for speaking up were the same: the team weren’t playing well and he had identified a lack of self-reliance among the players.
At heart, he still wanted the team to improve, but expressed himself badly with the effect perhaps magnified by his frustration at being marginalised.
Threat to sense of self
Andy Flower is a strong man. Few would question that. Could a man who took a stand against Robert Mugabe ever feel threatened by someone like Kevin Pietersen?
Well, perhaps. Taking a stand against a dictator takes courage, but if anything it is an act which adds to your sense of self. You can take pride in what you’ve done. It is not easier to do than accepting you were wrong about something – but it is a different thing. Accepting you were wrong means acknowledging your own fallibility and who can readily take pride in that? Flower might well not be that kind of person.
It’s the flipside of having conviction. When things are going badly, conviction might manifest itself as greater certainty that you are right and a belief that what is going wrong is that people aren’t doing exactly what you want them to do. All your repressed insecurities and self-doubt might therefore become focused on those who question you the most (and in the clumsiest manner).
A strong, confident, self-assured leader of men
Alastair Cook was perhaps in a similar position. He will certainly have been having doubts about his ability to lead the team – he’s said as much himself. That’s not a strong base from which to withstand questions about the way you’re going about things. It’s easy to say that valid points should be taken on board by those in authority, but insecurity can affect us all – particularly when the defeats are piling up.
We’ve done another Pietersen piece for Cricinfo. You’re probably a bit weary of it all by now, but if you’re not, it’s about the ECB information vacuum and the concept of ‘rebuilding’.29 Appeals
Remember when England dropped Nick Compton? At the time, we thought maybe they were getting a little bit ahead of themselves. People said Joe Root was amazing and there were loads of other amazing batsmen queuing up to play for England and come on, come on, bring us the future; the future’s going to be amazing multiplied by amazing!
A few months later, 33-year-old Mike Carberry made 78 against a Western Australia Chairman’s XI and England were now in a position where they thought: “Oh, okay, er, maybe he could open the batting? And then Joe Root could move back down the order? Yeah? Yeah?”
Sometimes you can overestimate the quality of what you have in reserve. Particularly if you’re cocky and kind of stupid.
But of course we’re in a completely different situation now. Back then, England were planning for a glorious future and ushering in talented youngsters in a bid to experience it sooner. Now England are shit. Now it’s time to rebuild with talented youngsters. You know, like Australia did earlier in the year.
Because surely that should be the template for how to turn a team around? Except for the likes of Chris Rogers, Mitchell Johnson, Brad Haddin, Ryan Harris and a few others, Australia started afresh, didn’t they? They gave youth its head.
When times are tough, you have to move on. It’s vital to start rebuilding and the first step in that process is to chuck any half-decent bricks you find into a skip. It’s not sinful waste, you see – it’s long-term planning. You can’t really judge the wisdom of these decisions now because it’s a long-term thing. It’s all going to be fine. Stop questioning the ECB’s wisdom, okay? Just stop.51 Appeals
Granted, we work for them, but we’ve been very impressed with Cricinfo recently – specifically with regards to their near-refusal to report on the latest ‘Kevin Pietersen situation’. They’ve pretty much restricted themselves to one ‘it’s being reported that senior figures are to meet on Tuesday to decide the future of Kevin Pietersen’ article, when they could easily have produced daily non-news on the subject, adding to the general nowtstorm that’s been raging of late.
If you don’t know what’s happening, you’re not alone. Even those of us who have been foolish enough to try and follow this saga don’t know what’s happening because there have been very few specifics.
The Guardian has been most guilty, churning out article after article dotted with ‘it is thought’ and ‘there is a belief/feeling’ with very little in the way of actual detail. It’s been infuriating to read. When the writer appears to know something, but feels they cannot put it across using specifics, it’s immensely frustrating.
We’re not sure whether it’s a sign of a journalist being disconnected from their audience, assuming they’ll pick up on whispers and allusions in the same way as their press box pals, but it makes for bad writing, lacking in value, in our eyes. Perhaps there’s a narrative to the writer, but from the reader’s point of view, hearsay has been repeated until a point at which it is then presented as fact.
A vague overview of the situation
Sorry, it can’t be anything but vague because as far as a non-journalist is concerned, dramatic things are happening for no clear reason.
- ‘Poor behaviour’ from Pietersen has been mentioned
- Being ‘high maintenance’ is another of the charges
- Pietersen is said to be ‘a bad influence’ on younger England players
- Alastair Cook, Ashley Giles and Paul Downton are apparently meeting today to decide whether Pietersen should be ejected from the team
Even if there does turn out to be some major issue that precipitates the end of Pietersen’s England career, it won’t negate criticisms of earlier coverage of the story.
When you were a child, there was probably an occasion when some other kid claimed to know ‘a secret’ and wouldn’t tell you what it was. They hinted and mocked you, but wouldn’t relent. Eventually, a third party whispered in your ear and everything became clear, but that didn’t mean that the first kid hadn’t been acting like a complete dick.29 Appeals
It’s hard to pinpoint precisely when the final wheel fell off. It was probably a couple of months ago, but England’s cricketers have had to continue shoving “it” along anyway. No wonder they ended up going round in circles.
It’s not been the best tour. In a vain effort to gain a well-paid but pointless position at the ECB, let’s take the positives.
We can see it now. England are already drafting their excuses for when he’s injured. “We need to find another all-rounder because it’s impossible to balance the side in his absence. He’s effectively two players in one and 12 into 11 won’t go.”
His bowling’s solid but unspectacular. His batting’s surprisingly unshowy. His mental resilience appears first rate. A three-format, two-discipline cricketer – expect diminishing returns as he’s worn to a nub.
We’ve warmed to Broad quite a lot during this tour. Not that we ever disliked him, but he’s always been hard to really root for. However, it takes a certain kind of person to be bullied by an entire nation and not buckle; to in fact take pride in it.
Delusion can be a strength for an international sportsman and Broad has somehow played well in a weak side when throwing in the towel and sleepwalking through a few matches would have been infinitely easier. If only he could stop saying ‘to be fair’ in interviews.
Back when England’s pace bowling strength in depth seemed like a real thing, you could get down as far as Ajmal Shahzad and still think that he’d probably do okay given a run in the Test team. Nowadays, Steven Finn’s turned into Ishant Sharma at the end of a one-day international.
In this new and murky light, Chris Jordan somehow looked like he backed up the positive impression he made when appearing in our county cricket round-up pretty much every time we bothered to write it. He managed this despite taking six wickets at 42 in the one-day series. Honestly, what a tour.
Sort of carried on doing what he does – something almost no other England player managed. The fact that ‘what he does’ is mind-blowingly spectacular is a bonus.
Why did you push it without wheels for so long? Look what you’ve done to the axles. And the chassis. Junaid Khan (new non-blasphemous exclamation), it’s a right mess. It’s going to really cost you to get this fixed.16 Appeals
And England give their coach the boot. At least that’s the case according to ‘reports’.
We’re not actually suggesting that the two events are linked. We’re just struck by the fact that we’ve been sitting around checking the cricket news once every four minutes for the whole of the last week only for something to happen the minute we step away.
A watched Cricinfo never breaks news, as the old adage goes.
Some of you are suggesting we should have some sort of official stance on this development, but, like we say, we have had a pint. It was called ‘long hop’ funnily enough.
There’s a suggestion that Flower might take up some other job within the ECB. Doubt he’ll be running the website, so maybe he’ll become ‘mega-director’ or ‘stategist emperor’ or something, in which case his not being coach will seem less significant. We don’t know. We haven’t even finished reading the article yet. We’ve been otherwise engaged.31 Appeals
We ask that not even knowing whether it’s still a draft or not? When does a draft proposal become an official proposal? When they actually come to vote on it? Presumably that’ll only happen once everything’s been thrashed out, in which case official proposal status will be a transient and meaningless state.
Whatever it is, where are we? Our answer is: don’t know.
There have been all sorts of changes in the last few days as the various pedlars, wide boys and shysters tweak things in order to get enough people onside. We’ve heard about a few of these changes, but there is sure to be plenty more going on that we don’t know about.
The upshot is that the future of the sport hinges on a vote on proposals the exact nature of which are unknown to us. Being as the whole thing’s entirely out of our hands anyway, we suppose that doesn’t especially matter in any practical sense.
In other news, Bangladesh got battered by Sri Lanka. You probably saw. Shakib al Hasan was hoping it would be a spicy pitch. Sri Lanka scored 730-6.21 Appeals
It doesn’t really matter which format gave rise to it, no-one wants to see a headline reading ‘Australia’s mastery entrenched’, which is what we just saw over at Cricinfo.
Nothing good is ever entrenched. Tuesday night pub night isn’t entrenched, despite having persisted for over a decade. Nor is our taste for salt and pepper chicken wings entrenched. If something’s entrenched, it implies that the wider world wants to dig it out and end the horror.
Racist views are entrenched. Problems are entrenched. Soldiers engaged in a long, arduous and inhumane war might be entrenched. When something is entrenched, it is always, always a bad thing.
This is a time for heros. Michael Lumb, Luke Wright, Jade Dernbach and Danny Briggs – lead us from this squalid realm. Lead us to a 2-1 series defeat which, while still undeniably a loss, at least hints that Australia’s mastery is not entrenched.11 Appeals
On the face of it, there should be plenty to say about the fifth one-day international, but shortly after watching it we didn’t feel moved to write anything. A day later, we’re left with one abiding truth: we should feel a little more strongly than ‘peeved’ when England throw away any match against Australia.
It’s over half a year since either team played anyone else. We were momentarily elated when James Tredwell edged to the keeper, giving Australia the win, because we thought it was all over. Then we remembered the Twenty20 internationals. There are three of them. They finish in February and at that point it will be 17 months until the Ashes.
We’re beginning to live through what we saw on the horizon back when we got rather irate about them scheduling 10 Ashes Tests in a row. It’s becoming a weird, philosophical exercise, more than a series of cricket matches. We’re starting to ask ourself questions like: if you replace all of the components of something, is it still the same thing? Is a team with Nathan Coulter-Nile and without Mitchell Johnson still ‘Australia’ if it wears the right clothes? What about a team with Danny Briggs, Alex Hales and Luke Wright in it? Is that still England? They call them specialists, but is this specialism or dilution?
And why is it that we find ourself asking such questions specifically now, in the aftermath of an ostensibly compelling match?18 Appeals