Jul 2016 – Page 2 – Being Outside Cricket

Whitaker’s For The Sack – Comma

Jul 20, 2016Jul 20, 2016LordCanisLupus38 Comments

Well. Here we go again. Scapegoating by “good journalism” after a defeat. We’ve sure been here before.

Whitaker

I’ll give Paul Newman something. He sure knows how to rouse the media to a story, and he sure has the “sources” to back him up. Naturally, this prima facie case of “good journalism” throws James Whitaker, Mike Newell and Angus Fraser under the bus, keeps Trevor Bayliss on board as the driver who doesn’t quite know his way, and Alastair Cook as the conductor, shouting and barking his words, but being far enough from the action not to be culpable. Meanwhile, stretching this metaphor beyond breaking point, Strauss acts as Bus Inspector Blakey (from On the Buses for you oldies out there) spouting “I hate you Whitaker” and we have, after one defeat, when a player is left out of the team on health grounds, some unhealthy scapegoats to target. Stop me if we’ve been here before.

Oh yes, and if we weren’t perturbed enough already there’s a begging letter from “the greatest England Coach ever” to come back as some all-knowing, all-seeing eye. Funny how that came out on the day Ben Duckett made 163 in a romp for the England Lions.

The Four Journos

Today Selfey and Berry have followed suit with the comments that the current structure is archaic, and that we need a new format for selecting the team. This sort of groupthink, co-ordinated or derived, or both, is the sort we’ve seen for years. Andrew Strauss is still very much in the plus column when it comes to his achievements with Team England, and the Comma Master may well wish to spread his Mindflicking wings and take a good look at a selection process. A process which has had zero scrutiny (in public) once Strauss put it to bed in the immediate aftermath of the I don’t trust KP monologue in May 2015, but out of the blue surfaces when we lose a game quite narrowly, and one of our key players has not played because he was told not to by medical experts – a marginal call some said, but one heeded by the selectors, who were actually doing their jobs.

There’s the rub, and it stinks. Newman tweeted last week, before the test, that Anderson looked fine in the nets, so why wasn’t he in the squad? Former New Zealand bowler Iain O’Brien helpfully pointed out that bowling in the nets was not the same as 20 overs on a flat deck at Lord’s in a test match (in possibly warm weather) and was (maybe temporarily) blocked by Newman on Twitter! (Join the club Iain – but, apparently we are irrelevant and he never reads us, so why he had a fit with me, I don’t know!) My sniffer dog nose for inside tracks was going overboard – why would Newman undermine the selection committee, and medical experts, to the length he’d block a former test bowler for calling him out on it, if there wasn’t more to it? Then it hit you yesterday. This looked like an inside job all right. People running from a decision, and running from their assumptions of a comfortable series win to explain away a surprise defeat. Suddenly Whitaker is in the crosshairs. An inside job.

The same inside job that absolutely looks like has been perpetrated on Nick Compton. Sure, his form merited being dropped, but Newman cites this as another example of the selectors not being fit for purpose. He was “mystified” why Compton was given an extra chance to prove himself at the start of the Sri Lankan series, when that contest against overmatched opposition gave us the chance to blood a new player (ignoring, of course, how successful the blooding of new player James Vince has been) and is now continuing that whispering campaign against Gary Ballance. Both of these are conveniently lumped on top of the non-selection of Anderson in particular as massive errors.

These things do not appear out of the ether. The whispers around Compton was he was a bit of an oddball, a bit intense, a bit “not suited to test cricket”. He fell out with Andy Flower. Rumours were Cook didn’t like opening with him because they were both attritional. Trevor Bayliss never wanted him because he wanted two dashers and a steady one in the top three. Compton was primed to fail. The same whispers about how Ballance refused to change his technique which secured him four test centuries once dropped, which now has him classed as a failure while Hales and Vince await their first. This has all the hallmarks of the impervious inner sanctum of days of yore. You know, the one that there were never leaks from, but plenty of good journalism to go round. You have to wonder who is squawking in the camp, but I don’t think things are as tickety-boo as they were when we were winning overseas series and preparing for a 7-0 summer. For starters, Pakistan were meant to be frail, on the edge, and ready to be steamrollered. Instead, at Lord’s, we got a nasty shock.

The clear inference from Newman, and whoever it is that paints his wagon, is that Whitaker et al took the medical advice that it might be a bit early for Anderson and Stokes, and thought “it’s only Pakistan, Lord’s is a road, let’s save them for next week.” That is now going to be a stick to beat the selectors with, and all of a sudden we have a co-ordinated attack on the make-up of the selection panel. So Selfey comes up with something about camels and drinking brandy with Paul Allott. I’ve not read Scyld. Chris Stocks is on Twitter asking when England’s football team stopped picking by committee. A week ago, no-one was in any rush to condemn the way the England teams are selected. One loss, a player or two missing on medical advice (and remember, Stokes was on a limit of “short spells” this weekend, and Jimmy allowed to play for two days, so there were still doubts), some aspersions cast in James Whitaker’s direction, plenty of people saying “well they looked fine to me” and the selection process isn’t fit for purpose? Pull the effing other one.

Don’t you dare confuse this with me supporting James “GARY BALLANCE” Whitaker. I’ve not been a fan, will never be a fan, and I’m impertinent enough to say he was out of his depth from day one. But he was a useful idiot in the immediate wake of the KP debacle (the car crash interview with Tim Abraham still brings a smile to my face) and then the one later in 2014 with Pat Murphy probably went one better. But he stood there, did his master’s bidding by saying KP was never up for selection and provided a useful bulwark when times got tough. He was certainly less visible than his predecessors, and I’m given to believe he dispensed with the press conferences to announce teams. Probably because he was / would have been rubbish at them. His removal from the position, should it happen, will not be mourned by me. It’s just the way it is being mooted to be changed is classic ECB double-speak.

For Strauss now appears, IF THIS IS TRUE, to want to consolidate power in the Comma. While not quite the same as Ray Illingworth’s legendary One Man Committee, as at this moment in time there are no signs that he wants to be coach as well, the Comma man looks like he wants to become the chief selector if the co-ordinated triumvirate are to be believed. This, I presume, would mean the Comma would need to get out of Lord’s and tour the country watching players. Or, as is being intimated, he watches DVD coverage from around the grounds in the luxury of his office. The selectors do tour the country – if Stocks tries to draw parallels with the England football team, he might remember that the national side does not play at the same time as the Premier League – and get to see players in the flesh, back up what they hear, and maybe get more of a feel for the live situation in a game that sitting in an office doesn’t do. There are good reasons for employing selectors (though two county coaches is probably not the best idea) and not leaving it to a coach who knows naff all about county cricket and a captain who may not have seen all the players (and will have favourites).

We’ve seen Matt Prior’s fall from test cricket. We’ve seen Jimmy’s recent injuries. We’ve seen the mess made of Mark Wood’s recovery. We’ve seen Andy Flower take a litany of unfit or unselectable bowlers to Australia. If a group of selectors take the long view, it is not now a stick to beat them with. For it is the same selectors who picked the winning teams of the last couple of years, and you had little problem with them then. Stop Monday morning quarterbacking, ingratiating yourself with the powers that be, try to rehabilitate Flower, keep Cook’s fingerprints off the weapon, and connect the dots. Because we have here.

Disagree with me? Comment away (I know many of you have). But as someone said on Twitter this morning, there are many reasons to do away with the selection committee, but ignoring medical advice isn’t one of them.

UPDATE – Clive, if I may, I have borrowed your comment on The Guardian BTL:

The thrust of this article is exactly like that of Paul Newman’s in yesterday’s Mail and Scyld Berry’s in today’s Telegraph. I put that down to Sheer Coincidence and the tendency of great minds to think alike, rather than the press having been briefed about the imminent axing of the selection committee and told what view to take.

Dearth Of Press Men

Jul 19, 2016LordCanisLupus83 Comments

The Fantastic Four — The Poll Winners Party

And there there was one.

I know many of you were coming on to this site yesterday looking to the reaction I might have about the news that Mike Selvey is not being retained past September of this year. Many of you no doubt thought I’d be delighted. That I’d be revelling in the so-called downfall of one of this blog’s most prominent targets. That I’d be chuffed to see the ending of his writing. That it would be revenge for what happened to KP, and the part people like me thought he played in it. I think some might even have wanted me to gloat.

You probably think I’m laughing my head off right now. You probably want to think that this is something I wanted to happen. Well, you would have been wrong, because the clue was in a post I wrote a few months ago when Bunkers was getting the push from the Independent.

One other point. I know I’ve been a critic of Stephen Brenkley, or Bunkers as he’s known on here. Mr Aplomb was one of those guilty men who drip fed us some crumbs of information but never really told us what went wrong on that Ashes tour. I will remember the salt in the tea analogy as a particular Bunkers piece. Today he took to Twitter to say that he’s written his last piece as The Independent’s Cricket Correspondent, and that’s sad. He also said he has two weeks more to go and he’d write for the I if they wanted him to. I’m not rejoicing. Brenkley’s loss to the media coverage of cricket should be a bloody beacon of woe for the game. I’m not sure who will be taking over at the I, but I’ll bet it won’t be a full time correspondent. Let’s see. It didn’t seem the departure of a retiring man, but one of a paper cutting costs. Maybe things will become clearer.

That it is a disaster for the game when prominent cricket writers are dispensed with on cost grounds. It is a sign the game is losing its audience. A commercial reality writ large, so large, that the ECB can’t keep ignoring it and hoping for the best, can they?

Because I’m not a fan of someone’s writing (and I’m not) does not mean I want to see them sacked. That would be churlish, unsympathetic and nasty, and believe it or not, I might have a part of the first in me (relentlessly so, perhaps), I’m not either of the latter. At least, I don’t think I am. Selvey was (well still is) an integral plank of the written media and the cricket writing genre cannot cope with huge positions being downsized and big personalities being dismissed. It is the canary in the goldmine for the game. As each year passes without a meaningful, well promoted, cross-platform access for the majority to the big events, so another year passes with less people engaged in cricket. When I was growing up cricket was an integral part of the fabric of the nation. Now it appears like an elite indulgence. While the cricket writers of today aspire to the levels of those of yesteryear, anyone without satellite access might as well read Harry Potter, for all the tangible evidence they get of this derring-do. When Ben Stokes played that innings in South Africa, the ECB should have begged, scraped, whatever the BBC to play full highlights of it on their website or Iplayer. When Stuart Broad skittled out the Aussies at Trent Bridge, the patchy wicket highlights were an improvement on nothing, but nothing compared to seeing it live. And you see, as each of those people who have drifted away from the game are further distanced, so the needs for relatively highly paid “experts” diminishes.

It can’t be hard to see, for the likes of Selvey, Pringle and Bunkers, that the sport isn’t what it used to be in the public conscience, and thus as the audience diminishes, so does the need for their salaries. It is brutal, it is hard to take, but we are dealing with commercial realities. The 200 or so who have offered their lachrymose comments on the County Blog are not going to be enough to pay Selvey’s wages. Because, by and large, most of us don’t buy the Guardian (nor the Indy, nor the Telegraph) and read the content for nothing. The alternative for the vast majority is not to pay for access, it is not to read them at all. The Telegraph limit the content you can access free, so I limit myself to that number of articles (and get around it when needed). That is the pure reality of the space we live in now. The free internet news access is a disaster for most, but taken for granted by many.

Of course, I’m taking a leap of faith on the financial rewards of being a journo. I simply have no idea what they are. But I’m wagering given seniority, reverence and output that Selvey was pretty well recompensed compared to someone newer on the scene. Those tasked with making money, which newspapers need to, aren’t going to see his faithful few supporters as anything other than collateral damage. A few might not buy the paper again in disgust, or not access cricket content, but the opportunity to pontificate below the line is always an alluring one, in the same way blogging is for me. They’ll be back, by and large. Do you thing wctt, palfreyman et al are going to up sticks and go somewhere else?

On a personal level, losing a job is a terrible thing, and on that level I genuinely wish Selvey well going forward. If that makes me a hypocrite in some eyes, well so be it. I can’t help that. Those people that think that are probably the first to misrepresent what I say in any case, so f for Freddie them. On a writing level, I was never a fan and that pre-dates 2014. I’ve said it many times when we’ve run the worst journalist poll, that I have not lost any faith in Selvey because I never really had any in the first place. But I do see how those that used to love his writing felt very let down by the post-2014 fall out. KP has made his feelings known in a typically tone-deaf tweet today, and in many ways I think that these incidents with Cook, Flower, Clarke et al were the beginning of the end. He saw one of his peers, Pringle, alienate his audience so much with his misjudging of the mood that it was no surprise when he was given the push. Now, a bit further on, the fickle finger of the feckless newspaper industry is pointing at Selvey.

I don’t actually believe it was the furore that brought him down. The interaction below the line post-2014 has been aggressive because of the Tyers Twitter Tendency (see glossary) that Selvey was one of the prime examples of, but it drove hits. We didn’t see what we thought we should be seeing – a journalist acting as our representative, not as someone giving off the appearance of being an ECB stenographer (and he did in my eyes), but it got people going. There was a consistent groundswell from “our side” that was almost begging Selvey to be more open, but he closed the door, and his plaudits loved him for it. So while some of his output was, undoubtedly, of considerable quality, it kept coming down to the KP question. The damage of 2014 has been very widespread, as you know, because I’ve mentioned this schism constantly.

When 2014 was ongoing, the likes of Selvey and Newman, Pringle and Bunkers provided me with tons of material to fisk. While Selvey was waging his campaigns, his picking apart of Adil Rashid, his defence of the realm, his pet theories of wind directions for ODIs and where to pick hitting boundaries, there was always something to react to, to provide material for the blog, and comments for the supporters of us here. Like him or loathe him, he provided things to react to, in much the same way as Downton did. Our material is diminished by his departure. But that’s me being selfish.

I’ve never interacted with Selvey (that I know of) and nor him with me. Fine. I don’t live and breathe for journo’s attention, no matter what some of them think. I have been critical of him, of course I have. I don’t share some of the love for him, there’s no doubt about that. But he is a position lost to cricket on a national level, and that can’t be good, and on a personal level, I’m not cheering his dismissal. I’d be surprised if anyone thought I would be. It’s indicative of a sport downsizing. If you are happy with that, then I think you are wrong to be so. But I suspect that’s not a universally held view.

The Sore Tooth Test – A Dmitri Review

Jul 18, 2016LordCanisLupus31 Comments

This has been a very different last few days. My thanks to Chris for stepping up to carry out the reports from the last three days of the test. I just couldn’t do the action justice, at times feeling extremely sorry for myself, as the great match passed by with me swilling salt water, popping painkillers, administering antibiotics, and caressing clove oil onto a very sore tooth that refused to give up telling me how much it hated my guts. I missed Saturday’s play (and a sincere apology to my hosts, yet again, for not being able to make it, and for missing the chance to meet a genuine legend of the past) and spent most of that day laying down trying desperately to get some sleep. It’s not really conducive to blogging. While the pain has eased, no doubt to the great sorrow of some of my biggest supporters, the fact I’ve been in the hands of others to keep the show rolling again is of some concern. Here’s hoping for a successful Friday, when I go under the local at the same time as the afternoon session draws to a close on Day 1 in Manchester.

But I saw enough to bring a smile to my cricketing heart. The temptation is to take this victory as something more than it is – a good win against a good side, which England are – and extrapolate to a whole series. After all, just two years ago India won at Lord’s and we were thinking the same, before they collapsed in a heap in the remaining three test matches, so that Alastair didn’t have to “nearly resign” at the end of that campaign. But we had the sense, did we not, that this win was somehow more substantial than that Indian one? First up, the bowling looks pretty decent, and there are others who might be able to come into the team without markedly weakening it. Also there are three left armers, and England have had their struggles in the past against that form of bowling. Then add on top the leg spin of Yasir Shah, and England are facing a somewhat more deadly foe, it seems, than India. Then, against India, we feared the visitors batting, and thought we would win, easily, a bowling contest (although the Rose Bowl was anything but that). Here, we sense a bowling contest may yield a 50/50 contest, while a batting shootout is not going to be in anyone’s favour it seems, as they are seen to be weaknesses.

Many are saying it was a good toss to win. Many also said after half an hour that this was a nailed on draw, on a boring Mick Hunt wicket, where at the end of play on Day 1, England were seen to be well ahead by many. Step back a bit and look at last Summer for a reference point. England won 4 tests and lost 3. In the three they lost, they batted second. In all three the winners stuck on over 300 in the first innings and England appeared to wilt under scoreboard pressure in English conditions. In the four victories we batted first in two of them – NZ at Lord’s, Australia in Cardiff – and made decent first innings totals. In the two we won, we skittled Australia out for shirt buttons in the first innings. In UAE this winter, Pakistan batted first in all three matches, won the series 2-0, and did that in the two games where they made 378 and 234 in their first innings, not the one where they made 500+. Indeed the only test in recent memory where England faced down a team that got 300+ in the first dig to win was the Joburg test, when England reaped a favourable overhead condition and one of those Stuart Broad spells to whistle out the hosts for next to nothing in the 3rd innings. It may be that batting first against England, on anything other than a green top, is a good recipe for success. Hence, let’s see how Pakistan go if England get a first go to see if this is something worth pursuing further. (Think back to 2013, when in that Ashes series, we won when we batted first, didn’t do well when Aussie did). But it’s a little bit of a pattern, which may indicate some endemic mental frailties?

Of course, after a test like that, questions are asked of the home team. In a sport where there are just 10 wickets per innings going around, and one of your players gets 11 of the total, eyes are going to be cast at the others. Jake Ball had his status as debutant to fall back on, and it will remain to be seen if that is his only test for a while despite not letting himself down by any means. With Anderson and Stokes returning, he seems surplus to requirements. Steven Finn will find himself under a lot of pressure, and rightly so, but every time I think that, I also think what might have been, and why he is still such an enticing presence when he’s not in the team. He has the capacity to be horrible. To be a bowler no-one wants to face, but it doesn’t happen often enough. Chris Woakes had a game for the ages, with his bowling threatening and his lower order batting also resilient and intelligent. It is easy to be seduced by a bowler taking wickets and scoring runs. Broad at the start of his career, and Goughie too, were seen as pseudo-all rounders, good to bat at number 8, but regressed as their number one suit had to take preference. Woakes is showing no signs of either, and his temperament is what impresses me more than perhaps the wicket taking. He seems to have a solid head on those shoulders. Broad had a run-of-the-mill bowling performance, while any time Moeen Ali is attacked, the media push the panic button and start hunting around for the spinner who is taking wickets that week. I note Rashid is back in the squad today.

The fact that two bowlers are likely to be dropped, and a third possibly, is the general hilarity that comes with a match where the batsmen undoubtedly lost it. I think Talking Heads sung it best. Same as it ever was. Alex Hales had, by all accounts as I didn’t see a lot of it, a good series against Sri Lanka, but this was a match he’ll want to forget. Fact is, he’s always going to be hit and miss with the way he goes about things. I think he’ll be the sort that if persevered with is going to give you a series for the ages, followed by one for the aged not long after. It is up to England if that is what they want. Root at three is neither proved a success or failure judged on a performance where he looked ok defensively but got out to two expansive shots which always attract the ire of the cognoscenti. If he’d been got out to a defensive shot against the new ball, the clarion calls would have been deafening. Instead of knowing how Compton felt, he probably knows a little bit more about how KP did. Vince is not convincing (sorry) anyone at this moment. The suspicion that the promotion to test status was based more on some attractive stroke play than longevity and sustainability is growing. Dobell uttered those thoughts on podcasts a good while ago, but other more persuasive voices have held sway. He may have the series, he may just have the next game, but the sands of time are running out. There aren’t exactly many new faces being put forward – the fact the two I’ve seen are Robson and Bell sort of sum it up – is one slight factor in Vince’s favour. Dropping catches while struggling is not a good look.

Gary Ballance was brought back on the say so, we are given to believe, of James Whitaker. His return wasn’t bad, it wasn’t great. He’s not changed the technique that had the scribes panicking but then again it was a style that nabbed him four test hundreds in less than 12 months. His second innings dismissal was alarming for someone who might be needed to play the spin in India this winter, but then again, Strauss once got exposed like that and he did OK. The fact is that Ballance isn’t an exciting pick, but he has the temperament which is one big tick in the box. He’s got a while to go but I suspect we know how this is going to end. Jonny Bairstow was a huge plus for me. He looked very dodgy against Yasir in the UAE and again in the first innings, but his second innings performance showed he learned quickly, not without fault, and his confidence has really helped his temperament for the game. His keeping will always have the pundits and fans nervous. People, we aren’t picking the best keeper if he isn’t capable of test hundreds while this top order is the brittle mess it is at the moment. It just isn’t going to happen, so don’t wish your life away hoping for it. Moeen’s thrash in the second innings isn’t going to go down in his scrapbook of favourite memories, but one thing with Ali is that he will forget about it, and move on to his next match. Again, he has a couple of test hundreds, plays selflessly for the team, and there isn’t a spinner in county cricket begging to be selected. You have to be practical.

And Cook. 81 in the first innings, a poke and a low score in the second. It’s Cook. It is who he is. While the first innings was aggressive, full of intent and the highest score made by an England player in the match, when he was needed in the second innings, it never happened. SimonH has noted he hasn’t a great record in 4th innings when chasing down a gettable total. I saw his ton in Perth when we were chasing 500+ in the 4th and that was the sort of knock needed here. The ball that got him could have got anyone out, but it was also the sort of ball you expect to receive as a test opener. Let’s put it this way, if Hales had got out to the same ball, no-one would be giving the bowler all the praise, and instead be pointing out that Hales showed a weakness outside off stump. That’s what 10000 runs, a free pass from the media and a Twitter feed in hock to your genius gets you. As for his captaincy, I never really got to see Pakistan bat (work on Thursday, pain on Saturday) so couldn’t comment. His comments after the game? I’d like to see / hear the context before going totally at him for them, but let’s say this. He’s got form for being a little churlish.

The test was won by a team who put together a decent display despite showing weaknesses. The openers aren’t going to scare anyone, although you feel Hafeez might put it together in one knock in the series. I am a big fan of Azhar Ali, but it wasn’t his best game. Younus looked a little dodgy to say the least, but woe betide we let him get into form. Ramiz Raja was going on about him being over the hill, and with his eyes going, while then offering all sorts of praise to a 42 year old! Asad Shafiq is a gritty customer, and played two really vital knocks in a performance that went right under the radar, but vital to stem the bleeding in the first innings and set a target in the second. Misbah’s hundred got all the praise it deserved on Thursday, and his captaincy looks calm and assured, a leader of men indeed. Sarfraz had a funny old game behind the stumps, but appears to be that noisy nuisance that’s a joy for your team in the field and batting, but a pain in the rear end for the opposition. And we’ve said what needed to be said about the bowling before. Amir’s return was overshadowed by Yasir Shah – who went from barely mentioned prior to this test in the Amir brouhaha to Shane Warne status in the space of 48 hours – while Wahab Riaz and Rahat Ali were threats throughout in a league above what we saw from Sri Lanka. It was ironic / fitting that Amir applied the final coup de grace with Ball’s wicket, and the wish we had on here, that Pakistan would provide decent opposition was confirmed. 1-0 up in a four match series, in a really fun, hard fought test match.

A couple more observations from the game. We’ve seen Pakistan’s 2-0 win in the UAE almost ignored in the light of the 2-1 win in South Africa and the 3-2 win v the Aussies that preceded it. That defeat was dismissed as “alien conditions” and “we never win there” when teams like New Zealand and South Africa had won tests in the Emirates. Pakistan came to their alien conditions, with only really Younus Khan a dab hand at them in the past (Azhar Ali played a very good knock at the Oval in 2010, but not much else) in terms of batting, and won a closely fought contest. Maybe that 2-0 win will garner some more respect as a result? The other point is that while it was wonderful to see a great test, this doesn’t mean test cricket is “back”. People point to a four day test future, and imagine what that would have done to this game (do you seriously believe we’ll be seeing 100 over test days? really?). England would have shut up shop rather than chasing the game. The five day test needs to be preserved when the pace of over rates is so slow. The test match also conflicted with the Open Golf, the Tour de France, the Davis Cup (and wasn’t that a great win) and football will soon be upon us. Great games don’t hurt, but there’s a long way to go. But it looks an exciting one.

Old Trafford is usually a good cricket wicket, the weather is always dodgy in Manchester (joke) and the last time we played Pakistan there, didn’t we hammer them in 2006 behind top performances by Harmy and Monty (19 wickets and a run out), and a ton each for Cook and Bell? Here’s hoping for another terrific contest, and who knows, maybe some more press-ups for us all to enjoy.

Or was there something else I needed to talk about?

England vs Pakistan: 1st Test, Day Four

Jul 17, 2016Jul 17, 2016thelegglance97 Comments

Given the troubled and fractious relationship over many years between England’s and Pakistan’s cricket teams, perhaps the most startling outcome from this Test has been the realisation that they have become a likeable side. The celebration at the end of a match they have thoroughly deserved to win made most onlookers smile, for it signified a team seemingly united and also enjoying their cricket. Although that might have been the most obvious example, there were plenty of others, from Misbah’s century celebration to the adorable reaction of Mohammed Hafeez to the sight of a young Pakistan fan in the stands celebrating his catch to dismiss Alex Hales. Rather obviously, over recent years Pakistan have had something of a PR problem, but under Misbah’s exceptional leadership and example, they have demonstrated themselves to be very welcome tourists.

It does of course help player demeanour when matches are won, and although England swiftly wrapped up the Pakistan second innings in a few minutes this morning, 283 was a big ask in the fourth innings of a match that had already showed declining batting returns. Reaching such a target is quite possible, but it does require a fine batting performance, with few mistakes and bowling opposition that isn’t on top of its game – none of that was the case today. Some were got out, but all too many of them were self-inflicted. Cook certainly got a good ball, but his technique is looking ever so slightly awry again, his head moving over to off and ending up squared up by the bowler much too often. In contrast, Hales and Vince were loose, Root and Ali downright careless, as England went helter-skelter at the target. It wasn’t until Bairstow was joined by Woakes that a calmer mindset was brought to proceedings, and although the two of them battled hard against some exceptional bowling from Wahad Riaz in particular, much of the damage was already done – unless they were to pull off something magical, an end was always going to be open the moment the partnership was broken. So it proved, from the moment Bairstow to his utter horror managed to miss a long hop to the end of the match was a mere five overs. The final nail in the coffin came with the loss of Chris Woakes, who batted longer in the game than any other England player, for 58 runs and once out to go with his eleven wickets. Seldom has an England player in recent times been more unlucky to finish on the losing side.

Yasir Shah’s ten wickets in the match will receive the plaudits, but the seam bowling today should give England pause that they are going to be up against an attack with no weak links. As was suspected before the start of the series, the strength of the two sides is in the bowling, albeit Pakistan have a spinner on a different level, and both batting line ups look brittle. For England the return of Anderson and Stokes will improve the side, with Finn and presumably Ball the likely ones to make way. That would certainly improve the batting in the middle order, but that’s not the area where England look vulnerable. Vince doesn’t at this stage look likely to contribute more than a few breezy runs, while Hales at the top still doesn’t exude reliability.

From a series perspective, Pakistan’s win is probably the best thing that could have happened; England now have to show they are capable of more than beating up weakened opposition. But if nothing else, three more Tests as enjoyable as this one certainly won’t harm interest in the game. These are two fairly well matched sides, both flawed, both capable of brilliance. Pakistan won this Test rather than England losing it, because when it came down to it, their key players stepped up and delivered to a greater extent than England’s did. That may not be the same next time, but for now they can reflect on a fine performance, that had the added side effect of winning over some hearts and minds. Not a bad day’s work.

England vs Pakistan: 1st Test, Day Three

Jul 16, 2016thelegglance15 Comments

Lords tends to be one of the quieter grounds in world cricket; even when full it is more a murmur than a roar, yet in the last hour of play today the crowd were vocal and supportive, particularly towards the outstanding Chris Woakes and the desperately unlucky Stephen Finn. The reason why is straightforward enough, for this is a Test that has been a scrap from the first ball, with both sides harbouring legitimate hopes of victory. With all the suggestions and plans for ensuring the relevance of Test cricket, the involvement of those at the ground was due not to gimmicks, or innovations, but to two sides battling to gain the upper hand in a Test that has been excellent throughout.

Perhaps some would then think it churlish to begin with a complaint, but it’s the same one as on the first two days – that the over rate was sufficiently poor that the full 90 weren’t completed in the day. That it was only two overs short is not the point, they have an extra half hour to complete them. It’s very simple – stop cheating the spectators and talk about them being cheated will also stop.

With the most obvious difference between the sides being in the lower order, it was natural cricketing perversity that ensured that while England’s fell away in the morning to be bowled out 67 adrift of Pakistan’s first innings score, the tourists decided that today was the day when theirs would perform. Yasir Shah for one is engaged in a personal contest with Chris Woakes for all rounder of the game, merrily dispatching England bowlers with disdain just when England might have thought they had the upper hand at last. It capped a fine day for him – in removing Finn this morning, Yasir had become the leading wicket taker in Test history after 13 Tests (an arbitrary number for sure, but evidence of the impact he has made on the game).

Indeed, for most of the day England looked to have clawed back much of the first innings deficit, especially when Pakistan were reduced to 60-4 following an impressively dreadful shot from the captain. The best matches are those that swing one way and then the other, and a hideously out of form Younis Khan may at the end of matters consider that his crabby, laboured 25 was vastly more important than the number suggests. Asad Rafiq and Sarfraz Ahmed carried on that work in much more fluent fashion, along with the aforementioned Yasir. They had a little help, Cook and Bairstow dropping very catchable chances, both off the luckless Finn but with a lead of 281 with a couple of wickets still in hand, Pakistan are in a very strong position.

That they are is despite the best efforts of Chris Woakes, who once again was the star of the show with the ball, although rather surprisingly he was held back early on. How impressive his match has been is perhaps best illustrated by how he’s reduced his Test bowling average from 41.25 on Thursday morning to 28.18 now. Yet he doesn’t appear to be doing anything greatly different – a fairly consistent bowling action, line and length, and a little bit of movement off the seam. In the last few Tests he had mastered the art of being parsimonious, and perhaps the wickets he is now taking are to an extent created by the impression of being hard to get away he has begun to foster.

Around 300 never seems that big a total to win, but history is against it, not just at Lords but in Test matches generally. It’s rare to chase down that many, indeed over 300 has only been done 28 times in the history of the game, which given the number of Tests played is a miniscule number. There is a constant underestimation of the difficulty in reaching targets of that size, amongst players and commentators as much as anyone else. So it was that Nasser Hussain talked about England being comfortable up to 280, when they should be anything but. It’s not a criticism of him, as it’s something heard widely from all quarters on each occasion it comes up in a match, but make no mistake, England are in a spot of bother.

What it does mean is that there will be a result in this match, possibly tomorrow, possibly early on Monday. Mickey Arthur at the close of play stated that Pakistan had hoped for a lead of 275, and allowing for the usual kidology that is always present in interviews, there was little doubt that he was delighted with their position. That’s certainly not to say that England cannot win this, but the bookmakers are being a little generous (patriotic money presumably) in cricketing terms in making them the favourites. While Yasir Shah may be felt to be the biggest challenge based on the first innings, the seam attack underperformed a touch first time around, and with the warm weather and bone dry pitch, both conventional and reverse swing should add to the level of difficulty.

This has the makings of an excellent series, and praise be it’s been enjoyable to watch.

Day four comments below

England vs Pakistan: 1st Test Day two

Jul 15, 2016Jul 15, 2016thelegglance22 Comments

It is perhaps perversely illustrative of the issues Test cricket faces that after two days play there is considerable intrigue at where this match is going, and rather more pleasure at the way that it is developing into a proper scrap. Despite all ECB attempts to portray the last Ashes as a classic, each Test was more or less over by the end of day two, the direction of travel beyond retrieval. Thus, the prospect of an even fight is in itself an attraction, and as far as Lords is concerned at least, reflected in strong ticket sales. Give the public something to watch, and they’ll turn out. This is of course helped by Pakistan not having come here for six years, precisely the importance of not killing the golden goose by playing the same teams constantly. Whether it’s a lesson the ECB will learn seems unlikely – the four year Ashes cycle that was promised to return is already being compromised as administrators look after their immediate financial interests rather than the game itself.

This isn’t anything new, nor is it remotely something of which critics are unaware, yet it bears repeating at every opportunity, for the matter of the game’s integrity is more important than anything else in cricket. Pakistan are a talented team, and one who are good to watch. There are wider reasons for their long absence from this country, but it doesn’t mean there is any excuse should it be a similar gap before their next visit.

For the second day running, the scheduled 90 overs were not bowled in the day. The bulk of the bowling was from Pakistan, after England bowled them out in fairly short order, meaning that both sides have been guilty of not providing ticket holders with what they had paid for. A ticket in the Compton stand was £90, making the mathematics rather straightforward. Yesterday we were three overs short, today it was four. This is after the additional half an hour was played in order to complete the allocation. The television coverage gently mentions it from time to time, but suffers from the fundamental problem that all the media does, written or broadcast, which is that they aren’t paying for their entrance – the very opposite. Ultimately, they don’t care any more than the players do about what is, without a shadow of a doubt, theft. That might be a strong word, but it’s a disgraceful, entirely unacceptable state of affairs. Players get fined occasionally (note that the money is not returned to the spectators, as it should be) but almost the entire series in South Africa suffered from shortened days in terms of overs, and nothing whatever was done. Fundamentally, as if we did not know already, the players and the ICC do not care about the spectators except as a revenue stream.

Doubtless if put to them they would protest that, but the fact is that nothing is done about it, and nothing is ever said to those unhappy about it. Both yesterday and today the crowds thinned out around 6pm, the scheduled close of play, as the crowd caught trains or buses home. This is meant to be when it finishes, so there is a contempt already present by not meeting the timings imposed; to then fail to get the overs in within the additional time allowed is nothing short of scandalous. The match referee then looks at it over the course of the Test, which is ridiculous in itself given that most people go for a single day’s play – it doesn’t help them if the over rate speeds up later on.

There are various ideas about how to prevent this happening, but the given the current sanctions aren’t used a great deal anyway, there’s little point even talking about them, as it seems unlikely they’d be used either. Both captains should be banned for the next match. But they won’t be. No one suffers – except the poor bloody spectator who pays for the game to be put on in the first place.

Chris Woakes is one of those figures whose first class record suggests an all rounder of rare ability, genuinely worthy of a place with both bat and ball, yet to date in his international career he has been more likely to be in receipt of comment that neither discipline is good enough, that he is, as the parlance goes, a bits and pieces cricketer. There has been defence of him on these pages, but his presence in the team has been anything but universally welcomed. In the same way that early struggles shouldn’t be a reason to his dismiss him, nor should his current success mean that he is a fixture for years to come, yet there are signs he is coming to terms with the standard, not just today, but in recent games where he has been one of the better performers. His 6-70 was outstanding, his halting of the Pakistani charge through the England line up in the last session highly meritorious. The one area where England have a notable advantage over the visitors is in the lower middle order. Woakes has hinted at batting ability often enough without going on to make a significant score – partly due to his lowly position at 8 or 9 – but in a tight game, a contribution from him could make all the difference.

Alastair Cook was the prime contributor to the England score, and in so doing became the highest Test run scorer of any opening batsman, overtaking Sunil Gavaskar. Longevity may not be the most important attribute in analysing a player’s worth, but nor is it to be ignored either. Opening the batting remains a uniquely challenging occupation in cricket, and the landmark is worthy of praise. Yet today he seemed somewhat out of sorts, playing and missing outside off stump frequently (and being turned square far too often) as well as having two escapes when straightforward edges were dropped. Most batsmen will worry little about that, factoring in the occasions where brilliant catches are taken or dubious decisions are given as evening up the ledger. But the slightly out of sync technique brought his downfall, dragging the ball on to the stumps as he failed to get across to it outside off stump. He’s not quite in top form.

Joe Root was clearly upset with himself for his dismissal; a poor shot undoubtedly, not for the first time recently. Perhaps he will receive genuine criticism for the first time in a while, but it seems few will be as hard on him as he will himself. Jonny Bairstow too was guilty of a poor shot, one borne perhaps of overconfidence as much as anything. Many a batsman will say that you don’t make hundreds when you are in the very best of form, because you take chances you wouldn’t do if the fear of dismissal was in the back of the mind.

But if those were somewhat self-inflicted – most dismissals are batsman error – it doesn’t detract from the performance of Yasir Shah. To take five wickets on day two of a Test at Lords, where pitches are usually flat and slow, is some achievement. England consistently have problems with legspin, despite their protests that they have learned lessons, and so it proved here. Given that the seam attack was a little off colour (not helped by the drops) it was ominous that England struggled so.

Late in the day the tale of two lbw decisions pointed the way to the future. Firstly Moeen Ali was given out despite two elements on umpire’s call in the decision. It was of course out by the rules pertaining to Hawkeye, but the question is whether it should be. If there are two points of doubt, surely there is doubt all round? The second example was the appeal against Stuart Broad, it was not out according to the current playing regulations, but when the new ones come in later this year, it would be. There have to be concerns that the number of lbw decisions will increase quite substantially, and matches shortened accordingly.

England are 86 runs behind with three wickets left. They could get close, they could be rolled over in short order. Not having a good idea where the match is going is when Test cricket is at its best. Day three may be pivotal, it may not. But the point is that there will be interest in finding out.

Day three comments below

England v Pakistan – 1st Test, 1st Day

Jul 14, 2016Jul 14, 2016LordCanisLupus33 Comments

Before I move on to any assessment of today’s play, I thought it was right to wish Michael Carberry all the very best wishes from all on here (and I’m pretty sure for once, I’m speaking for all of you) in his battle against cancer. I’m always hit quite hard when hearing about people younger than me, fitter than me etc. falling foul of that awful disease. I wish Michael all the best. It’s all we can do. Good luck.

With that awful news breaking at the end of the day’s play, complaining or moaning about the action seems somewhat out of place. But let’s get the good out of the way first. As Chris said yesterday, real lives really do interrupt our ability to do full justice to what went on. Chris was there today and can no doubt let us know his views on what he saw. I was in the office – the workers, united, will never be able to watch weekday cricket – and could follow it only on the internet, until I managed to sneak out early, courtesy of a ragging toothache (and I’m not moaning, my fault) and watch the last half hour. I therefore missed (just) Misbah completing his century and the brilliant press up celebration. I did catch his interview with Ian Ward afterwards, and there looked a man totally at ease with his place and role in life. 42 years old and looking every bit a test batsman, totally contemptuous of Moeen Ali, on top of many of the other pressures exerted on him. In a world where we dismiss players if they have a bad run on the older side of 32, there is a testament to the class is permanent as long as the body is willing. 10 press ups? I could barely get myself out of bed.

England nicked four out before Shafiq, a very impressive player in the Emirates, and looking a class act here, joined with his skipper to put the Pakistanis in a decent position before he got tempted by a little outswinger (having missed one barely shortly before) and it clipped the bottom of his bat to be pouched by Bairstow. The wicket off the final ball of the day, via a shot that would have had our media tut tutting but appeared to have Misbah laughing, made it a top day for Chris Woakes, who took four of the six wickets to fall and by common consent, it seems, was the pick of the bowlers. George Dobell’s head, I understand, has swollen to the size of a small planet, and there is no truth in the rumour that he is currently marching through St. John’s Wood with a placard saying “I told you so”.

Following the game as much as I could – I have a job, I have a massive interest in the Tour de France, I have a massive interest in the politics at the moment, and wouldn’t mind knowing about the golf too – it seems there was much wailing about Mr. Finn. On the day when David Saker was appointed as assistant manager to Buzz Lehmann (I just made it up, heaven knows why), 4 Fux special project was on display for all to see. Now the Selfey’s of this world place no blame for Finn’s regression on 4 Fux, as of course he is his mate (now, who were we to accuse the media of cosy relationships, how dare we) and he wouldn’t do that, but there’s a massive correlation between his downturn and him being told constantly by all and sundry to change actions, bowl dry etc. etc. I like Finn, but can’t help but feel he’s been a prime asset wasted. Hope is getting less and less. Every time he gets into rhythm, he then seems to lose it as quickly. With Jake Ball performing well, Woakes having a great time and also the added weight he brings with the bat, Finn risks slipping a fair way down the line if Anderson, Stokes and Wood are all fit and firing.

This is based on reports. It seems likely I’ll be able to watch him bowl for a little bit on Saturday as, if I imagine this game will go, we manage to take the last four wickets before lunch tomorrow. Misbah doesn’t have, off the top of my head, a wonderful record past 100, and Sarfraz is placed above what looks quite a long tail. However, while England pundits are saying 350 is below par, they seem to be rather too confident that England will get there given our recent track record. This looks a flat deck, but then they are illegal now for the moanerati who purvey this line like a stuck record every time we have a wicket that isn’t seaming all over the shop (could we wait a bit to see how the game plays out, please?). One wicket fell on day 1 last year, and the game was over within four days. Yeah, let’s see how it goes.

Talking of four days, and I know Chris has been hot on this one, recall how Colin the Never Wrong has been burbling on about four day tests with 100 overs per day in them (looking forward to that in tropical areas – what time you intend to start play, 7:30 am?), today England provided the spectators with 87 overs of action in half an hour over the allotted time. Those three overs will never be seen again. The studio and interviews warbled on for another 30 minutes after play – those three overs could have been bowled, the TV cameras were still there, but hey, no, it’s not important – and cricket that could have been played, wasn’t. Chris is never a happy bunny at this, and made his views very clear:

Looking forward to the £3 refund for the overs the team couldn't be arsed to bowl in 6.5 hours. Do let me know how to claim @englandcricket

— Chris Crampton (@BlueEarthMngmnt) July 14, 2016

I know no one gives a shit about this, especially @englandcricket but I paid for 90 overs. Do footballers stop after 85 minutes?

— Chris Crampton (@BlueEarthMngmnt) July 14, 2016

So England are not going to get the overs in. I'm at Lords. It's theft. Nothing but theft. I'm paying your wages guys. #EngvPak

— Chris Crampton (@BlueEarthMngmnt) July 14, 2016

There’s so much farting about in cricket that you have to wonder why this is still allowed to happen. But it is. And there’s nothing we can do about it. I’ll let the Wanderer go into more detail because believe me, as good as I am at a moan on a pet peeve, this Crampton is Champion.

Look forward to any comments, hope you can get to see some of the action (more than me) and I’ll no doubt have lots of stuff coming out of my visit on Saturday, including a load of pictures, and of course, extra overs for the ones lost today. Ho Ho.

Comments for Day 2 below. Isn’t it nice to have, for at least the first day, some hard competitive cricket. Thanks Misbah.

England vs Pakistan: 1st Test Preview (of sorts)

Jul 13, 2016Jul 13, 2016thelegglance26 Comments

A fundamental difference between the world of the blogger and the world of the journalist is that real life intrudes on our witterings. There are other differences of course, not least that some of the latter have little but contempt for those who dare to write on the game (and it needs to be said that others still find the blogs of interest), but that is probably the principal one. What it means is that we have jobs and cricket is a side interest. That side interest both waxes and wanes depending on circumstance, but even when at its zenith it doesn’t mean that cricket – or any other interest – is in the position to take priority.

So it is that in my own case I have been unable to watch more than a few overs in the last month. It might have been a little bit more were it not for the truly impressive incompetence Southern Rail bring to proceedings, but even if they were capable of such unusual abilities as running a train service, it wouldn’t have been much. As some know, I was a month in Asia, travelling around Laos, Thailand and Indonesia (minor plug for the blogging results of that – go to http://www.thoughtsonatrip.com), which as work goes is hardly being condemned to working down a pit, but it was work nonetheless. Returning from there it was a week away working, and after that an actual real life holiday for a week in Turkey. This week is the first time I’ve had more than two days at home since early May, all of which is a roundabout way of saying two things; first an apology for silence and second to note that I don’t have a clue what’s being going on.

The Sri Lanka series was comfortably won, even the wider points based version that precisely no one gives a stuff about, but my own experience of it consisted of reading the odd newspaper report and Sean’s excellent precis of the action on here. That means that for this series the pretence to hold is that the approach is one of a fresh mind, open to all possibilities, and the editor’s decision is final on that one.

Having said that, I am also at Lords tomorrow, so anyone who wants to say hello get in touch. It makes for a curious feeling, one of trying to re-engage – not with the England team, that still seems some distance away which is a saddening truth, but with the game of cricket itself. For everyone here and beyond does hold that in common, a love for the game and its vagaries and sub-plots. The presence of Pakistan adds to that, for it has been six years since they were last here, on a tour that will go down in cricketing infamy. The relationship between England and Pakistan has been anything but smooth over the years but that particular tour was the one that caused considerable damage to the game itself rather than to assorted egos.

Such discord seems rather less likely this time around, barring the odd bout of booing for Mohammad Amir. As an aside, I will not be joining in any of that, my own view is that once punishment has been served, that is the end of it. Whether that punishment was appropriate is another matter, and I am as unlikely to cheer him as I would have been to cheer Dwayne Chambers, but that isn’t the same thing as actively expressing displeasure at his presence. Either way, and assuming nothing untoward happens, it will dissipate both across the day and the series. The history does not require constant reminders to always be there.

Pakistan cricket has recovered its reputation in the intervening years in large part, and much of the credit for that must go to the captain, Misbah ul Haq a man who receives very little of the credit due to him in his own country, and rather more outside it. Misbah’s career as a batsman has been impressive enough given his late blooming as a cricketer – one which gives entirely unmerited hope to all forty somethings everywhere – but his leadership of his nation has been a thing of wonder. Above all else, he has given Pakistan cricket its dignity back, no small achievement considering their continued exile from home internationals.

Misbah himself hasn’t played Tests in England before, something of an irony given a batting line up that is anything but youthful, and despite strong Test records there has to be a question over how it will perform in English conditions. It is perhaps to the advantage of Pakistan that the first Test is at Lords, where chairman’s pitches have been more frequent than not over recent years. In any event, while there may be question marks over the batting, the visitors do possess a potent pace attack, and one that will cause England far more difficulty than that of the of the Sri Lankans.

England’s batting is anything but settled, the departure of Nick Compton, the promotion of a Joe Root who hasn’t had the best of summers to date, return of Gary Ballance who hasn’t looked fully at home against pace in his Test career to date, Vince is just starting out and with that Pakistani attack, it is a Test that for the first time this year has a degree of uncertainty about the outcome. Pakistan are a dangerous side with the ball, and despite potential fallibility in English conditions do at least have a top and middle order of known competence.

This is an intriguing match up, neither side have all options covered, both have significant and obvious weaknesses, both have equally obvious strengths. As with many sports, the period before it begins is in some ways the best time, with all possibilities open. May the cricket be the focus, and may it be a proper tussle. And after tomorrow, I may even know what’s going on.

A is for Animosity, M is for Malign, I is for Indignant, R is for Retribution

Jul 12, 2016Jul 12, 2016LordCanisLupus21 Comments

There are some occasions when it really pains me to be a blogger. I don’t have to write this blog; I don’t really need to do this, and by blogging’s very nature, the whole thing is self-indulgent. But sometimes you have to write about something you really don’t want to because it is almost expected of you. The subject is so overwhelming, so front and centre, that to ignore it would be a dereliction of my duty to you. It’s almost required to say something when so much of what is out there is so annoying. That subject, if you cannot guess, is Mohammad Amir.

I’m fed up with people getting on high horses. Taking the moral high ground is surrounded by slippery slopes. It’s about trusting the people who made grievous errors to right the wrongs. Yet when it comes to British sport, it’s easier to forgive and forget our mis-steps than it is those of a team we have had an interesting relationship with over the years. It’s easier to be righteously indignant over the crimes of a young kid, than it is a major legend. I have to say, Mohammad Amir is walking into a storm, and I don’t know how he will cope.

Let me give you an example. Don’t misquote me by saying I’m comparing two incidents as moral equivalents. I’m not. It’s about how we reacted to them.

In 2006 Christine Ohuruogo was banned for one year for missing three out of competition drug tests. These tests were introduced in an attempt to catch those who were doping outside of the main events where tests were routine, but where anyone with any sense would not get caught. Anyone who has read any of the Lance Armstrong books will know how doping went on, and these tests hardly stopped him, but they were part of the anti-doping regime. It is part of an athlete’s job to give location notification, it is a part of a campaign to stop cheating, and anyone falling foul of it would and should be punished.

Ohuruogo took her punishment (on the face of it, quite lenient at one year), came back and won world and Olympic medals. She was magnificent in her return to the sport. You heard barely a murmur about her offence, except when a number of the British commentariat were making excuses for her. Whether unwittingly or not, and we’ll never truly know, Christine had not abided by the rules, and she had to be punished. It was a clear, plain transgression of the laws. For to believe her excuses, to allow her to miss three tests without punishment, would be to undermine the fight against doping in sport. But she was forgiven, and she moved on, as did we as we cheered when she won gold in Beijing.

Now, I hear you say, that this isn’t remotely comparable to an 18 year old, possibly under duress, from spot fixing and profiting out of a sport by fixing a specific, if small, outcome. What do you think dopers do? Why do you think that there are rules in place? Those people who win medals and the prize money and sponsorship gains that they achieve on the back of doping are every bit as much cheating the sport as the spot fixers and match fixers in cricket. So if you can forgive people for doping offences, for skipping tests, then why does Amir warrant such abuse for two no balls, in among a spell when he was otherwise lethal and dismissing England batsmen?

There are a number of pieces on whether Amir should be playing in this test series. The fact is that he got caught, went to prison and then served a five year ban. His freakish talent should not be an issue AT ALL in this. The case should have been judged on the facts, the mitigations and reasons should be taken into account, and then the verdict be respected and honoured. You may be of the view that such offence should be punishable by a total ban – that is your opinion and you are entitled to it – but you aren’t the judge and jury on this. Neither am I. We can hold opinions. If you do not like the verdict of the decision making panel, you have a number of options – one of which is to withhold your ticket money and your Sky subscription for matches you may have attended, or may want to watch. After all, money is all in sport these days. However, what is perturbing me is the option being espoused pretty openly by ex and current players. You should show your contempt in the flesh, by booing him. (on re-checking the main individual’s quote, I might have over-reached on the booing him bit. He said he would get abuse….but I got spun that he was advocating. That said, there are plenty thinking abuse would come, and not a lot telling us we shouldn’t).

You see, when people like me pointed out that Ohuruogo may have got off a bit lightly and that if she were a Russia athlete you’d probably be spitting tacks if she’d denied one of ours a gold medal, I was told that there were mitigating factors, and that she had served her ban and been punished. You certainly wouldn’t have advocated me switching off the TV, booing her on any UK appearance, or going into the papers saying her gold medal was tainted. But because Amir has done something so heinous (a couple of no-balls in a match where he took five wickets and undressed some of our top batsmen’s technique, don’t forget), so much a betrayal of the cricketing firmament that he is beyond the pale, and paid heavily for it, I’m supposed to get outraged. Abuse him. I’ve seen it said that Pakistan should never have picked him again – if that was said about a certain individual I’ll come to later, I might have missed it. Because I don’t recall it.

You can have the right to not approve. Of course you can. But you don’t make the rules. I’m perfectly comfortable with Amir playing. He knows another transgression and he’s gone. He has paid the debt determined by a panel of his peers, and served the time of the courts of this land and the international suspension, and, importantly, cleared to return. Anything else over and above that, seems to me, slightly vindictive. Which brings me to KP’s contention that all match fixers and drug takers should be banned for life.

Such clickbait should be ignored because its clearly not been thought through. Sport is not special. Sport is a business like any other. People who mess up, break the law etc get punished but come back to work in their areas of specialism because as a people we should be forgiving and accepting of those that have paid their debt to society, and also, it benefits us if they come back productively and aren’t a burden to society.

Under KP’s edict, it is doubtful at which point he would have wished Shane Warne’s international career ended – after the weather reports to John, or whoever it was, in India, or after his capture for taking a banned diuretic which just happened to be one of the prominent masking agents for steroids out there. Long-term readers of mine know precisely what I think of Australia’s hilarious hypocrisy over Warne (a one year ban? Really?) but KP thinks he should have been done? Or does he believe in mitigating circumstances? I’m not sure. I’ve never heard him get angry about Shane’s drug mistakes.

Those hardliners, the pious ones, who think nothing of not walking when they nick it, appealing for something when they know it isn’t out, who would take every advantage they could in an effort to win a game, even if it was fuzzy in its legality, are pontificating and telling me I should boo Amir on Saturday, when I go to Lord’s? Really? Is this the same pious crowd who bemoan the terrible abuse Alastair Cook gets? That dutiful men who served England well get? No, I’m not comparing apples with oranges. As far as the cricket establishment goes, Amir has every right to play cricket. You might not agree, but you shouldn’t be cajoled into fighting someone else’s battles.

Cricket has a gambling problem, and it is from a gambling sting that Amir got caught. So do many sports have a difficult relationship with betting. They welcome the money that the sponsorship of betting companies might bring, with the synergies between Sky Sports and Sky Bet particularly interesting to me, while not thinking of the somewhat mixed messages that might entail. You can bet on almost anything. Part of me thought the Super Series was only introduced to give another thing you could bet on. You had Graeme Swann a couple of years ago appearing in an ad which was for a betting company that said it was “by players, for players”, which was about as dense as it could get for tone deafness. The ODI and T20 circuses exist for betting, context meaning naff all, betting revenue and TV participation being the be all and end all. Yet that linkage is never explored, instead someone who bowled a couple of no balls in a test match is the lightning conductor for the rage. I’m a little mystified. We have a sport that openly admits that it rigs international draws so that England play Australia and India play Pakistan. We have a sport that doctors pitches.

I watch sports around the world, and they are adjusted to suit the TV and entertainment needs more than the need for a sporting contest. Take the recent NBA Finals. The TV networks, the NBA, hell, everyone wanted a Cavaliers v Warriors final. In the semi-finals, the Warriors were trailing to the Thunder, and one of their key players committed a foul that should have had him banned for the next game. They didn’t. Although not a factor, that player was part of the Warriors team that came from 3-1 down in the best of 7 series to win. In the Finals, with the series at 3-1, a much more minor indiscretion by the same player got him banned for the 5th game, and the other team got it back to 3-2, won at home to make it 3-3 and the NBA had 7 Finals games to show to the USA and the world. One could make a pretty good case that it was a very convenient outcome. You don’t think it possible, just read about NBA Western Conference Final, Game 6, 2002. Hell there’s a book about the way the sport was “manipulated”. So a couple of no balls and we are getting all prissy here?

On a cricket level I would love to see Amir bowl on my day at the test. On a moral level, I’m a little queasy, but not all that, because I’ve seen a punishment. I think going to jail and being banned for 30% of his career is quite a tough punishment. Sport is full of questionable characters, governing bodies rigging, so spare me the moral piety of sanctity of the game, when players cheat to gain any advantage they can. And I’ve managed to spin over a thousand words out on a subject I never wanted to talk about.

Plus ca change.

The Silence Of The Damned

Jul 11, 2016Jul 12, 2016LordCanisLupus19 Comments

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA — England v Pakistan – 2006

We are three days away from the resumption of #propercricket. The test match series against Pakistan gets the Second Super Series underway, and like many first tests of a series, and in particular the late summer one, there is intrigue piled upon intrigue. There will be more previews as the week unfolds, and we’ll even have boots on the ground as Chris (remember him?) will be there on Thursday and I will be there on Saturday. The weather had better hold!

While we might write some stuff, others have had their say. As previews go, The Cricket Paper needs to take a hard look at itself (Hayter’s article is headed “Cheating Amir will be judged in House of Lord’s”) – Stocks mentions Amir in the first article, a total focus on Amir. Hayter follows it up with another load of self-righteous guff on Amir, Pringle’s article starts with the headline “Pakistan cheats? Maybe…., Stocks mentions Amir’s sins again on page 24 and Martin Johnson has another tribute piece, taking us back to 1987 and Hasib Ahsan. There’s precious little mention of a recent series, more raking over the coals of the past.

But it’s to more mundane matters I wish to turn in this piece. I know many of you will remember my piece “Schism” in which I bemoaned the state of our support and the way there were now two factions which seemed worlds apart and would remain so in perpetuity? Or at least for the long term? The reasons for that split, and why I was so angry at those that failed to see the other side’s point of view.

The blogging world, for me, was always going to calm down once the Kevin Pietersen business was finally put to bed. By not playing in the 2016 World T20, that was it. It was probably “it” before, but now there is utterly no logic in selecting KP, and given he’s turned into a golf club and safari Instagram junkie since then, that fight is over. There is no sense in raging at his non-selection any more to get him back into the team. Indeed, there is now no sense in raging at much. This is, very much, what defeat feels like. We were taking on some pretty resilient forces, but they had the membership with them, and the levers of power. I’m drawing no further parallels 🙂

The fact is, that defeated foes are rarely the most amenable, and are prone to different kinds of reaction – flight or fight being the two main ones. The other fact is that the winners are rarely magnanimous, because in their eyes, they were right all along, and it’s time to put the mouthy lot in place. What was actually “right” is just a passing fancy – almost cricket’s equivalent of “post-truth” politics. I look on those that sided with the authorities, for that was, in large type, what you did when you approved summary dismissal without the evidence laid out, with barely concealed contempt. When they next want someone to fight a cause they’re interested in when it comes to cricket, don’t come looking to me for support. We’ll do it our own way. Well. I’ll do it my own way because unlike many others, I don’t claim to speak for anyone other than myself. Like one of our BTL Guardian stooges saying today on a politics thread that

Quite why the Graun gives editorial space to Matty is something I’ve never understood. He’s a Tory apologist and ex Torygraph writer etc. I presume someone, somewhere thinks it’s worthwhile to give us the viewpoint from the otherside of the spectrum, something we are capable of getting by simply going to the Torygraph website. At any rate his views do not represent those of the Guardian.

I don’t want to touch the political angle of the debate here, but that “his views do not represent those of the Guardian” is typical of the genre. It’s almost “no platforming” dissent. “There is a worldview, and if you have the opposite, I want nothing to do with them. I just need my own views reaffirmed by comfy fellow travellers.” He’s not alone in acting like that, and while the likes of him and others lord it over any dissenters because they were on the side of those that held the power as if they were some geniuses for being such, we have no chance of bridging the gap. I highlighted Tweets by those dissenting to poke fun at them, to attack the logical inadequacies in them, and yet, if I feel I’m wrong, I’m never short to say so. If you can’t admit error, then you are a fool.

There are many for which cricket is just a sport, and they say we should be happy just to watch a successful England team and enjoy them (George Dobell has become the patron saint of that argument) because the issues aren’t their fault. I have an appreciation for that position. England can be decent to watch. A number find solace in ODI and T20 for one massive reason, which we’ll go into later. But it’s not that easy for me. I don’t like not being 100% behind them, but I can’t find it in myself to be so.

But if you are made of different stuff, fine. As long as you don’t demean those that seek to get to the bottom of some pretty sordid old nonsense that was going on at the time. Sordid? Try some of the press and their all so cosy relations with the ECB suits. Try appointing a man to Managing Director that was so out of his depth, we were setting up RNLI fund-raisers to get him out. Try the omerta where nothing could be said, except ECB leaks. Try Giles Clarke stitching himself up an international job. Try the new ECB chief making a Horlicks as soon as he started over whether KP could play or not. Try the appointment of Peter Moores as coach, and the post-dismissal justifications so that the decision isn’t cast as an ignorant disaster. Try appointing someone who called the polarising figure of his generation a “c—“ on air and then try to give off his end decision as something even-handed. Try the dodgy dossier. If those of my “enemies”, and they know who they are, think we were in the wrong on that, then let me know how you think that conduct was acceptable. Don’t wash your hands of it. Don’t say there’s no point. That’s a cop out.

It’s not as if we are working hard to find these issues. They were presented to us, and more besides. The game in this country is in a parlous state IF international cricket dies on its arse. The workload on the top players has to increase to be able to pay for the luxurious county championship structure, and the down years when India and Australia don’t come here. They want to shorten test cricket to fit more games in, not manage workloads. They want more T20 because it is context-less fluff that you enjoy at the time, and forget in the morning. And it fills grounds, despite you hardly remembering what happened. Especially at Oval T20 matches.

Cricket, as a sport to blog about, provides me with many things to comment upon, but I find myself in the same position, without, perhaps, the same mental anguish as the last two years. Oh, don’t get me wrong, I’m still angry. But I don’t care as much. Fellow fans went their way, and I’ve gone mine. They can bury themselves in their county cricket snobbery, putting their noses up in the air at us “philistines”, but get remarkably prissy when we dare disagree with them over the international scene. Some may believe, by my relative silence, that peace is in the air. That the fans are becoming united behind one England team in all its formats. That there is no need to argue any more. Because what’s the point?

Sorry. Not built that way. The beatification, both by media and many fans, of Alastair Cook wasn’t a celebration of his achievements to make us happy, it was also a justification of his modus operandi. Thus it was used to beat the KPistas, the ECB rebels, the anti-establishment hooligans. The anti-KP, not flashy, not gauche has got his 10k runs by being the model establishment player – nice (in media terms), hard-working, stubborn, and a leader of men who brought his new charges with him. Your boy is playing T20, hanging out with celebs and causing trouble. “Learn your bloody place”. I spoke to someone who used to be a commenter on here, but is off on other causes at the moment and she said to me “Just cannot bear to watch it with Captain Fantastic in charge”. They are not the only ones. Are cricket fans not in the least concerned by such collateral damage?

The tactic by Strauss and Harrison last spring was easy to see. Hold on for as long as they could, and the anger would subside. Some good wins would help, and they got them. England’s cricket is in decent shape, but in all our hearts we must sense that this is down to the regression of others over the advance of our own. Or do we? Many is the call to end the division and get behind the lads. Some will say they are really nice guys, that they have engaged more with the public, tried to get rid of the arrogance. It’s about the head, I’m afraid, people. Because this is Cook’s team. I don’t think the schism has a chance to end until he’s not here. Much of this is not down to him – it’s his media, it is what he represents in the eyes of a number of us. And some of it is. He’s not 20 years old now, he’s in his 30s. He is one really truly awful run away from having his eyesight or desire questioned. He has an awful penchant of rubbing people up the wrong way who ain’t all in on the cult the media seems to be in thrall to.

So, for now, things are quiet. There is a relative calm. England’s cricketers wouldn’t, and shouldn’t, give a stuff about matters. The ECB hold our sort in contempt at the best of times. Our fellow fans felt no shame in questioning our motives, our desires, our love of the sport, polarising it behind “KP fanboys”. Our media tried, in part, to understand, but really didn’t give a toss, thinking we all want to be journalists and take their jobs, when what we wanted was for our views, held by quite a few, to be fairly represented and the authorities held to account. Summers like these don’t lend themselves to cricket fandom pyrotechnics. There’s enough outside cricket, ha ha, to get on about. But make no mistake, the schism has by no means healed, the malcontents are just not bothered about shouting as much any more, and the cosy little consensus will be maintained for as long as disaster doesn’t befall the England cricket team.

It’s the Silence of the Damned.

	markmanning2014 on You’re On The Road, But…
	Mark on You’re On The Road, But…
	Jomesy on Look In The View Mirror, Is He…
	man in a barrel on Look In The View Mirror, Is He…
	Mark on Look In The View Mirror, Is He…

Being Outside Cricket

The Home of Bilious Inadequates, Vile Ignoramuses and Social Media Zealots

Month: Jul 2016