I picked up a copy of the Evening Standard on the train this evening. On the back there was the repeating of a claim I’d heard already today that this was, in the view of Trevor Bayliss, the most complete performance he had seen from England in his time as coach. But it was when I flicked inside that my heart sunk.
Now people can say this about me and they might have a point. “Dmitri, if this cheeses you off that much, why don’t you try a sport that doesn’t?” Or you could say “Lord Canis Lupus, if you can’t get excited about a great new talent, why do you watch?” Or you could say Mark “surely a coach pumping up the tyres of a young kid isn’t that surprising, is it?”
I’ve been around the block a bit, and try not to get above myself when it comes to hype. I’ve not anointed Virat Kohli the new Tendulkar, Steve Smith as the new Border or Quentin de Kock as the new Gilchrist. Yet they have a more firm body of evidence than Haseeb. Yes, you can say that Haseeb is a young kid and surely you have to get excited, and believe me, I am. He seems a great lad, a great attitude and approach to the game, a beautiful temperament and very importantly for the sport in this country, a British-Asian batsman with what we hope is true staying power. But it’s so early in his career to be giving us this nonsense.
Bayliss, in the article, say Haseeb reminds him of Sangakkara in his love of batting., wanting to practice all the time etc. etc. Great. That’s not what the headline screams, is it? And even the most naive of media trained coaches must have known how this would be presented. Is there a big deal? No, not really, but English sport is littered with young sports stars who flamed out. Four England players made hundreds in this test match and Haseeb wasn’t one of them, but because we’ve been so desperate for an opener this strikes me as a little bit of over excitement. But I’ll say this once, and then hope it sticks. Judge Haseeb after a year. Judge him after this series, on more difficult surfaces than this on. Judge him on a home series against South Africa. Judge him on how he tackles an overseas Ashes series. We have time to see if the kid is the real deal, or if he gets worked out. We know he has the temperament, we can see that. Now let’s see if he is the package. Pumping tyres is all well and good, but if Bayliss really thought that of him, he’d have had him in the team at Chittagong, not at Rajkot. It looks daft, the headline looks daft, and we invite ridicule with this stuff.
It’s not a lot, but if you can’t see why I’m worried, people, you haven’t been paying attention. This England team, this set-up, over the years has chewed up great talent and spat it out. Sure, get excited, but keep your heads. Say nice things, of course. The lad deserves them. But keep some proportion, for heaven’s sake. Our press have built up enough to knock them down. Good luck HH!
I see George was saying this was the most entertaining England team he’s ever seen. Interesting. I’ve been clearing out a lot of stuff and came across the DVDs of the highlights from Adelaide 2010. So I put them on. I watched us bowl out the Aussies for very little, I watched Cook and Trott make hay, and then KP applying the coup de grace. That team would have murdered this one. And with the bat, which I care about the most it has to be said, they were really, really good to watch. Cook’s knock was magnificent – on the back of 235 – and well, KP was KP. Prior’s demolition of the demoralised was fun. I sometimes wonder if George takes the bowling dry thing too much as lacking entertainment. The MCG morning was certainly entertaining!
OK. Hope that explained my thinking, if you care!
Just thought I’d say that I’m reading Ian Chappell’s book at the moment. It makes me sad. Really sad. Chappelli absolutely raves about Sir Garfield Sobers. I hate the fact I’m in my late 40s and only just missed him makes me really sad. I wish I’d got to see him play, even as a childhood memory. But I don’t. I also went on a holiday 11 years ago where the previous year the star guest for the evening I went to was Sobers. I felt a little cheated to get “only” Joel Garner! The Chappell book is a good read so far, and I might do a review when I finish.
OK. That little ramble over, have a good night, and I’ll speak soon…
Unless something very, very odd happens tomorrow, this test match is destined to be filed under “bore draw” along with Nagpur 2012 and Trent Bridge 2014; the last two tests to go the full distance between these two teams. That it doesn’t quite feel like that is because of the debacle in Dhaka. We would, according to the scribes and the pundits, have bitten your hands off for this result. England’s batting looking stronger than it has in the last few seasons. England’s spinners outbowling the Indian spin attack we were supposed to be terrified of. It has been a very good England performance on a surface that has not deteriorated noticeably over the first four days.
Yet again I have a confession to make. I saw the last hours play only. Blame Australia. Watching their collapse in Hobart last night was car crash TV. They not only capitulated to some excellent seam bowling, there was a comedy run out (which prompted the debutant’s brother to storm out in disgust) and Steve Smith assaulting Vernon Philander. Add to that Michael Clarke appearing to be under the apprehension that Philander being off the field meant the visitors had to field with 10 men (the sub fielder I think executed the run out) and Mark Taylor admonishing Paf du Plessis for running towards the umpire on an LBW shout (while sitting next to his co-commentator, that ultimate respecter of umpires, Shane Warne) and I couldn’t take my eyes off it. This meant bed time at 2 am, and waking up late. So sorry, I hope you enjoyed more of the play than I did.
Of course, we are seeing that age old English media trait of appointing someone as the saviour on the basis of first evidence. Take it away Scyld:
Whatever happens in the rest of his 2nd innings, after taking the attack to Jadeja and Ashwin it must be said Hameed is touched with genius.
Now let me say this before you tear into me. I’m thrilled he looks the part, and he does. But he’s playing on a placid surface, against bowlers neutered by the pitch and in a 500 plays 500 test, more or less. What he has shown his temperament and class. Of course he has, but because he’s 19 we’re touting him as some child prodigy. “Touched by genius” in my view is a bit strong. Let’s see a big ton in the 1st innings of a match, or a pressure-filled hundred on a bunsen before we go the whole hog. This is a hugely impressive debut, but it’s not Trott at The Oval in 2009, it’s not KP at Lord’s (coming in at 20/3, soon to be 20/5) and it’s note even Cook at Nagpur in 2006 which was in the balance when he made it. This test was there to be made safe and Hameed has. There’s plenty to get excited about before we make Hall of Fame plans. Scyld can be a bit of an outlier, and in this case, I think the heat might have got to him.
He’s not alone, though. Plenty will follow, marvelling at the talent and temperament of a mere 19 year old. I’m sure I saw someone suggest he make our T20 team (because he hit a six). I’m here to be the grump. Let him play five/ten tests, playing on surfaces more testing than this, to see if he truly is the messiah, or merely a young talented boy.
Adil Rashid. Luxury bowler. Discuss media. Discuss.
The match appears headed for a draw. England’s 114 for 0 put them 163 in front, and a brisk pre-lunch session may tempt the visitors to try to set up a three to three and a half hour exercise in survival. England have worked very hard and will not give the hosts a sniff, so a lead of 270-280 with 45 overs left may be something like a target to go for. There is a school of thought that we should bat out time and let the hosts fry. I hope not, but also strongly believe a big marker has been laid down here by England. We aren’t going to be outmatched so horrendously that 5-0 was on the cards. It’s not the time to gamble, and we have a captain who won’t. If we are back here tomorrow talking about anything other than a routine draw, we are in for a hell of a day.
As Day 2 ended Escort rightly pointed out on the comments to Day 1 that it was a little quiet around here. While there is no doubt that a bad performance, or a moronic press piece set the pulses racing, we aren’t the relentless churls that pressmen of yore (no sign of that blog yet?) tagged us as. We’ve complained that this England batting line-up needed to put scores together, and they have. Not a lot to get mad about, is there?
How this innings will be judged will be clearer in three days time. The media seem to think there is something in this track, although I’ve not seen a lot of the game to comment, but it does seem odd that this wicket appears to have neutralised India’s key weapon, Ravi Ashwin, and as a result they’ve struggled. England appear also to have benefited from some woeful fielding and a little bit of the lady luck that can be so helpful (I’ve watched the highlights of Stokes through the 90s….). India appear to have been relatively untroubled on the way to the close. The thoughts must be that this is a very good batting surface and it will take a lot to get a result. But the thing about test cricket is that one bad session and the match can be thrown into the melting pot.
So with congratulations to our three century makers (and when was the last time we had three centuries in an innings. Without looking it up I’m going for Sydney 2011 as my worst guess) and wishing luck to our spinners tomorrow to get more out of the wicket than the Indians, I hand it over for your observations, your comments on today and importantly for Day 3…
You know I have a rule on this blog. One of the few. I don’t discuss politics. I don’t want you to discuss politics. This is a cricket blog. But I’m not a journo. I don’t get paid.
However, this is not merely a cricket blog, but a journal of my life as well, and you cannot escape life when it hits you between the eyes. I have to say that this morning I did not give a single toss about this test match. I had to face things that actually directly impact my life – you know I go to the States every year, have family there, and have an American spouse. So you aren’t going to get a match report from me. I wasn’t watching, and to a large extent, wasn’t even following the game.
Sean and Chris are both unavailable for selection, so it falls to me. 311 for 4 is an excellent start and it was great that Joe Root converted a 50 to a ton. Not a massive ton, but the first in India by an opposition test player since 2013, I think I read. Moeen has the chance to join him, posing that tantalising question that I sort of raised yesterday (in saying he doesn’t have a long-term future at 5). 99 not out overnight, and hopefully an early milestone and moving on to a nice sizeable knock. 500 has to be the aim, whether we get there or not.
Other match reviews are available, and I’ve not read them, but if you have comments on today and tomorrow’s play, stick them on here. 1460ish days to the next US election. And I’m not allowing comments on that.
I did mention, and was reminded of it by The Bogfather today, that I might replay the Ashes Panel that BOC ran last year. While I don’t envisage doing it for every test, I thought I might start with a pre-1st Test panel.
So, could I have some volunteers?
You will be asked five questions, and you can answer them in any way you want. Long or brief. They will be put on the blog and it starts the discussion.
E-mail me at dmitriold@hotmail.co.uk or leave a message in the comments (leaving an e-mail address).
Cheers,
Dmitri
UPDATE : Panel questions sent out, so I have a quorum. Don’t hesitate to sign up if you wish to take part in the following panels.
England’s defeat yesterday was the most disgraceful thing ever to befall the national team. Losing to a side who had only previously beaten a much weakened West Indies and Zimbabwe is a new nadir in the national fortunes, for which there is no excuse.
Actually, Bangladesh are an improving side and will trouble most teams at home these days.
It was the spinners’ fault – especially that batting collapse.
Gary Ballance was at fault throughout.
It’s fair to say that there’s been no universal response to the result yesterday, and an awful lot of tiptoeing around the wider issues for the England team as they move on to face India in a five match series where they are very definitely the underdogs. Some of it goes beyond legitimate criticism about particular performances and moves on to existing prejudices in some instances, and what can only be seen as blatant attempts at deflection in others.
There are some things that can be safely said – that England do deserve credit for going in the first place, for a second tour after Australia’s aborted one cancelled for security reasons (even if justified) would have crippled Bangladeshi cricket possibly beyond repair. Amid the joy of victory, it was notable that a significant number of home supporters made a point of thanking England for coming in the first place. That it passed off without incident doesn’t in itself justify the decision to go, but it does mean we are able to talk about the cricket itself, and able to revel in the pleasure given to a country that doesn’t exactly get its fair share of good news stories.
It can also be safely said that Bangladesh are a much improved side. Whatever the shortcomings of England, they will give many teams a hard time in their own conditions – particularly the non-Asian sides. Cook deserves credit for rejecting an invitation to wallow in the excuse that the surfaces were difficult by brusquely saying “Why wouldn’t you?” in response to a question about the wickets suiting the spinners. As it turned out, rather than being low and boring in an attempt to scrape a draw, the groundsmen produced result pitches. And well done them, we had two exceptionally entertaining matches. Rather obviously, Bangladesh’s bowling strength is in their spin attack, and while Mehedi Hasan’s glorious start in Test cricket is no more a guide to his longevity than Bob Massie’s early matches, it showed that they have the attack to put sides under serious pressure when conditions allow. That means little when they go away from home, for not a single fast bowler took a wicket for them in this short series, and the prospect of the hard tracks of Australia or South Africa, or the green seamers of England or New Zealand would likely mean they were overwhelmed, but all sides have to begin somewhere, and winning at home is that somewhere.
It’s not just the bowling either; Tamim Iqbal may well love batting against England in particular, but he is a very good player full stop, as is Imrul Kayes, while Shakib Al Hasan is a potent all rounder. The lower order was too often blown away, but there is plenty to work with here. They are improving, and all they need is the opportunity to improve further. If there were to be one good thing to come out of this England tour, then it would be that teams play them more often – for this was their first Test series in over a year. Too long and simply not fair.
Perhaps in advance of the series there was a degree of underestimation about where they were as a side, although given the lack of cricket, and Test cricket in particular, it’s not too surprising that most observers were short of detailed knowledge. That they had better players than in the past was known, but it didn’t mean that there was any kind of expectation they would draw the series. It doesn’t alter the truth that having watched them play this time, there is a recognition that they aren’t a bad side at all now, and that they thoroughly, completely deserved what they got, indeed they perhaps should have won 2-0. Having lost the first game it would have surprised no one if they’d been badly beaten in the second, a narrow defeat is always hard to take. That they went after England with a vengeance instead was wonderful to watch.
That doesn’t necessarily let England off the hook for the result, and while it is true that England were beaten by the better side in Dhaka, it’s reasonable to ask whether Bangladesh should have been the better team, even with all their improvements. It therefore comes down to a question of what England did wrong, how much was forced by Bangladesh, how much was their own shortcomings as players, and how much was underperformance.
What can certainly be said is that by agreeing to play 7 Tests in 8 weeks, and skipping a warm up fixture in India to boot, they brought some of their problems on themselves. This is the ECB’s responsibility rather than the captain or the coach, for they do their masters’ bidding in terms of the itineraries. But with no match between this second Test and the opener in India, they were certainly forced to treat this one at least to some extent as a warm up match for India. That meant resting Broad and bringing in Finn for one of his periodical appearances on surfaces for which he couldn’t be more unsuited. Whether that made all the difference is neither here nor there; Broad didn’t have an exceptional first Test, but he is an exceptional bowler, and dropping him did weaken the side, no matter how necessary that decision might have been, and how wise it might turn out to have been over the next month and a bit.
The other change was dropping Gareth Batty for Zafar Ansari, and it is here we get to the thorny question of the England spin bowling. England played Moeen Ali, Batty, Ansari and Adil Rashid across the two matches. Ansari was on debut, and allowances have to be made for that, while the others have been the recipients of exceptionally strong criticism for their performances. This is grotesquely unfair for a number of reasons. Their returns were not bad at all overall, Moeen averaged 22 with the ball, while Batty and Rashid were a touch under 30. They’re not fantastic figures of course, and certainly nothing like the wicket-taking levels of Hasan or Shakib, but it has to be asked what is expected here. Bangladesh should be expected to have better spinners than England, in the same way that England can expect to have much better fast bowlers than Bangladesh (which they do). Likewise, when they get to India, they’ll be facing better spin bowlers than they possess themselves – this is normal and to be expected. Complaining about it is akin to wishing for golden elephants. The last time England toured India they had the best spinner England have had in 40 years bowling from one end, and another who in another era would have been a fixture in the team for being the best we had by a distance. Indeed, a fit and healthy Panesar right now would be a major upgrade on all of the alternatives. England does not often produce quality spin bowling, and while that is a criticism of the coaching and structure that can and should be made, whining about the positioning of the deckchairs on the Titanic is what it always has been – pointless.
Therefore the only option is to work with what is there. Rashid is a leg spinner; they have always been prone to bowling a bad ball an over, it tends to be in the nature of them with the rare exception of the very best like Shane Warne. Even one as good as Stuart MacGill was relatively expensive. That isn’t to defend his performances, but it is to make the point that if a legspinner is going to be selected in the first place, then some understanding of how to manage that legspinner is needed, plus a decent and realistic level of expectation about what they can and can’t do. You simply don’t pick a leg spinner if the aim is to dry up the runs, it’s not going to happen. Cook has shown little sign of understanding how to captain Rashid, who should be considered a wicket taking weapon, who will go for some runs (rather like Finn come to that). Betraying a complete lack of confidence by having as at one stage six players on the boundary hardly helps the bowler or the team and removes the whole point of having a leggie in the side in the first place.
This is a common attitude problem in the English game, one that goes all the way down to Sunday village cricket, where a seam bowler who gets smashed around the park comes back for another spell later – a spinner suffering the same is lucky to get another bowl three weeks afterwards. It takes an astute and clever captain, sympathetic to his bowlers to manage it and to make the best use of their assets. Cook, unfortunately, is not the man to do that.
Moeen overall bowled passably well – he is what he is, a batsman and part time off spinner converted into being the senior slow bowler. He does let the odd bad ball go down, but the truth of the matter is that people need to deal with that, he’s quite probably the best England have, and is someone who is doing relatively well given where he’s come from bowling wise. Batty’s recall was frowned upon or approved of depending on perspective, and while he didn’t bowl as well as he might have hoped, even at his best he simply isn’t going to run through an Asian side in Asian conditions. These players are very used to facing spin – something else that hasn’t been taken into account when berating the bowlers for not being better than they are, while imagining that left at home is a miracle worker who would have repeated Laker’s feat.
If that reads like an extended defence of the spinners, it’s only partially meant that way. They could certainly have bowled better, they unquestionably could have been captained better, but they are players limited by their English upbringing and learning. The truth is that those who don’t play find their reputations enhanced by virtue of missing a defeat; whoever England select would not change things dramatically, and complaining that they aren’t Graeme Swann is as futile as the years Australia spent discarding spinner after spinner for the crime of not being Shane Warne.
More to the point, if the spinners were average but not appalling – in other words pretty much what could be expected of them, then the attempt to blame them for the match loss and the drawn series is downright peculiar. It certainly wasn’t the cause of collapsing from 100-0 to 164 all out in little more than 20 overs. The pundits have a real habit of demanding the heads of the bowlers for batting problems, and it’s much more realistic to point to the batting failures as being key to England not winning this series. Not one of the top 5 averaged even 30 and they managed just four fifties between them in the series from a combined 20 attempts, with a top score of 68 from Moeen Ali as he and Bairstow attempted to rescue the team from the wreckage of the first morning of the first Test. Only Woakes, Bairstow and Stokes managed to even score 100 runs over the four innings,while just behind those three in the averages was Adil Rashid, who with Woakes performed another recovery act from the shambles of the upper order.
Put simply, blaming the bowling is simply an attempt to project from the reality of where England went badly wrong – the top order batting. Cook was poor, Duckett was brand new, Ballance was lucky to be in the team and was extremely poor, Root was poor. Not many sides can handle the core of their batting malfunctioning repeatedly and go on to win. And here is the problem for India, for it is hardly a shock to anyone to know that they have superior spinners, but for England to have a chance they need in particular for Cook and Root to step up and score runs – and lots and lots of them. They are more than capable of course, Root is a fine player and Cook is an exceptionally good player of spin, and for an opener a phenomenal one. But they could and should be feeling particularly uncomfortable with the way the spinners are getting the blame for not winning a series that was fundamentally about the inability of the England batting to reach 300 in any innings – and only once getting close because the middle and lower order got them there.
Furthermore, of the England players Ben Stokes is the one who can really hold his head up, his bowling was outstanding and his batting was good enough to score more runs than anyone else. Yet the comment about him largely concerns his behaviour in getting into a spat with opponents. Stokes is a fiery character alright, but it is peculiar to say the least that this gets attention and criticism ahead of the failures of those above him. This blog has expressed concern on a number of occasions that a few media types are waiting for him to fail so they can properly put the boot in – nothing has happened which changes that worry, for we know all too well that it has happened before.
Bangladesh can bask in the glow of a successful short series, while England go to India with a lot of questions to answer. It is to be hoped that some spend time on the questions that matter rather than wishing things were different than they are. That is nothing but carping. Whinging. And if it’s unfair on some of the England players, it’s more than just unfair when it comes to the Bangladesh ones – it’s disrespectful. This was an enjoyable and hard fought series, and one where a deciding Test would be just perfect. Bangladesh would be quite strongly fancied to win it.
I slept, like most of you no doubt, through the first two sessions. England seemed to have put in a decent effort to keep the damage down to needing just 270-odd, but then I caught up with the news that the fielding was duff, the conduct might not have been all it was and, well, we weren’t that good.
Then I saw 100-0 at tea and thought, oh well, we’re doing very well, and maybe there are not so many terrors in the pitch. Then we watched the collapse. Duckett went for an aggressive 56, and then the house of cards collapsed.
There’s so much to say, but the immediate aftermath isn’t it. What we can say that Bangladesh demolished us today. Absolutely thrashed us. Humiliated England. Watching the media this week is going to be incredibly interesting. The spinners will cop it, of course they will, but what about the arrogance of our selection? What about the batting, the bloody batting, which is still paying for the sins of the past. I’m not even going to talk about our captain. Well, I will, but not now.
England, remember, were being cited as a “great team” not so long ago. World number 1 team. But it’s ok. Matt Prior has just told us the players “will be hurting”. I look forward to the nonsense that will follow. As I watch Twitter, James Taylor is being turned into Graham Thorpe in terms of batting on the sub-continent.
Bangladesh. Well done. To Mehedi, a fantastic display. To Shakib and the others who have been through the travails, all praise.
Let’s have some truths here. Let’s be honest with our cricketing public. We’re watching you Team England, we’re watching you Team ECB, we’re watching you media.
So advantage Bangladesh. The fact that they were able to quickly score against the new ball has in all likelihood put them in the driving seat to win this Test. Despite Ansari getting rid of Mahmudullah at stumps, England will need a number of quick wickets in the morning to give them any hope of winning the game, as I feel that anything above 220 on this pitch is likely to be too much. Whereas England tried to be positive against the new ball and got out, Tamim in particular, showed why it is such a pity that we don’t get to see him bat more in Test matches. There is a skill in taking on the opposition opening bowlers on a pitch that as an understatement, is conducive to spin and whilst he may have only made 40 odd in this innings, what he did do was wrestle any momentum away from England.
To be fair to the England team, that we even got past the Bangladesh 1st innings is an achievement in itself. With the team hovering on the wrong end of another bating collapse at 144-8, Woakes and Rashid showed the top order how it’s done by producing a partnership with a lot of guts and no little skill to get England to what we hoped was a priceless first innings lead. The fact that Rashid, despite batting quite beautifully, was still the target of a number of MSM snipes clearly shows there is still very much an agenda:
Now it’s fair to say that Rashid hasn’t come on as we hoped he would have, he can bowl brilliant wicket taking deliveries but amongst those, he is likely to bowl some dross and half trackers along the way; however we’re not exactly enamored in the spin bowling department at the moment, so the criticism that has been aimed at him during his Test career so far is far from helpful. One can only look back at this piece of gold, from our favourite ex-Chief Cricket Correspondent to work out that Adil Rashid is not likely to be getting a seat at the Alastair Cook table anytime soon:
“Rashid, though, is sailing close to the wind with his club and career: there are sceptics about, some with a greater depth of knowledge than most, and his card has been marked.”
Of course having a captain that accepts that he will go for runs but take wickets if you give him the support and field that he needs would be nice. Unfortunately the ‘bowl dry’ mentality of past eras still is at the forefront of English cricket’s mindset. The fact that he came on so late for a bowl in the 2nd innings today shows quite clearly that Cook has either no faith in him or simply has no idea how to utilize him.
As for the batting, it was the same old story. The top order has failed more times than a Southeastern train at rush hour and yet again it was the lower order that tried to dig them out of a hole. Gary Ballance is the man getting the most heat from our beloved national press at the moment, and on this occasion I can’t really disagree with the MSM here, as his technique against all forms of bowling looks all over the place. I was surprised they picked him for the subcontinent tour as he looked all at sea against an admittedly world class spinner in Yasir Shah in England over the summer. However the fact the Ballance keeps failing with the bat nicely takes the heat away from another batsman who has struggled for form over an even longer period. 4 tons in the last 42 Tests is a pretty damning statistic for any batsman who is proclaimed to be world class, and you could guarantee that if this was for example Ian Bell, the MSM would be queuing up to demand that he is dropped; however this is not Ian Bell, this is captain fantastic and I have yet to see even a murmur questioning Alastair Cook’s form. The thing with Cook is that unless he is contributing with the bat, then he isn’t contributing at all. His captaincy is a mixture of conservatism combined with an inherent streak of stubbornness and inflexibility. Unless England are able to get a first innings lead and then squeeze the opposition, he seems completely lost. There is no plan B apart from hoping that Stokes, Anderson or Broad suddenly deliver a world-class spell out of nowhere. I’ve occasionally commented that the Investec Zebra would be more proactive in the field and certainly in conditions that don’t favour our seam attack, this seems like a fairer and fairer reflection of Cook’s tenure. A funky Captain he is not.
Of course, many will counter this argument by pointing out the number of runs that Cook has scored over the course of his England career and he does indeed have an impressive record; however the Cook of pre-2010 and the Cook of post 2010 are two completely different animals. He has been worked out by opposition bowlers, they know where to bowl at him and how to keep the pressure on him, there simply is no fear from the opposition side when he comes out to bat. The MSM will continue to laud him as the great new hope, the leader of our group of up and coming band of warriors and there is absolutely no chance that he will dropped until after the next Ashes series (and even then it is likely to be a polite ask as to whether he would care to step aside); however Cook to most unbiased observers, seems to be slightly lucky that we simply have no other options at the top of the order. It all reminds me of Mark Taylor when he was coming to the end of his career (except Taylor was a better captain), a very good player once, but one that was struggling to justify a place in the team on his batting alone.
The clocks go back tonight, so who knows what time Day 3 is likely to start in the UK tomorrow but I can guarantee that I’m likely to be in bed for most of the action. For those that are far more committed than me, please post any comments on Day 3 below before another cretin appears on Twitter or WordPress try to shut us down again:
Good evening. We’re back online. Apologies for the inconvenience caused.
HDWLIA is now closed again. I thought I might keep it up and running for a bit, but someone decided to ruin it. I’ll say no more than that as I don’t want to give the cretin more publicity than he/she deserves, but hopefully they’ll get bored soon.
Today there were lots of early runs, then very many wickets. Then England lost some wickets too. The game is “evenly poised”. That’s all you are getting. I’m knackered.
Comments on tomorrow’s play below.
Those of you with memories of February 9, 2015…..I’ll leave it there.
If you have come here looking for marks out of ten, then you have come to the wrong place. If you have come here to look for a tale of derring do, of great escapes, of wondrous times, then I suggest you log on to the Twelfth Man, or whatever the Tufty Club is that is approved by the ECB (or is that All Out Cricket?). If it is grumpiness, tetchiness and a completely egregious mention of Kevin Pietersen, then this might be for you.
England have completed a 22 run victory over Bangladesh in a tight, absorbing test match, with lots of good entertainment and a tense, taut ending. What this was not was a good England performance. Just like 18 months ago in Grenada, where the Jimmy Anderson show won England a test, Chittagong was Ben Stokes saving our hides. This may, or may not, be a portent of things to come, but remember, after Grenada came Bridgetown, and defeat to a team we would probably all believe would struggle against Bangladesh if played now, and who are living down to Costcutter Charlie’s description of “Mediocre”.
Let’s focus on the good stuff first. It was a top test match to watch. How many actually did in this country will be interesting to note – I wonder how ITV4 did for viewers, for instance – but those that missed this because it was “only Bangladesh” will have missed a contest that ebbed and flowed. BBC Sport were busy this morning lauding England for an “unlikely victory”, which is a bit of nonsense because for the vast majority of this test England had their noses slightly in front. After Day 1 we thought it was a competitive score on the board; after Day 2 with the late wicket we thought it was honours even, but Bangladesh had to bat last; at the end of Day 3, after another reliable top order subsidence, England had “enough runs” and were firm favourites; and on Day 4, England had two tail order wickets to take at the end of it, looking really shaky when Rahim and Sabbir were in partnership. It’s not exactly Botham’s Ashes or Adelaide 2006.
England won because of more experience, probably – and it’s hard to dispute that when the team you are up against haven’t played a test for 14 months – and they had the most influential performer on either side, Ben Stokes. For the Durham man this was a test match he can look on with great pride. He saved England’s bacon in the second innings with a mature, composed, and very clinical 85 which should take pride of place in his collection of batting performances. I ignore the Aussie with the constantly changing moniker, and his lame attempts to belittle the output of Stokes. He was magnificent. 6 wickets in the match to add to his runs made him a slam dunk man of the match.
Not To Be Trusted
Much has been said about how Cook only trusted his seamers (Stokes and Broad in particular) at the end of the game. Much was also said last night about the lion-hearted Broad “doing it again when it counted”. I must be watching a different game to these people. I saw tons of criticism of the spin-bowling allowing them to get that close (and not the top order batting for collapsing like wet cardboard, AGAIN). The top six in the Bangladesh batting order, the six you needed to get rid of, were all dismissed by spinners in the second innings. Yes. You wouldn’t know that from the reports, the tut-tutting online, the nonsense from Newman. The quicker bowlers knocked over the tail, the top order eked out by the spinners. I’m not saying the garden is rosy, I’m not saying we’ve found our spinning solution, and I’m not saying that this will work in India, but you’d have thought they’d all gone 1/120 the way people are going on. They weren’t Murali, or even Swann, but they were decent bowlers, maybe not quite test class, doing a job for England. In this mad rush to anoint a team as its greatest ever, you need to realise that not every generation is blessed with the tools to do so. I remember real dead losses like Richard Dawson and Ian Blackwell given a go.
Broad the Lionheart got rid of numbers 8 and 9. This wasn’t Trent Bridge, Jo’burg or even Oval 2009, but we do go overboard. That I’ve realised only too greatly since the 2013/14 epiphany. I hope we’ve learned from the past that we have a doughty, resilient side, with a long batting order, a decent, if limited bowling attack, and that there will be pains and losses along the way. We should realise that we have a flaky top order, a limited captain, and a propensity to alarming slumps when the intensity goes from their game. We are a little too reliant on super-performances to pull out matches, which isn’t the recipe for reliability. We are quite an enjoyable team to watch, but what we are not, and what this team should never be proposed as, is a great team, a team worthy of World #1. You might think that this is just the same old same old from me (and I’m reluctant to use too many personal pro-nouns), but I’ve not exactly been given a reason to hold those words back, have I? Thankfully, the response to this win has been more restrained than Grenada, for instance.
So let’s run through the team performance.
Cook – Returned with great fanfare from the attendant hordes, rejoicing in his return, and getting DDC some hits. Didn’t produce the runs we will eventually need from him, and his leadership was conservative. I think he should trust his spinners more, but that’s really easy for me to say. Now it is four test centuries in 42 test matches, if you are counting.
Duckett – A nondescript debut. Not having his technique demolished after two low scores could be an indicator that he’s in the chosen group of players who the media might give a chance to. See my comments on an earlier post about how not making 20 in your first test match is not a portent of great times unless you are Gooch or Hutton (and a couple of others).
Root – A quiet test match, which means he isn’t the heartbeat of the team for this test match. A massive contribution in the next, and a quiet test from Stokes will mean the clichés will be reversed. Perception here is he may have gone off the boil a little, which is understandable given he didn’t play the ODIs, and also he’s played a ton of cricket. That balance isn’t always easy. Which leads me to…
Ballance – Ballance is in that room where no-one wants to be. The “next one the media want out” room. I love how we are accused on here of not backing our players, but within ten minutes of a dismissal the journos are tweeting “he has to be gone”. I’d like to see them work on that basis, and perform their best. Ballance has made four test hundreds, and is derided for his technique. Cook can go months (and yes, him again) and all that the media care about is falling over themselves to say “he’s back to his best” after some flaky runs. Lord knows what they’d say about Tres, for example, now. Ballance had a poor game. Only he is on the hot seat.
Ali – Very useful runs in the first innings, part of the problem in the second. Five wickets in the match, but because he didn’t run through them, and bowled his usual assortment, he’s part of the problem. That five of them were top order batsmen (and left handers) is his fault. Seemed a pretty usual Mooen match to me, does things well in parts, does things not so well. Having made 7 or 8 his home, and effectively so, he’s back up the order.
Stokes – A terrific performance, with his second innings 85 a really top notch performance. With the ball he was our main weapon, snagging six wickets, and getting the vital blow of Rahim late on Day 2 to perhaps turn the match (given the tail subsided the following day). Interesting point raised by Nick Knight (yes, stick with me), that it seems as though Cook leans on Stokes for advice (said on Day 4) and that his views are quite widely respected in the team. He’s the heartbeat (or at least until Joe Root makes runs) of the team. Clearly man of the match.
Bairstow – Jonny is now a team fixture, and the debate as to whether he or Buttler should be the keeper is pretty much closed in my eyes (and I’m a Buttler fan). Again he came to our rescue, with 99 runs across two innings, both in key alliances to dig England out of a hole. It is a role he is becoming used to, but I feel we rely on too much. He dropped a big chance last night, that to this untrained keeper’s eye looked like a horrible one to take (Chris might opine), and copped a Hollywood strop for his troubles. Dunno, but I reached right for KP – the Autobiography at that point. Otherwise, on a difficult surface his improvement was there to see.
Woakes – A nothing game really with the ball, yet another 50+ runs with the bat at number 8. They are vital runs, coming in at 194/6 in the first and sticking around for another 60 or so and in at 189/6 in the 2nd and being there at the end for another 50 runs. 0/15 and 0/10 in two seven over efforts with the ball, keeping it tight, but not getting wickets.
Rashid – I can say that I didn’t see a lot of his bowling in this match, but I tend not to listen to what I’m being told by people who have made up their mind about him long before he reached the test team. He’s going to be a “when it clicks” it bowler. A sort of spin equivalent to Devon Malcolm. Is this a long-term recipe for a team that aspires to greatness? Probably not, because we are all about containment rather than attack. He didn’t have a great game. He knows that. Should we jack him in? Well, you’ve either made up your mind and wild horses wouldn’t make you do it, or you think, perhaps he is that weapon we might, one day, need.
Broad – He’s going to be called Hollywood from now on. (Interesting only to me, I call Neil Warnock “Hollywood” in football). Hollywood is the man to win you the game. He can bowl unplayable spells, He can also average 143 in India. Broad nicked out two late wickets last night to put England in control, but in context, it was “just” the numbers 8 or 9. No-one else was going to get the Hollywood glare if they’d done it (perhaps Stokes). Two double figure scores should not be overlooked, scratching out vital runs, and yet having us pine for the man capable of 169 v Pakistan.
Batty – Again, didn’t see a lot, but the one spell I did saw him bowl well, look dangerous, and having the batsmen taking risks to score. But then it’s really fashionable in cricket circles to slag off Batty. True, he’s 39. Newman uses him as a reason to bemoan England spin bowling (I’ll bet if Cook is still playing with England in his late 30s we won’t be seeing the same). But Batty took a few wickets, including the key breakthrough of Rahim to end the menacing 6th wicket partnership, and still the people moan. Again, what it is it about us not backing our players? I’ve read the slamming verdicts on him, and note that, yet again, we are the ones with the agenda.
To the other question / debate that has been posed. How should Bangladesh treat this performance and how should England fans approach it? First of all this wasn’t Bangladesh’s first chance to push a top team to the limit. Last year in Chittagong they took a decent first innings lead on South Africa before the rains came to ruin the match. This should, if Bangladesh are approaching this the right way, a pleasure in being a plucky loser to a world power, but a real case of “we probably should have won this”. To have chased down 280-odd would have been magnificent. I’m not having the “moral winner” stuff, because England made it hard work (and because Bangladesh made them work hard), but I probably would like to judge this off the back of the second test back in Dhaka later this week. England, after all, looked like world-beaters in the 1997 first Ashes test, but subsided. Bangladesh need to maintain the intensity.
As for whether England fans should cheer on Bangladesh, well you know our site’s views on that. You should be free to choose who you want to win without admonishment. I don’t necessarily cheer on the oppo, but I also don’t get as mad about England as I used to which I think allows me to take a more dispassionate view on proceedings. It certainly helps in not losing my temper at the latest move I disagree with. It also allows me to laugh when the pants on fire enthusiasts stretch their latest (il)logical leaps of faith. I might have a dispassionate view on England, but I’m not about to reduce the passion for the game. This test match was a cracker. It deserves 2000+ words on it as an Ashes test might. It had great storylines, it had great drama and importantly it had a great test match wicket. So many of us were thinking it wasn’t going to be up to five days play, but the surface played its part in this absorbing contest. Let’s hope Dhaka brings us a repeat.
Happy to hear your thoughts. I’ll have some other takes tomorrow, if I have the time.
Unless something very, very odd happens tomorrow, this test match is destined to be filed under “bore draw” along with Nagpur 2012 and Trent Bridge 2014; the last two tests to go the full distance between these two teams. That it doesn’t quite feel like that is because of the debacle in Dhaka. We would, according to the scribes and the pundits, have bitten your hands off for this result. England’s batting looking stronger than it has in the last few seasons. England’s spinners outbowling the Indian spin attack we were supposed to be terrified of. It has been a very good England performance on a surface that has not deteriorated noticeably over the first four days.
Being Outside Cricket 