2015 Test Century Watch – #33 – Asad Shafiq

LordCanisLupus2 Comments

Asad_Shafiq__30_exdrb_Pak101(dot)com

Asad Shafiq – 131 v Sri Lanka at Galle

Asad Shafiq joins Steve Smith, Alastair Cook, BJ Watling and Kane Williamson in making his second century of the calendar year. Shafiq’s seventh test hundred and his second highest score in test matches. Shafiq isn’t doing well in the DBTA stakes – that is his average over 100, which is just 20. But it has to be remembered he is usually the last of the top line batsmen and is batting with the tail. Shafiq is certainly having a decent 2015!

Shafiq already had two half centuries at Galle (80 in 2012, 75 in 2014) so he’s had a record there. This was his fifth century away from the UAE and his second in Sri Lanka (he made 100 not out in Pallekele in 2012) which was his second test hundred. Continue reading →

Wolfy Blast

LordCanisLupus29 Comments

Before I start, let me point you in the direction of two excellent pieces I read today.

Andrew Miller’s piece on Alastair Cook (and thanks to SimonH for the heads up) is the sort of writing that the Cricketer misses. It doesn’t tally with all I believe in this saga, but it’s well put together, it comes across as considered, even-handed and evidential, and despite one use of “conspiracy theorist”, I’ll let Andrew off as his description of the “outside cricket” statement nails it. More on that below.

Also, David Oram’s piece on the ostracising of Reds Perreira and Tony Cozier, as well as Kenny Benjamin and Michael Holding, from West Indian commentary puts some of the below piece into perspective. It couldn’t happen here? Well, we had “something must be done” and the reported KP request. Who knows. Ruling bodies seem to think the sport is about them.

So to the meat of the argument.

As per usual I’m going to kick a piece off and not really knowing where it is going to end up. But the very minor events of last night, as a reaction to a post that had a brief shelf-life called “Hardly” was almost amazing, even by the standards of some of the stuff that had been seen in the HDWLIA days. A blog that was going slightly moribund as I tried so hard to get up for the Ashes had a rant laid down before it and I can tell you, by the hit rate, which gets the readers’ juices flowing and what doesn’t. I mentioned on a frank twitter exchange with someone we might know that I wrote what I did last night as a partial experiment. I wanted to see if I could still get the rage going, still see if it’s what the readership react to. It wasn’t contrived AT ALL, but it’s a piece I’ve avoided writing for quite a while now.

The fact is that the whole of the last 18 months has got me in a combative mood towards those that challenge me, and more, the opinions I hold. I am not, by any stretch of the imagination, a rebel of any kind. I am not some political animal who rages against everything. What does annoy me is being told what to think, told what I am thinking, told something without evidence and treated like an idiot. And yes, I don’t like being misrepresented, and in the case of last night’s post, I believe I misrepresented Lawrence Booth’s position. I certainly did not misrepresent Paul Newman’s.

The problem with the 140 character format is you can leap to your own conclusions and they may be wrong. The problem with the longer reading format is you can leap to your own conclusions on the basis of a couple of sentences. I am particularly touchy when it comes to the inside/outside cricket thing. After all, the blog is named after that phrase. To belittle its significance is, in a small way, belittling the premise of this blog. On that February day, and frankly you can stick all the excuses you want, a professional organisation has no excuses for it, the authorities, having sacked a prominent player, and told the paying public to just accept it, threw in a phrase “outside cricket”. We aren’t a bunch of muppets, we knew full well what they were talking about, and it was one man. But instead of calling him out, they thought they’d be clever. They could have said “certain individuals”, “associates of people involved”, or anything like that. No, they put in the phrase “outside cricket”. It may have meant one man, but it opened the window into their DNA. We’re inside, and if you’re not inside, you’re outside, which means shut the hell up, and butt out.

So many journos are rapid to emphasise the first part – the Piers Morgan part – as if we’re elementary school pupils who need education by constant repetition. No. Increasingly a number, not all, journalists need to have that method applied to the true insight on outside cricket. There is an attitude around that say we are too touchy about it, that it was clumsy, that it wasn’t meant as implied, that it was really all about one person. Well, they knew the storm it caused, and apology there has been none. If there was, I certainly missed it. The ECB acted like all arrogant, out of touch organisations do. It wasn’t going to admit it had made a mistake. Instead, they’d hope us shallow proles would be ameliorated by performances on the field and new fresh brands etc. (note – Andrew Miller says exactly the same in his excellent piece on Alastair Cook) In short, they hoped the team would dig them out and make us forget.

When that didn’t work, we were marginalised. Attempts were made to make us look like idiots. False dawns were (and still are) exaggerated beyond belief. How many pieces do we see about bilious inadequate, the phenomenon of social media and the silent majority codswallop? It’s again, as if we are too stupid to understand. I see our hit rates for a month, and the number of visitors we get. I know this blog is seen by a very small section of the cricket community. Fine by me. While the message can be intemperate, maybe a bit OTT, from my behalf, I didn’t exactly get noticed by being all sweetness and light. Because to do that you become neutered. When an unreasonable party faces someone being aggressive, they tend to blame that party for being unreasonable. To divert attention away from their own failings. I’m really not like that. Nor are many of the readers here.

This is rare from me, but I do apologise to Lawrence, having considered my position overnight, for perhaps reacting in the wrong way to his tweets. If the first paragraph of “Hardly” had been more clear, maybe he could see why, but that’s not enough from me to justify my jumping the gun. I have to recognise when I’ve over-stepped the mark and over-reacted. Lawrence has been someone prepared to break bread with me, and I think using his tweet to post that item was not the brightest thing I’ve ever done. I can still see why I reacted to it the way I did, but I needed to stop and think. We should all learn along the way. I am not one who will let that Piers Morgan / Outside Cricket thing pass, but also Lawrence’s Wisden notes, his comments, and what he says to me along the way, I should have taken into account. My mistake.

There comes a point when you blog, and 18 months full on is pretty hard work, where you evaluate where you are. In terms of quality of writing, this blog is better than ever. TLG is a brilliant addition (thanks jofo), I love the panel stuff, I’ve enjoyed the memories work and others seem to enjoy it too, and at times it has been fun. But the mood that made this blog what it was is changing, and I’m wrestling with myself over whether we can have the success and feedback (struggling for the right word) in an environment like this. There is a “fear” (if that’s the right word) that this blog is a “bad times” blog and when success comes to this England team, as it will, can it function and survive?

This is not a blog that is negative for the sake of it. Seriously, believe it or not, it isn’t. It’s just that negativity brings the best out of me, and many of you. By negativity, of course, I mean critiquing bad results, bad administration, bad reporting not just being doom and gloom merchants. We enjoyed the ODI series that just went by (how could you not watching England bat like that) but instead of many of the print and TV journos who only jumped on the “we are out of date” bandwagon once the World Cup got underway, we’d been banging on about it for ages. Yet we are pilloried by insinuation if we are “not reconnecting with the team” or “falling in love with it”. I’m not. Nowhere near it. I’m pleased we played well. I’m effing livid we blew a World Cup and no-one did anything to change it beforehand. That’s in the past now. Doesn’t matter etc. Because if you think it did, you’d be aiming your laser missile at the ECB, who made Downton carry the can, and then his greatest coach of a generation.

From where I sit, I see much journalism determined by access. It was one of Brian Carpenter’s criticism of HDWLIA in Wisden (don’t get me wrong, I thought it was an incredibly fair article) that I maybe didn’t have an understanding of their pressures. Fine. I probably don’t know the realpolitk of modern sports reporting. That’s because I’m not a journalist. But what I see from the outside is not the stenographer that some of the commenters on here are seeing (and they may be right), but more reporting by access. Benny, I think, on here says that much of the press coverage now in newspapers is out of date by the time you read it, because bloggers get there first, or the internet has it all up. Yes, to a degree, but I was always one who wanted to read what others thought. Half the fun of a Newman column is reading his opinions, and then getting angry about them. The same with Selvey. But remembering that those people have vastly larger
audiences than us and are writing to be read by the fanatics and the casual fan. They have vastly more influence on shaping views than we ever will.

I’ve banged on about the Tyers Twitter Tendency – the inside knowledge what I can’t tell you plebs approach – for ages, but it grates. I wrestle with the fact I talk to a couple of journalists behind the scenes and do not report it here. Am I being a hypocrite? Probably, but this is because I’ve actually not been expressly asked to keep this stuff quiet, and I treat it as a relatively private conversation (I’ve shared a couple of things with my co-writer to be fair). These guys are dealing with the decision makers, and in some cases, are consulted by those decision makers (Downton freely admitted it). That’s where there’s a lack of trust, so that when we see the Outside Cricket line is about Piers Morgan, I get tetchy. That’s the ECB line. You are reporting the ECB line, because they don’t want to admit that’s how they think about cricket, and their public. My touchiness on this is my problem. You wouldn’t have read the stuff on this blog for
the time you have if you didn’t at least respect where it came from.

I will release the Hardly post without the bit referring to the Outside Cricket exchange which will make the comments look slightly odd. Apologies for the long-winded nature of this post, and it’s only touched the surface of what I would wish to say, but it needed clarifying.

Note – Hardly

LordCanisLupus38 Comments

I’ve not done this much before, but I’ve taken a post down.

I want to reconsider it before I put it out again. I’m sorry folks, but that’s the way it is. If people read the first part of the post, they might see some reason why I reacted the way I did. Maybe I should have left it longer before I posted.

Speak soon.

It was interesting the reaction it got. In more than one way. All these Ashes Memories and panels are treated with equanimity and quite low hit rates. Put out a “Dmitri Rant” post aimed at my favorite targets and “bang”. The first 30 minutes after release and the dial rocketed.

Guess I know now what floats the boats.

Hardly

LordCanisLupus24 Comments

I was in good cheer when I read another tweet yesterday, and which I’ve seen in today’s amazing episode of The Cricketer Magazine.

I mean, seriously. I am getting to be seriously crotchety in my old age, but I hate this shit. I realise we live in a corporate world, where sport has to flog itself to maximise the revenues for its players and so forth. But Hardy’s doesn’t own the Ashes, and they aren’t some commodity that can be flogged to death to some corporate with ties to the sport as deep as a puddle. But no, let’s have it hawked out and retweeted by the players so they can earn a few more bucks. Let’s have all the interviews by England players sponsored so they can earn a few more quid. I even saw an advert on Twitter by Specsavers using the Ashes.

While I don’t doubt the sporting commitment of any of these players, there seems far too much of players hawking themselves to flog a bit of the sponsors wares and not enough actual proper engagement with the hoi polloi who follow them around. The team looks appallingly distant still. I get no more of a warm glow from Alastair Cook as I do from my neighbours on the other side of the estate I live on. I hate how sport has become a corporate vehicle, so it’s corporate first, second, third, fourth and so on, and the punter comes a distant last. The corporate pays and gets the finest seats, the best service, and fuck me blind, decent beer. We sit in the cheap seats, have to somehow manage to carry four beers in a paper/cardboard contraption that happens to break if it gets to wet to a crowded seat, with eff all leg room, to be bombarded by nonsense, have official rehydration breaks, have the most prestigious test series in the game paired with an investment bank every time it is mentioned over here (it was never the Cornhill Insurance Ashes, was it) and drink absolute piss masquerading as one of Paul Sheldon’s selection of “fine beers”.

Their priority is to make money – the players and the administrators. To soak the asset. If they see off some of the low earners or recalcitrant fans, well that’s just collateral damage. They probably wouldn’t drink Hardy’s wine, probably think Waitrose is a bit too pricy, wouldn’t have a scooby who Royal London are, think tap water is fine to drink, don’t use an investment bank and so on and so forth. Stuff ’em. After all, they are outside cricket.

Commercialisation is a growing annoyance, and don’t tell me the journos don’t think so. Agnew, for one, was livid he had to go through this “interview is brought to you by…” crap. The players seriously don’t help themselves when any interview they have is done under serious media management and only on the premise that they can hawk something for a few bob more. This tweet summed it up…

Which brings neatly on to Betway’s new “employee” in his Editor’s notes in The Cricketer…

“Alastair Cook has been called a weasel and a coward and other derogatory things. He does not deserve any of it.”

Ah. But calling someone who scored 8181 test runs a c–t is ok. Rah Rah. The article has decency all over it. Alastair is a thoroughly decent man. If you get a chance, read it. It’s like a bloody love letter. There seems no recognition that there is another interpretation of all this. That Cook has never truly explained the decision that he must have been party to to (a) exclude Pietersen and (b) as Dean Wilson reported, I believe, at the time, that he maintains a veto over his return. I call not explaining this as, yes, a form of cowardice. A form of weasel behaviour. He may have very good reasons, but I’ll bet he’s storing them up for a lovely autobiography somewhere down the line. Hughes, of course, conflates the cowardice line with actual facing up to quick bolwing in a marvellously ridiculous finale…

“He (Cook) is the antithesis of the men who say, “It’s the way I play.” He is constantly evolving as a player and as a leader and is about to confront the fastest attack and feistiest foe to visit these shores for many a year. So whatever you think of him, don’t call him a weasel or a coward.”

Bloody hell. Instead, we’ll just laugh at this piece of analysis (as previewed in comments below) in a tweet from Tickers.

Indeed.

I’m sorry, but Lovejoy, complete with stupid mug shot is at it again in The Cricketer…

“Obviously the above are moot points if England themselves have a divided camp and are still being forced to answer questions about the captain, opening batsman and other extraneous stories that refuse to die down. Alastair Cook must shrug off any worries about the hierarchy and apparent criticism from the media and get back to enjoying the role of prolific run scorer and team captain.”

Count the many ways this is laughable.

2015 Test Century Watch – #32 – Kaushal Silva

LordCanisLupus9 Comments

bhagya-and-kaushal-55

Kaushal Silva – 125 v Pakistan at Galle

In his 17th test match Kaushal Silva scored his second test hundred, his second highest test score, his highest score in Sri Lanka in tests, and without him Sri Lanka would have been in even bigger trouble than they ended up. It wasn’t a quick ton, but welcome nonetheless.

I expected 125 to be a pretty dull century watch, but it isn’t really. For instance, Silva is the first man to be dismissed on 125 in 7 years. The previous one was Thilan Samraweera, who made the score against the West Indies in Port of Spain. You expect this sort of score to be made much more frequently. This was the 36th instance of 125, with the last one being an unbeaten innings by Marcus North in 2009. Anyone remember that one at Cardiff. How topical….

Have you seen a 125, Dmitri? Nope. Just seven have been made since 2000 (1999 was a bumber year with three) and none in tests I’ve been at. Some notable 125s? Mike Atherton almost certainly has the slowest, with his monolithic effort in Karachi in December 2000, that , if I recall correctly one prominent cricket journalist berated for its sheer obduracy. We ended up winning that game. Ah, the press (now if only I can remember who it was without delving into old Wisdens). I remember watching Greg Blewett’s 125 at Edgbaston in 1997, when he and Taylor were starting to make a 350 run lead look vulnerable.

Desmond Haynes is the only man to make two scores of 125 in tests. One was at The Oval in the Blackwash series after he had a pretty raw time of it while all else about him was carnage, and the other was in his test dotage in 1993 against Pakistan in Bridgetown. I think Bourda, Georgetown is the only venue that has seen three scores of 125.

The first 125, and I always try to do the first of each score, was also, surprisingly, very late on in test cricket. The scorer of it was by Pieter van der Bijl in a rather famous test match played at Kingsmead, Durban in March 1939. This was, of course, the famous timeless test, when England were set the mere total of 696 to win a test, and had to leave the scene on 654/4 because their boat was sailing home. Van der Bijl’s innings of 125 was made in the first dig, when the hosts made 530 in a mere 202 overs – and these were 8 ball overs! England responded with 316, and instead of enforcing the follow on, the hosts piled on another 481 runs, at a better pace, with van der Bijl making another 97.

There is, bizarrely, a cricinfo report of this hundred!

To finish off, this was the 42nd century made by a Sri Lankan against Pakistan. This score places him 24th overall, the third highest at Galle in this match-up and the 12th highest in Sri Lanka. Sangakkara holds most of the records, so we’ll leave him to it. Except the highest score in tests between these two teams – Sanath Jayasuriya leads the way on that with 253 in Faisalabad in 2004. It’s the 226th century by a Sri Lankan in tests. It was the 53rd test century made at Galle.

Kaushal Silva’s century came up in 261 balls with 15 x 4.

2015 Test Century Watch – #31 – Steve Smith

LordCanisLupus2 Comments

steve-smith_1sf5t1glu2e9j1v73issyo604sSteve Smith – 199 v West Indies at Sabina Park, Kingston, Jamaica

Let’s get stuck into this meaty little innings played at a venue with a long history of test cricket. A recipe for some severe stat-mining, let alone the symbolic nature of the score alone.

This was the 91st century made at Sabina Park. Steve Smith became the first person to pass 163 and not make it all the way to his double hundred at this venue. That 163 was made by Roy Fredericks in 1972. 15 double hundreds (including two triples), so Smith slots in at #16. One boundary hit and he would have moved past two Aussie legends to become the innings record holder for his country at Sabina Park. Steve Waugh’s 200 in the series clinching win in 1995, and if it had been a six, Neil Harvey’s 204 in 1955 would have been shunted down to the minor placings. The highest score by a non-West Indian at Kingston is Andrew Sandham, and we’ve mentioned him before in Century Watch.

Only one player with three initials (SPD Smith) has made a higher score at Kingston in tests. Sir FMM Worrell was his name. Reasonable player. The two with just one initial to do it were both English. A Sandham and L Hutton.

This was Smith’s highest score in test cricket beating his 192 in the Boxing Day test against India just six months ago. It is his third score of 150 or above in seven months. No wonder he is world #1 at the moment. It was his first test hundred batting at #3 in the order. He now has 9 test hundreds.

So to 199. I’ve not seen one. I saw Vaughan get out in the 190s, and saw Hayden get out for 197 at Brisbane, so been close. This was the 75th score of between 190 and 199 in tests, and the list of those to make two scores in the 190s is as follows.

  • Mohammed Azharuddin – 199 and 192
  • Ian Chappell – 196 and 192
  • Rahul Dravid – 190 and 191
  • Herschelle Gibbs – 196 and 192
  • Brian Lara – 191 and 196
  • Mohammad Hafeez – 196 and 197
  • Mohammad Yousuf – 192 and 191
  • Ricky Ponting – 197 and 196
  • Sachin Tendulkar – 193 and 194*
  • Marcus Trescothick – 194 and 193
  • Michael Vaughan – 197 and 195 (in the space of four or so weeks)
  • Everton Weekes – 194 and 197
  • Frank Worrell – 191* (carried his bat) and 197* (captain declared on him – man, look at the scorecard.)
  • Younis Khan – 199 and 194
  • Steve Smith – 192 and 199

And with three scores in the 190s…

  • Kumar Sangakkara – 192, 199* and 192

That’s quite a list to be in.

So to the 199 score. This was the tenth in test cricket history. The first was made in 1984 by Mudassar Nazar for Pakistan against India in Faisalabad. This was in a turgid test series between the two rivals where a result never seemed on the cards. In this particular match, India made 500, and Pakistan replied with 674/6, and then everyone went home. Qasim Omar made a double hundred, and Mudassar was caught behind off the spin of Shivlal Yadav. The other eight 199s were made as follows.

  • Andy Flower v South Africa at Harare 2001 – not out
  • Kumar Sangakkara v Pakistan at Galle 2012 – not out
  • Mohammed Azharuddin v Sri Lanka at Kanpur 1986 – LBW Ratnayeke
  • Matthew Elliott v England at Headingley 1997 – Bowled Gough
  • Sanath Jayasuriya v India at Colombo SSC 1997 – Bowled Kuruvilla
  • Steve Waugh v West Indies at Bridgetown 1999 – LBW Perry
  • Younis Khan v India at Lahore 2006 – Run Out
  • Ian Bell v South Africa at Lord’s 2008 – Caught and Bowled Harris
  • Steve Smith v West Indies at Kingston 2015 – LBW Taylor

So three LBWs, two bowled, one caught and bowled, one run out, one caught behind and two not outs. Of those above, just Azharuddin and Elliott finished their careers without making a test double.

This was the 110th hundred by an Australian against the West Indies, and places him 10th equal with Steve Waugh. Australia are four away from their 800th century in test cricket. Smith’s 199, to put it into context, places him 68th=. Compared to England, where 199 (Ian Bell) places him 53rd (in 829 test centuries). Ian Bell has the 800th test century for England – 116* in the tedious Nagpur test in 2012 had that honour. I’m digressing!

Steve Smith’s 199 came up in 361 balls with 21 x 4 and 2 x 6 – his hundred came up in 200 balls with 13 x 4 and 2 x 6.

Ashes Panel #002 – Cook, Smith, KP and Memories

LordCanisLupus75 Comments

australia-celebrate-the-ashes-whitewash_10piscrajeyf61qj64a1ovgr5r (2)

Mainly decent reactions thus far to the first Ashes panel, so the pressure is on for me to keep up the questions. I’m sorry, but I lapsed with question 5, and one of my respondents wrote a wonderful piece on it which I will produce at the end.

So, we have, in no particular order for this panel, Andy In Brum, a legendary Twitter presence and lover of our press @AndyinBrum; Mr Steven Melford, another Twitter follower and occasional poster @drmelf; Keen retweeter and technician extraordinaire, @pgpchappers , better known as Philip Chapman (usually the first to retweet my posts), and cricketjon, who posts here quite regularly and has stood up to the task. I’m waiting on one more, and if they get back to me, I’ll add it on.

The rules are four out of five of you respond, I put it up, and the next batch of questions will be out to the third round of panelists towards the end of the week.

Reminder – Ashes Panel #001 can be found here – with PaulE’s new answers added in!

So, here are the questions and the responses…

1. Many are saying we are riding a crest of a wave after the ODI series. Do you feel it out there? Does it compare to 2005?
Andy – No, the ODI side is so different in personnel, attitude & captaincy that they’re completely separate. Also the 2005 ODI series was against the Aussies, this one wasn’t, so I’m not sure how it’s relevant. Also 2005 came off a fantastic 2004 & winter tour against South Africa. This time we’ve had a fucking awful start to 2014, an ok middle & a fuck awful end, we’ve only managed to draw with NZ this year. 2005 had a pack of excellent quicks, good batting & a captain who knew their players, trusted them & knew how to win games.
DrMelf – When you’re on holiday at the seaside for a fortnight, and it’s been pissing down for 13 days, a small break in the clouds will always be exciting. The ODI series showed what we are capable of and it was great for fans. However, I am worried there are too many ‘old guard’ in the test team to embrace a new mentality.  I hope Bayliss & Farbrace can push the guys to rediscover their fire. Compared to 2005?  It feels like the enemy is ourself as much as it’s Australia. If we are two down after the first couple of tests I expect big changes.

PC –To be honest no it doesn’t compare to 2005. We haven’t just beaten SA and the Windies away and the team is nothing like as established. We are also not playing against one of the greatest ever teams. My view is that the England team now doesn’t have the strength of personality of the 2005 team and as a mentally weaker team are more likely to mirror the opposition behaviour than have the ability to set the tone themselves. With that in mind I don’t think it in anyway compares to 05, personally. The fantastic New Zealand attitude rubbed off on this England team in the one day series especially and, if that continues, then wonderful we are in for a treat. Not likely though. Also remember we were outplayed in the second test.

 
However we are in a hugely different places to where we were after the world cup so that is good news. If we have a big start in Cardiff then it might be interesting – although I think the Balmy Army may have to sing Land of my Fathers rather than Jerusalem to start the day. Realistically, I don’t think we have enough to beat the Australians.
 
Looking back to ’05 the other key difference is that hardly anyone will be able to watch it, the kids will be worrying about their teams football transfers and they won’t know or care who Ben Stokes is as it isn’t on free tv or covered that well by the mainstream channels. That is a bit more bah humbug than it was meant to be!

Cricketjon – I do not think this is like 2005 at all. Back then we hadn’t played them since the difficult winter of 2002/3 and the team had moved on considerably in the period between 2002/3 and 2005. We had, at least, experienced a Sydney Test which was the first one without Warne and McGrath in several years and won due to some quality batting from Vaughan in the third inns of the match and a swansong from Caddick on a dying pitch. in the 2.5 years that followed, the captain had changed and a fit, available and increasingly experienced bowling line up had grouped together with much success.  Dare I say it, KP had added some venom to a reasonable batting line up.

In that era there wasn’t a lot between the composition of the ODI team and the Test team. The ODIs were an appetiser to the main event and quite a good one although the cynically scheduled NatWest Challenge served to fill the pockets of the peeps in charge ( a sign of things to come?) On this occasion, the make up of the teams is different as is the captain though we had to burn some fuel for such separation to take place. The 2015 World Cup was the crystallisation of the chaos that ensued before and in a similar way to 1996 we have new thinking in Planet ODI ( observe inclusion of Neil Smith as pinch hitter at 3 against India in seaming conditions in May 1996 as a knee jerk reaction to Jayasariya and Kalithawana in dry conditions two months earlier). The recent announced ICC regulations will reset the dial and provides another opportunity for England to assess how to play to those regulations notwithstanding that applies to all other teams as well.
In short there may be some carry over of “intent”, “euphoria” and “bonding” but there’s no credible way of arguing otherwise that the teams and captain differ greatly. If England do play well ( and they might) it is less likely to be down to the warm gloss painted by the ODI players no matter what is reported afterwards. Little is reported of what Dermot Reeve advised them in his one day assignment but the hell for leather performance cannot be entirely coincidental. The rewiring spoke of is of a different nature for Tests.
———————————————————————————————-
2. Alastair Cook is seen as a key man for England, and he does appear back to some good form. How do you think he’ll go in this series?
Andy – Batting wise I’ve no idea, hopefully well, he’s looked like he remembers how to hold the bat, is still & scored runs, last year he didn’t. Captaincy wise, a burning paper bag full of dog shit could do better.
Dr.Melf – There’s no question that Cook(y) is looking better with the bat than any time in the last two years. We need his runs, so I hope he does well. However, Australia will clearly target both his batting and his captaincy. If they get to him and he personally starts the series badly? I think he will be a huge liability. As an individual he has strength but I think he lacks the aggression we need to bag this series.

PC – I believe he has already agreed to step down after the summer if the team looses, so won’t be under any personal pressure to succeed as captain. That will be to his benefit. His form is good. His technique is looking stronger than it has for ages so he is in a good place. His hip alignment is much better, hence his impact, really good to see, but I have no idea why it has taken so long to sort.

With Harris looking unlikely to start the first game and him being a good player of the quick stuff, he should do well, an attack of Johnson, Starc and Hazelwood may not be as intimidating as Harris, Siddle and Johnson at their peaks, as it was in Aus last time. Cook (and the rest of the batsmen) will certainly benefit from not having the accuracy of Siddle and Harris thundering in at him. Cook’s Ashes record is mixed and it is time for that to change.
Cricketjon –  It is instructive he is in good form and telling that he had to venture outside of the bubble to make the changes to his game. The Australians will target him and have a better chance of frustrating him than the West Indies or New Zealand. Australia’s availability of a quality first change bowler will be the reason. How he overcomes that is both a matter for him and a matter of fortitude. His record is excellent against average attacks and less so against the quality attacks so much rests on him setting a precedent. All this with the pressures of captaincy. We shall know even more about him come the end of August than we do now and yet we have learned much in the last 18 months.
—————————————————————————————————–
3. Stuart Broad has been clear in thinking that Steve Smith at number three might be a vulnerability. Do you think he is right?
Andy – Yes, get to him early with a swinging ball of course he’ll be vulnerable. Not that I have anyfaith that broad or Jimmy will pitch it up in the stumps to get any swing.
Dr.Melf – This has been a big problem position for Australia in recent times. On paper you’d agree with Broad(y) which is why England historically would never make this gamble. But Smith looks a like the kind of guy who loves proving people wrong, so I think he’ll rise to the occasion. He will be helped if Warner has a great series.

PC – No.

I think Smith’s technique is fine and we don’t play on uncovered wickets any more, we play on low, slow roads. His form is not a fluke it is a sustained period of excellence. Smith will score runs. If Rogers and Warner get a few starts it will be very messy for England. To be honest I would move Root to 3 to relieve Ballance of the pressure and to get his impetus into the top order, which would be a similar move to Smith batting at 3. But not many agree with me on that!!
Cricketjon – The media have pages and screens to fill and rent a quote Broad isn’t going to deviate too far from his tape on a loop monosyllabic responses. Number 3 is clearly more challenging than lower down the order and Warner may give him cause to test his skills early on. He looks like someone to me for whom (from an ugly stance) everything comes together perfectly at the split second it needs to. I do not know whether Broad is right or not but sides do have this habit of sending in their best player into a difficult position. To answer the point a different way, I wouldn’t want us sending Root in at 3 this summer, the burden is on Australia to demonstrate why they think this benefits the endgame at the expense of every other option.
————————————————————————————————-
4. If you’ve been reading the blog, we’ve been walking down memory lane. Give me an Ashes memory….
Andy – Sunday, day 4 of the Oval test 2005, Oz in a strong position with both openers getting tons. Freddy & Hoggard with a fantastic spell to get the last 9 wickets for under a hundred. That spell was as vital in saving the test as KP’S fire works the next day. Plus the Aussie players all wearing sunglasses to pretend it was really bright & all the England fans putting umbrellas up to pretend it was raining. Now that’s banter. Oh and meeting twatto in 2009, a really nice man to random fans.
Dr.Melf – Lunch at my grandparents in 1981 (aged nine). My dad and my grandad cheering as Bob Willis(y) scythed through the Aussies at Headingley. I walked in after his fourth wicket to ask “what’s going on?” My dad replied “something absolutely amazing”.  The oven was turned down and the roast was eaten late. #Hooked (#skatingonthinice – ed.)
PC – Sydney 2003. England bat first. It is my first Ashes test live and Lee opens the bowling with absolute thunderbolts. The Australian team is without Warne and McGrath, but Gillespie, Lee, Bichel and McGill was more than useful attack to a beleaguered England team! Vaughan was out early nicking off to a ball I can confidently say no other batsman on the planet at that time would have got within a foot of. Butcher walked out at three and batted astonishingly. He ground out a 100 when he could have been out at any time. Hussein got a pair of 70’s and Alex Stewart made runs In the Aussie innings there was the hugely emotional Steve Waugh last ball of the day 100, then we had Vaughan’s match winning second innings 180. An unbelievable innings. Followed up by Caddick’s last appearance for England by bowling out the Aussies. (should get you to write an Ashes Memory on that. ed.)
Oh and Harmison struggled to hit cut strip…
 
A brilliant 5 days and a brilliant holiday!
 
We had lost the ashes, but I was unbeaten in my part of that tour!
Cricketjon – Ashes memory. Hmmm. Sitting inside a damp rented house as a 12 year old with my mother watching ( on free-to-air)  Botham’s 118 at Manchester in 1981. When he was dismissed, the number 3, Tavare ( batting to orders because he was a dasher in the county game) was on 69 not out! My memory is of how dark it was that afternoon both in Birmingham where I watched it and at Old Trafford. For those who see those shots on the recordings now and think ” yeah ok, he was good but so what?” they need to realise that people didn’t play like that in those days. He truly was exceptional. It is fair to say that having top edged Lillee twice into the Old Warwick Road end he was millimetres from an Andy Roberts ball in the mouth repeat. He had no fear and he brightened up a very dark day and dismal rioting Britain ( sorry – don’t do royal weddings).
—————————————————————————————————
5. Let’s go for it. If he were selected, which won’t happen, how do you think Kevin Pietersen would have done?
Andy – If he was fit, a few infuriating 20’s or 30’s & probably a big fuckyou score & a vitally important wicket. But no thanks or appreciation.
Dr. Melf – Kevin loves a good script. Particularly when he’s the romantic lead. He is fit, playing well with a point to prove. I genuinely think he would have “mullered them” this series. I also think it’s a shame that a sport in desperate need of some exciting stories has been denied a fantastic narrative.
PC – The short version….
In short, 3 or 4 50’s and an epic, match winning 100 at some point. Because that is what he does. Also a crass interview with Jonathan Agnew about playing for the team, great to see Rooty batting so well and wanting to get 10,000 test runs. The jumpers aren’t mentioned.

Cricketjon – He would have done ok. A 300 in division two doesn’t make him a genius nor indeed was he disengaged in Sydney ( well no more so than anyone else in the team and that is the critical point, no-one else was demonised for it ). This isn’t about KP anymore because the ECB always continue to supply us with new material but there is no doubt they could have handled the matter  better ( I suppose aplomb is a bit much to ask). His absence means that Root can take over with only a slightly soiled sheet of paper when the time comes as distinct from the reams of pungent toilet roll currently wrapped around Cooks pristine whites. Root can take it forward without the legacy issues, as far as I am concerned, let Cook deal with the legacy of KPgate since he was undoubtedly involved in the shenanigans. What goes around comes around, it’s just a shame for the paying fan.

What I strongly object to is the rewriting of history that ECBTV propagates. The absence of KP in the Billy Joel remix flies in the face of what would have been a 2-2 drawn series in 2005. Lest we forget.
————————————————————————————-
So, many thanks to those who participated. I think this is working thus far, and would love to keep this going as best we can. I’ve always wanted to get you lot writing stuff, and so far, so good. And my god, have we got an ecelctic mix for the third set of questions. We have a poet, an Aussie or two, and a couple of other regulars.
I mentioned Philip’s epic on KP as a long-form answer for number 5. Instead of a separate post, I’ve added it below. Enjoy or wail, your decision.
——————————————————————————————————————
Here is PC’s Long version of the KP question…
An alternative view of a hero/villain’s return [delete as appropriate]
 
After being frustrated by the Welsh rain the Australian team humbled the “new era” England team with a very aggressive brand of cricket at Lord’s. In fact England were really struggling with Bairstow already called up for Jos Buttler whose split webbing had got infected.
 
Gary Ballance at three had made a no impact in Cardiff and made a pair at Lord’s. As the selectors sat down to agree the squad for Edgbaston, a mysterious force comes in and hypnotises the selectors, including Jonathan Agnew who sits in on the meetings so he can tweet the decisions really time.
 
Somehow they agree to select a maverick former player to come back and “rescue” the team, in a selection that harked back to the days of Brian Close. Steven Davies another Surrey player was discussed, but it was felt he “wasn’t quite ready” no one was totally sure what that meant but Aggers assured them it would keep the journalists inside cricket happy and the sages would nod wisely.
 
When the announcement was made on Sky news the following day Shane Warne was interviewed saying “ow look, this is the best think that could have happened”
 
No one was sure what this meant either, but the Guardian cricket columnist suggested foul play. He then wrote a lengthy blog on the retrograde step and how Davies, an openly gay cricketer, was the future, in the “comment is free” section below the “line” there were accusations of click bait, but these were censored. Boycott mentioned something about rhubarb and his mum.
 
Fast forward to the morning of the third test. A fight had broken out in the dressing room, someone had already started kicking off about the new stash and a misspelt name. New hi tech Adidas woolly jumpers were thrown off the balcony and Afrikaans was heard outside the rooms. Paul Farbrace was laughing with Trevor Bayliss and ignoring the fracas. Peter Moores was interviewed about the jumpers and said they should talk later about them, but a lot of scientific stuff had gone into the design – especially so they would look great on kids from the right kind of family. There was absolutely no mention about data, I repeat no mention about the data, even for Sky. The BBC wrote another apology letter.
 
Meanwhile out in the middle Alistair Cook had elected to bat, said some form of waffle to Mark Nicholas about being delighted to have a world class player back in the dressing room and said Root at 3 KP at 4 and Bell back to 5.
 
Piers Morgan had self combusted in his private box and even his wife was said to be relieved. “there were three of us in a very crowded relationship” she was overheard saying by a Mirror correspondent.
 
Back in the middle Alistair Cook had started nicely, but lyth was out early from a snorter by a bowler called Mitchell. The tourists had named a 4 man Mitchell attack, with Lyon for support. Clarke said they had thought of playing Siddle, but he had refused to change his name to Mitchell so it didn’t happen.
 
Just before lunch with England on 69-1 The heroic skipper inside edged a full ball onto the stumps for 27 off 98 balls.
 
There was a hush around the ground.
Cook departed to polite applause, then the booing started. First it was the Aussies in the crowd, then the Yorkshire fans who felt Lees or Rashid should be playing not a past it, cast off Saffer with a didgy knee.
Finally a small portion of the crowd got to their feet and cheered, only to be removed from the ground by Andy Flower and Giles Clarke dressed as the ECB security guards.
 
First ball. The Aussies were on their toes, with a funky field of three midwickets and 4 slips.
 
The new batsman knocked the ball into the leg side and called for the “Redbull” run. Root responded and there was a cloud of dust as the ball broke the stumps as Root leapt for his ground.
 
It goes upstairs.
 
Fortunately Colin Graves had stepped into have a chat with the third umpire and the Yorkshire hero was adjudged to have made his ground.
 
In the sky commentary box Michael “Slats” Slater was incensed, letting out a strange wailing noise through his nose. David Gower was non-plused and Bumble was going nuts about his car and it not starting.  Nobody was watching anyway as the sky coverage had just been put up to £250 a month to pay for the football.
 
Back on the pitch Root and the South African born batsman made it unscathed to lunch.
 
“Honours even, my dear old things” said Blowers to his adoring fans whilst eating some cake in the TMS box.
 
After lunch Root started playing well and moved to a nice fifty with a cover drive. Ed Smith suggested he looked like Michael Vaughan in his pomp. At the other end, the 100 test veteran was strangely becalmed. The online ball by ball commentary suggested he was facing a more hostile environment than he received in his native South Africa for that memorable first ODI series there, after his failures in Zimbabwe.
 
40 mins after lunch there was a crack like a rifle shot which awakened the post lunch slumbering crowd. A split second later the ball was removed from an advertising board. The ECB marketing machine was furious with the batsman for damaging their sponsors logo, who had moved to 40 before anyone had really clocked what had happened. Not that the Waitrose chief executive minded – he was watching at Lords as Edgbaston was too far north for Waitrose.
 
Ruing the decision not to play a left arm spinner, Clarke (who had earlier pulled his hamstring setting a funky field) asked Warner to have a bowl and he promptly got into a fight with Joe Root, who was soon out hooking at Mitchell Johnson.
 
In strutted Ian Bell, showing he was up for the fight all collar popped and positive intent. He knew the Aussies were scared of him.
 
At the other end his partner at the crease raised his bat for a well-crafted and chance-less half century. Bayliss and Farbrace are on the balcony clapping whilst the Skipper doesn’t look up from his hymn book. Broad was too busy tweeting and Jimmy was in the match referee’s office still talking about Ravi Jadaja.
 
After tea it was like the apocalypse had arrived at Edgbaston. Clarke had set the field for a barrage of the short stuff for both Bell and the newly recalled batsman. While Bell bobbed and weaved, fearful that he might get out without playing enough trademark cover drives at the other end, as the Mitchell’s charged in the ball was deposited further and further into the stands.  
 
The crowd was going nuts now and as his 100 came up the ground stood to applaud the returning king – with many saying “he always was a player of great innings, I still don’t think he is a great player though”.
 
At the close of play, England are 331-3, Root with 67, Bell with 48not out and the other player with 158 not out. 
 
James Taylor was seen crying over at Trent Bridge as once again his county runs weren’t enough. 

2015 Test Century Watch – #30 – Murali Vijay

LordCanisLupusLeave a comment

Murali_Vijay_Krishna_Wallpaper_confh_1920x1080

Murali Vijay – 150 v Bangladesh at Fatullah

Second for Murali. Second highest score ever made in tests at Fatullah. Second Indian to make a test hundred at Fatullah. But another in the big ton bracket I like to see, and thus providing some of the more interesting stat work.

I’ve done a fair bit on India in Bangladesh in the Shikhar Dhawan piece, so we can concentrate on this one a bit. This was the 15th century made in Bangladesh by an Indian, and the 4th highest, trailing Sachin, Shikhar and Rahul Dravid (160). It was Vijay’s sixth test match hundred and his third highest, trailing 167 against Australia in Hyderabad, and 153 against Australi in Mohali (once again, in alliance with Dhawan). The lowest of his six hundreds is 139. Impressive DBTA numbers. He has made the fifth century at Fatullah, and this is his fourth country in which he’s made three figures (India, Australia and England the others).

So, Dmitri, any scores of 150 that you’ve seen? I know I’ve seen a 149, but not a 150, I don’t think. But it hasn’t been a long time since the last one… Imrul Kayes did it a month or so ago. As I mentioned the first ever 150 in that post, let’s look at the second ever score of 150 (this is the 31st, by the way)…

The scorer of the first, Jamie Zulch was in 1911, and we had to wait another 41 years before the next. The scorer of it was one of our finest ever players, Len Hutton, against India at Lord’s. England won the match quite comfortably, as India’s modest first innings score of 235 was overwhelmed by Hutton, and then put firmly to bed by Godfrey Evans who made a rapid lower order hundred. Vinoo Mankad, how made 72 in the first innings, followed it up with 184 in the second, but England got home by 8 wickets, with Hutton adding 39 unbeaten runs to his first innings 150.

England owed much to Hutton. Quite early he appreciated that the conditions were unfavourable to slow bowlers and he called for a prolonged effort from his three seamers. The second day was dominated by Hutton, who not only scored 150 but, when he was second out at 264 after batting five and a quarter hours, his side were already 29 runs to the good. It was his first Test century against India and the second hit by an England captain since the war–F. G. Mann scored 136 not out against South Africa at Port Elizabeth in 1949.

At first Hutton was extremely cautious and his mood had a restraining influence on Simpson and May. The two hours before lunch produced only 60 runs, but afterwards Hutton found his most scintillating form. Simpson played a valuable part by staying two and three-quarter hours while the first wicket realised 106–the same as India’s–and then came a brilliant partnership between Hutton and May, who put on 158 in two and a half hours.

As much as I love the memories passed down to be by my dad of Peter May, a man who once made 364 against the Aussies and possessed a superior career doesn’t get in a Sky Ashes song! But David Lloyd being hit in the bollocks does.

Two scores of 150 in the space of six weeks for Kayes and Vijay? Pah. Gary Kirsten and Ricky Ponting made 150s in the same week. Kirsten’s came against Bangladesh in East London (starting on 18 October 2002) and Ricky Ponting’s came against Pakistan in Sharjah (starting on 19 October 2002). Interestingly, both those players have two scores of 150! Kirsten completed his on the 19th, Ponting the 20th.

Murali Vijay’s century came off 201 balls with 10 x 4 and 1 x 6

2015 Test Century Watch – #29 – Shikhar Dhawan

LordCanisLupus1 Comment

Dhawan Shikhar Dhawan – 173 v Bangladesh at Fatullah I’m well aware I am behind with the centuries, and the aim is to get up to date by the start of the Ashes. So here we have a relatively big ton which conjures up all sorts of potential for statistics. This was the mustachioed maestro’s third test ton, and his second largest, trailing his monstrous 187 on his test debut against Australia in Mohali. OK, it was Bangladesh, OK he was part of a 289 run opening stand, but he has a propensity to go big. A pity he seems not to have a propensity for the moving ball over here (ducks from Indian flak). This was the 14th test hundred made by an Indian against Bangladesh and the second highest. He trails Sachin Tendulkar’s 248* made in Dhaka in 2004 by a fair distance. Sachin has five of those 14 (15 if you include Vijay’s) and, of course, every single one of those 14/15 tons has been made in Bangladesh. Being India’s first test at Fatullah, Dhawan holds the Indian record there, but also the stadium record which he took from Adam Gilchrist who made 144 in a test where he famously pulled that great Aussie team’s arse out of the fire and kept them in a game they were being smashed in. So, Dmitri, how about a 173 in your collection? Well, I doubt it. I have a 175 and a 177, but not, to my knowledge, a 173. There is a famous 173, though, that all Englishmen recall fondly, and I remarked briefly about it in my Ashes memory of 2001. Mark Butcher’s crowning glory at Headingley in that year was the last unbeaten 173. There have been seventeen scores of 173 in tests, with the last by Virender Sehwag in 2010 against New Zealand. Viru has another score of 173 in his locker, making him the only man to make the score twice (the other against Pakistan in Mohali). Leeds, Lahore and Auckland have all seen two scores of 173. There is one particularly remarkable achievement in those 173s, and it belongs to a popular commentator who made that score batting at number NINE. Ian Smith did this at Auckland in 1990, undoubtedly also the fastest in terms of balls (136) for that score, and one of the top 100 innings in SimonH’s list earlier! The first 173 was made back in 1894 (well 151 of them were, the remainder were in 1895) by Andrew Stoddart of England against Australia in Melbourne. Once again with these feats, there seems to be something totally mad about the matches they took place in. In this case, on the opening day, England were bowled out for a brilliant 75! Stoddart was one of two to make it to double figures. Australia fared a little better, making 123, whereupon Stoddart became the only man in the second innings not to make double figures (by making triple figures). His innings allowed England to score 475, the Aussies followed with 333 and England went 2-0 up in the series. It seemed the first innings shenanigans were the result of a classic sticky:

The second of the test matches resulted in a well-earned win for the Englishmen by 94 runs. On the opening day the wicket was in a very bad state from the recent rain, and George Giffen, on winning the toss, put England into bat. His policy proved a wise one, the innings being finished off in two hours for a total of 75. The wicket had considerably improved when Australia went in, but Richardson bowled so finely that before the end of the afternoon the eleven were all out for 123, or only 48 to the good. A dry Sunday allowed the ground to thoroughly recover itself, and the Englishmen in their second innings batted under the most favourable conditions. It was not until the fourth day’s cricket was well advanced that they were got rid of, the total reaching 475. Mr. Stoddart, risking nothing, played a great game for his side, his innings of 173 lasting five hours andn twenty minutes. Australia wanted 428 to win, and when on the fourth day 190 went up with only one wicket down, the chances seemed against the Englishmen. Brockwell’s bowling, however, brought about a sudden change, and with several batsmen failing, the score for nine wickets was only 268. It then seemed as though the match would soon be over, but Iredale and turner added 60 runs together and played out time. On the fifth morning however, the end came in the second over, Iredale being bowled by Peel.

Stoddart was England’s captain, and it seems, quite a live-wire..

 In 1886 he scored a world record 485 in 370 minutes for Hampstead against Stoics, all after spending the entire night before the game playing poker. But even then the indefatigable Soddart wasn’t tired – he spent the rest of the afternoon playing tennis and finished off with a dinner party in the evening.

There was a sad ending for Stoddart who, in declining health at age 52, took his own life. But he had a decent old career, and played rugby for England too. He was the first captain to insert the Aussies, and the first to declare an innings. A daring spirit, maybe…

There’s also something else about him, that maybe ole Shikhar might admire too…. Stoddart Shikhar Dhawan’s hundred came up in a mere 101 balls, with 16 x 4. In total he took 195 balls and hit 23 x 4