Being Outside Cricket

India vs England: Fourth Test, Day Five

Dec 12, 2016thelegglance96 Comments

With defeat can come a time for reflection, for honesty and the opportunity to examine where a side is going wrong, why games are being lost, and what can be done about it. It can even be a period where one accepts that the team is being outplayed and there’s little that can be done to change that in the short term, beyond redoubling efforts. Either way, it requires a degree of self-awareness and the willingness to see that decisions may be wrong, that approaches need to change and that personnel might not be doing all they are capable of doing.

And then there’s the second element, in that the honesty required is internal, and talking to the media doesn’t mean sharing all that with everyone else. The kind of deep discussion required should not, and usually does not, make it beyond the confines of the dressing room, and that is exactly as it should be. That makes the fronting up to the media rather difficult, as those who have paid to watch the team play deserve answers, but for the sake of the team there are limits to how detailed and how extensive those answers should be.

Those competing imperatives can cause some frustration amongst supporters. When a side has been woeful, hearing a manager come out and defend them and claim they actually played well drives many to distraction, as any fan of the England football team for the last forty years or so will tell you. Yet it’s to some extent a necessary fiction, and in private the manager could well be climbing the walls at the inability of his charges to do what they were meant to do.

As a result, the post match interviews should always be seen through the prism of limited information, both for team dynamics and because the opposition are listening in. Reading too much into them is a dangerous game, though what people do want to hear is a degree of honesty, and a restriction on the volume of platitudes offered up. Of course, in many sports, football in particular, that’s because the media themselves are waiting to pounce on any expression of weakness, whereby the plea for honesty is nothing but hypocrisy given how such honesty is then treated. As a result, wagons are circled and a siege mentality is often the best one to adopt. All sports teams live in a bubble anyway, and despite occasional protestations to the contrary, the supporters, even though they ultimately pay all the salaries, are removed from consideration. It’s understandable to an extent, though you can get the situation where an England player assumes the ticket prices to be a quarter of what they actually are – that much ignorance is unacceptable.

The trouble is that there’s a contradiction here. By no measure could England be said to have a hostile press, indeed supine is nearer the mark given their inability to offer up any kind of examination of their flaws in structure or execution – whataboutery, especially if Kevin Pietersen can be brought into it, is the more likely response. Defensiveness is understandable in itself after a defeat, the problem is that when it occurs even when the criticism is highly limited in the first place that suggests that the mindset is one of being closed off to the reality of the situation.

The match was completed this morning in short order, England collapsing from their already desperate position to give India the expected series win and revenge for the defeat four years ago. The response to it was therefore one of interest, to see whether England were fully appreciative of what had gone wrong and why. Again, an instant response from all involved needs to take into account that words can be poorly chosen, or that with a game still to go baring one’s soul may not be the best, most appropriate response. Yet the captain’s words are interesting in themselves for demonstrating a particular mindset:

“I thought 400 was a pretty good score on that wicket. Keaton played really well, at 230 for 2 maybe should have got 450. Historically, 400 is a good score on this ground.

“In the second innings we had our chances. We aren’t taking those chances at the moment. Virat played an extraordinary innings but we had a chance on 60-odd to get him. Those are things that the game changes on. We are in it for three days but not good enough to stay in it. We haven’t been good enough to match India.

“We wanted to see what four seamers would look like because on the tour they have given us control and our two best spinners have been Mo and Rash. When you batted first you didn’t need that extra seamer, so that was a mistake. We had a chance to restrict the lead. We would have been in the game. But that isn’t really good enough. To me, we batted better in this game than the previous two.

I go back to the chances we missed, we could have bowled India out for 400. Virat is in incredible form, having one of the series you dream of. Clearly one of the great batsmen of our generation.”

Cook is quite right to laud Kohli’s performance. He has proved to be the difference between the sides throughout the series, and his extraordinary innings here turned India’s position from middling to utterly dominant. Yet his comments about the game turning on a missed chance is both unfair and could be said about pretty much every Test match ever played. Catches will always be dropped, but the bigger and more pertinent question is why it was that this was the only chance created, for that aside, England didn’t remotely look like taking a wicket. It wasn’t exactly a dolly, and nor was Kohli the only centurion to be dropped in that innings. Using that as a crutch to explain why the game was lost is throwing a team mate under the bus and effectively blaming him for defeat. Now, everyone can say things they shouldn’t, and reflect later that it might not have been appropriate, but it’s still not a good thing to do to a member of the side, and nor is it the first time Cook has done it. Even great teams drop catches, but those great teams create another chance. If you make only one in an innings of that length, that is the far greater problem. India have dropped plenty of catches both in this match and across the series – it hasn’t just been England, and while Kohli may have been magnificent, Jayant Yadav also scored a century, and it wasn’t luck that allowed him to do it. He can bat, and showed it, but England couldn’t get him out. That isn’t down to Rashid dropping a chance.

Likewise, the section concerning the seam attack is simply rather peculiar. If taken in isolation, any team can get it wrong and pick the wrong side, but this is the second match in succession that they’re saying this – indeed the implication is that they have got the right teams but the wrong way around: too many spinners last time, too many seamers this. The reference to the toss is simply odd, since when has the team depended on whether you win it or lose it? How can it be a mistake if England won the toss, but not if they didn’t?

In any case, India’s seam bowlers have outperformed England’s. James Anderson went wicketless in this Test, as in the last one, and while he might indeed be offering control, he isn’t taking wickets, or even looking like taking wickets given his insistence on bowling outside the stumps allowing the Indian batsman to watch it harmlessly pass by. Furthermore, the seam attack isn’t going to be important if you don’t take the second new ball for 40 overs after it’s become due. It suggests that there’s no faith in them getting any wickets at all.

Ruthlessly analysing every spoken word for an error is not fair on anyone, but Cook’s answer is still jarring, and invites concern that England are too frazzled to understand what they are trying to achieve, whether in selection or execution. When a side is struggling, errors are magnified by the opposition. As said yesterday, there’s no disgrace in losing this series to a team who are very good at home, but what is harder to grasp is what England are attempting to achieve here.

Cook did also go on to talk about the captaincy, which in itself suggests that he’s thinking about the end of his reign and there has to be a degree of human sympathy for him here, because leading a team who is getting badly beaten – and England now are being badly beaten – is emotionally difficult. He is highly fortunate in the coverage he is getting, for it is impossible to imagine any previous England captain ever getting such a comfortable ride – even if there are some words of gentle criticism now being offered. Still the idea that he can choose his own departure date on the back of more Test defeats in a calendar year than any previous incumbent plus a second proper hammering in an away series under his leadership beggars belief. To say so would mean that he is more important than the team.

Nobody wants to see a captain (or anyone else please note) made the scapegoat for the failings of a team, but it remains utterly extraordinary how favourable the coverage of Cook as captain is. Nobody is under the impression that he’s a superb captain, not even the biggest cheerleaders for him would ever make that claim. Thus the idea that him not doing it would represent some kind of disaster is impossible to believe or justify. Equally, he’s not had a record as captain that’s good enough to justify the adoration, being no better than that of Nasser Hussain who had far weaker personnel to work with. He did lead England to two Ashes victories at home, but also in the away disaster in 2013/14. The away win in India is an undoubted highlight, but balancing that is the home defeat to Sri Lanka and the drawn series in Bangladesh.

His tenure certainly hasn’t been a disaster, but nor has it been especially good, and the suspicion that England aren’t getting as much out of the team as they could does come down to leadership, whether of the captain or the coaching and administration. His on field captaincy has been – to put it kindly – limited, the administration of the ECB inept. Quite how he gets such approval, such reverence, is impossible to understand, for the likes of Paul Newman write as though he was a clone of Mike Brearley. It is notable that far greater criticism of Kohli’s captaincy has been present in the English media than that of Cook’s, and while Kohli may not be a great captain, he’s the recipient of the kind of comment that has been notably absent about Cook for much of his reign. The problem here is that it is counterproductive. It is treating the public as idiots – so obviously biased in Cook’s favour that it merely enrages those who would otherwise accept a limited captain doing the best he can. Pretending that black is white merely destroys the credibility of the cricket media.

The game ended with an on field spat between Ravi Ashwin and James Anderson, which is not altogether surprising given Anderson’s comments about Virat Kohli the night before. Perhaps the frustration at England’s performances seeped through, but the comments were not especially wise and lacked grace. It would be equally easy for them to talk about Anderson in the same vein, and Anderson surely knows that.

India are a good team, one who thoroughly deserve to have won the series, yet they are not a great one, at least not yet; suggesting they are is curiously making excuses for England – that they simply could not and never would be able to beat India no matter how well they played. There is being realistic about things, and there is burying a head under the duvet and hoping it will all end soon and there’s nothing that could have been done. India are very likely to almost always have better spinners than England, but this series they’ve had better seamers too. Indian batsmen are always going to be better players of spin than English ones, but it doesn’t explain the lack of patience or irresponsible dismissals of England batsmen when set. Perhaps it is indeed the case that Kohli isn’t a great captain, but when you have a superior side, that can be disguised – as England have demonstrated under Cook before – and when losing the weakness in that discipline is highlighted more.

Perhaps behind the scenes England are well aware of all these things and are discussing and debating them. But the media have long abrogated their responsibility to hold England to account, and the signs are that the ECB structure doesn’t see it. Andrew Strauss, highly visible when England do well, has been entirely absent this winter.

There is one match remaining. It is a struggle to see anything other than a comprehensive India win, for the margins of victory are getting wider. Cook’s line that he will sit down with the Director, Cricket at the end of the year is not an unreasonable one, for the conclusion of the series is the time to make decisions not during it. That discussion will decide what the England team are ultimately about and where they go, for there is talent there and there are good players coming though.

For now, India should celebrate their thoroughly deserved win. England have a lot of thinking to do.

India vs England: Fourth Test, day four

Dec 11, 2016Dec 11, 2016thelegglance136 Comments

One of the tricks of politics – spin as we call it – is to predict complete catastrophe and then talk up the subsequent normal disaster as being a positive result, better than expected, and evidence that the cause is making progress. A succession of party spin doctors are wheeled out to say the leader is having the desired effect, because they never expected to win anyway, and thus they are very satisfied.

Of course, this is invariably in complete contradiction of everything visible, and the interviewer usually points that out, but it’s a game, a routine to be followed, and at least normally they’ve been clever enough to have set out the predicted calamity in advance. The one group of people thoroughly ignored are all those watching, who roll their eyes at such a transparent fabrication but then they aren’t important anyway, it’s merely a routine to be followed and wilful defiance of the bleeding obvious and living in a fantasy world is considered an entirely normal response in that bizarre world.

Naturally, any statements to the contrary previously are ignored in the hope that anyone watching is so stupid they won’t even realise. This tends not to work.

Now, all of this plays out with the media being the ones making it clear on behalf of the public that this is pure nonsense, but just imagine for a moment that instead, they were to raise the very point of expected flop to the lying bastard…sorry politician offering them a free get out and a nice excuse for failure. And then doing it again. And again. Each time it happens.

England were not expected to win this series, in fact not even the most ardent cheerleaders who usually come up with preposterous predictions of certain victory suggested that. But there’s the realism about what England could have been expected to achieve, and then there’s Agnew claiming England have done well not to lose this winter 7-0. This includes the tour of Bangladesh remember, the team who have never before beaten anyone other than Zimbabwe and the West Indies fourth team.

Now that first series was great, and credit to Bangladesh for how they played. But to attempt to paint the 1-1 draw as being an England triumph is spin doctoring of a level that the West Wing writers would have rejected as unrealistic. Likewise, as this series unfolded England apparently only lost the second Test because they lost the toss, and with a little luck they would bat first in the third and all would be well. And then they did. And got hammered. Oh and the fourth. And they’re getting hammered.

But then after three matches India really weren’t all that good and England were quite capable of winning and getting back in the series. Which with a fair wind was just about possible, and a reasonable supposition. Except that now it was never possible in the first place and who could ever have suggested such a thing?

Let’s get something clear here, India is a very difficult place to tour, and they’ve not lost at home since England beat them four years ago. So losing this tour is not in itself the problem, for most observers would have thought that was the most likely outcome all along.

But would the England side of four years ago have done better? Almost certainly. They had better spinners, and they had better batsmen. That’s not a lament to a lost side, for time moves on, but it is a recognition that those who said India are good but not unbeatable were right. But to win England would have to play exceptionally well, be led exceptionally well and had their key players perform superbly.

That hasn’t happened.

C’est la vie, for this too is the nature of sport. There’s little point getting too down on an England side who have been outplayed at the key moments in all the matches bar the first one. But it has been remarkable to see an entirely new replacement for the Kubler-Ross model involving some of the fifth estate blaming absolutely everyone possible for wrong reasons at the wrong time. Except one.

Again, to simply point the finger at the captain would be equally wrong, for this is a complex set of circumstances and he has been having a progressively more difficult time of it on the field. But, and this is the constant frustration with his coverage, the endless attempts to excuse the golden boy while lashing out at others is shameful. The cricket press have been supine and by turns spiteful over the last four years. It’s by no means all of them, and of those that do, they seem to be as on the long goodbye as much as Cook now is. But it remains a grotesque sight, and one that must cause frustration for the more rational objective journalists. They end up guilty by association.

The nub of it is that cricket tragics are well aware that this is a tough tour, they are equally aware that India have better spin bowlers, for the only time they didn’t in recent years was four years ago. Anyone with a passing knowledge of the game also knows that Virat Kohli is a damn fine player, and that he’s anything but alone in that team.

Furthermore, in all team sports the wheels can come off, and on a long tour small margins can become gaping chasms. England really haven’t been completely adrift in this series, they have competed and they have had moments where the opportunity to do something was there. But ultimately the margins of defeat have been large, and they are getting larger. The prospects for the fifth Test are, well let’s just say unpropitious.

But the blame game has another angle to it, the notable whispers about Cook departing as captain. There is an irony that he is now victim of a whispering campaign in the press, for those who objected in the past to the ECB methodology also object now; he may have been a beneficiary in the past, what goes around may come around, but it’s still leaking, and it’s still underhand, and it’s still wrong. Which means that while Cook doesn’t directly get blamed for anything – for that would be to undermine the previous line that he is an outstanding leader who cuddles little lambs – there is an almost pitying theme running through the narrative that he now doesn’t know where to turn when things go wrong.

As if this has only just been noticed.

This morning was an omnishambles, seam bowlers utterly innocuous – and the silence about the way India’s seamers have utterly outbowled England’s is another notable refusal to face the truth – a captain bereft of ideas, catches dropped and a sense of resignation right across the field. Naturally, this is turned into a complaint that the spinners (who suffered from dropped catches, idiotic reviews that subsequently cost wickets and the usual unhelpful field settings) aren’t doing their jobs. As if them not being as good as their counterparts is a major shock.

Adil Rashid in particular continues to be criticised, despite being far and away England’s most successful bowler on the tour. One of a limited number of positive points. It’s not that he can’t do better, it’s that the desire to bully a player in print exceeds the obligation to be objective. It is not the first time it’s happened, and it isn’t going to be the last. The only shock is that it hasn’t happened to Ben Stokes yet.

With such a huge deficit, this match was only going to go one way, and as it turned out England batted reasonably well second time around. When one side is being ground into the dust, it invariably appears the sides are playing on different pitches. And there’s no doubt at all this is now a difficult surface on which to bat, no matter how easy India made it look against a beaten England team. Taken in isolation the approach was a good one, to take some risks, to score some runs and to be positive with footwork and in defence. Root batted well but yet again failed to go on to a really big score, while Bairstow once more did his impression of Horatio on the bridge.

None of it matters. England are gone in this series, and while raging against the dying of the light is meritorious in itself, it doesn’t change anything except to indicate that there are players in this team with the degree of relish for the fight that will serve them well in future years.

A realistic assessment of where they are doesn’t mean focusing on fripperies like Bruce Oxenford making a couple of errors, nor suggesting a game is lost because the current whipping boy dropped a catch and thus the match. It’s an excuse and a pathetic one at that, an attempt to avoid considering the bigger picture, lest the sight of tusks and a trunk be spotted by all and sundry.

Barring the kind of miracle that would genuinely be rather special, India will win the series tomorrow. And they deserve it, for they are a good team, and a very good one at home. There’s no shame in losing to them, there’s not even shame in not playing well. But there is in doing everything possible to avoid facing the facts. The irony is that it may not be the England team on this tour who should be feeling it.

Day Five Comments below

India vs. England, 4th Test, Day 3

Dec 10, 2016Dec 10, 2016Sir Ronald136 Comments

Well let’s not make any bones about it, that was a complete and utter horror show from England and for all true purposes we are now out of this game and out of the series.

First of all, lets give credit where credit is due. Vijay played a brilliant knock to get to a hundred in a typically understated way and that innings from Kohli was a class apart from anything I’ve seen in a long time. It may be that Kohli hasn’t ever really performed in England, but his last series here was 2 years ago and he looks like he has matured immensely as a batsman since then. This innings reminded me of the KP knock in Mumbai 4 years ago, a difficult pitch, a supreme knock and a batsman that looks a class apart from anyone else on the pitch. Without doubt Kohli has raised his game to reach the echelons of becoming a world class batsman and one can only applaud him for this, his batting has been one of the major differences between the teams in this series.

As for the ugly, well where do you start? It is rare for me these days to actually rage in front of the TV, older age has mellowed me somewhat; however what I saw from England after tea has more than got the blood going. I have rarely seen a team that is supposed to be aiming for the top echelons in cricket, try and play cricket with no clue and no game plan whatsoever. I mean it was just embarrassing and surely heads (or more precisely the captain) need to roll after this game. How do you even try to analyse Cook’s captaincy? Bowling a leg spinner for 28 consecutive overs so that he is completely cooked, not taking the new ball until 42 overs after it was due, refusing to rotate the quick bowlers at one end to see if they could get a breakthrough, employing negative fields whilst letting the game drift and wasting a review on a desperation hunch knowing that it could (and did) come back to haunt you later on in the game. I mean it’s all there, the idiots guide around how not to captain a cricket team. I used to think that Dhoni was the worst captain that I had seen in my lifetime, but his performances don’t have a patch on Cook’s performance in the field today. No doubt the sympathisers and the MSM will absolve Cook of blame and apportion it to others such as the spinners, the Bairstow missed stumping, the Rashid missed catch or whatever else they can find to take the heat off Cook, but that simply doesn’t wash. The blame has to lie at the Captain’s door for the most listless captaincy performance I can remember in a long time.

Ok rant nearly over, the fact that I am so annoyed about today is that we actually dragged ourselves back into the match at one point. The match looked like it was drifting until Root, who had bought himself onto bowl in Cook’s absence (says it all really) took 2 wickets in 2 overs to reduce the Indian team to 307-6. This was our chance, if we could dislodge Jadeja early and who knows, even lull Kohli into a false shot, then we could end up with a small lead and this game could end up as a one innings Test. A challenge on a difficult pitch against a top spin bowling attack; however one that we could give ourselves a chance on, if we managed to set a target of around 250 for India to chase on the last day. The problem though was we had a tiring spin bowling attack, one that had bowled nearly 80 overs between them due to the fantastic selection committee who decided that 4 quick bowlers was the way to go on this pitch. I said on Day 1 that this might come back to bite us on the arse and boy has it done so big time. You may have well as given Chris Woakes a lounger for all the bowling he has done in this Test, but I’m still sure it’s definitely the spinners fault! Anyway I digress, when Jadeja came out to bat, that was the time to take the new ball, give Moeen and Rashid 15 overs out of the attack to rest up and give our fast bowlers (yes we have 4 of them) the opportunity to each have a short spell of hostile bowling at the Indian batsman to see if we could get a wicket; however we didn’t, Cook left a tiring spin bowling attack against 2 good players of spin, and wondered why we didn’t blow them away. It wasn’t until Jadeja eventually whacked one up in the air against a tiring Rashid that we finally got a breakthrough, inspiring captaincy, I think not.

Yet the day somehow managed to get worse, when captain clueless finally took the new ball, we managed to drop Yadav early in his innings and then waste a review off Jimmy’s bowling that any child could’ve seen was nowhere near out. It would have been extremely unwise to use a review on this if you still had two left, but to waste your final review on that was simply criminal. Perhaps Jimmy now tells Cook what he can and can’t review these days in Stuart Broad’s absence. Now we all knew what was going to happen next and lo and behold, Yadav edges Moeen down the leg side, which is subsequently given not out and guess what, we have no reviews left. It was comical. The picture that will stay with me for a long time was the media’s favourite son, asking for a review until the umpires politely told him that he had already burnt them on two spurious appeals. You simply couldn’t make it up.

So where are we now, well the game has gone in my opinion. India are 51 ahead going into Day 4 on a pitch that is starting to resemble a minefield. It would not surprise me if they end up extending their lead to a 100+ before rolling out England for very little. They may have to bat again, but I can’t see them having to chase more than 50 runs if I’m honest. We had a chance, we blew it and I’m sure we can all look forward to a 4-0 defeat now.

As England fans we’ve all experienced pretty horrendous days (as Dmitri’s Adelaide piece particularly highlights, which was obviously the nadir) but today is up there with all of them. Quite simply, if Cook doesn’t resign after this Test, then I may as well cancel my Sky subscription and tickets to the Oval next year. Cook has never had it as a captain, good family or not, and it’s more than time to hand the reigns over to someone else. There is an alternative, even if it means giving the captaincy to the Investec Zebra, as right now, few others would have been able to give a worse example in the art of captaincy as we witnessed today.

Right, I may need a lie down now, comments and thoughts on Day 4 below:

India v England – 4th Test, Day 2

Dec 9, 2016Dec 9, 2016LordCanisLupus55 Comments

Fragile.

I’m sick to bloody death of it. He has a fragile temperament. A day when Adil Rashid did not deliver the goods isn’t explained away by any other factor than that he bottled it. That he won’t do well under pressure. That he is fragile. Amazing isn’t it? How someone gets labelled. He was our exciting spinner in the last test. Now he’s some unreliable precious little flower.

Cards on the table folks. I didn’t see any of today’s play. I’m catching up on yesterday’s highlights as I write this, and a debut ton for Keaton Jennings. I noticed how that was lauded and praised, but not in any sense or proportion to the Justin Bieber-esque HH responses that our media giants conveyed. Still, it’s only a hundred on a road, innit? So I’m going to have to wing this a bit, but then you are used to that.

India are playing at home and we are being a little more competitive than some of the other giants of the game over there. We’re not getting skittled for very low scores in every game, and while India are making scores, we’re not getting battered to all parts. We have a bad session or two, and it seems to cost us.

India finished the day still a fair way behind. A lot can happen in making up another 254 runs, so lets not get too carried away. I can remember a test match I was at in 2002 – the infamous Nasser toss game – Aussie got 450+, and at the end of the day England had 160 odd for 1! We all know how that turned out. I also know that although I enjoyed that day, I knew we were nowhere near in the game. Yes, I know it is markedly different but by thinking we’re is total strife at this point betrays our own mental state, just as mine did then. Nick one of these two out early, get Kohli, and then there’s all to play for. Who knows, Adil might not be fragile tomorrow.

I’ll update when I see the highlights, but in case I don’t get time tonight, this can act as the conduit for comments on Day 3. Thanks to Sean for holding the fort, and if anyone gives a hoot, the migraines have eased. Reading Newman is enough to make me want to lay down in a darkened room, though.

Sorry for the lack of analysis/comment, but it’s been madness as usual in life and recreation, and not helped by feeling a bit ropey, and I hope to be able to finish off the series I’ve undertaken. But, as you probably know, I’m a blogger of fragile temperament. Some days I feel like it, others I bottle it.

Comments below.

India vs. England, 4th Test, Day 1

Dec 8, 2016Sir Ronald39 Comments

If you’d had offered most England fans the opportunity to win the toss on a turning pitch in Mumbai and then finish 288-5 before play, then I’m sure most of us would have snatched your hand off; however the prevailing feeling amongst most fans is one of mild disappointment and thinking about what might have been today. England whilst not in cruise control at 220-2 were certainly laying down a good platform for what could have been a match winning innings, but one daft shot and one decent delivery in an Ashwin over changed the course of the innings on a pitch where it seems increasingly difficult to start on. The old adage that one brings two was perfectly highlighted in that last session and means England, from being firmly in the box seat, are now only slight favourites to win this Test.

As for the batsmen, Keaton Jennings had a day that he is unlikely to forget, scoring a magnificent hundred in his debut innings. Things could have been very different had he not been dropped on 0; however you have to make the most of any good fortune you get at international level and he looked far and away the best of the English batsmen. As I mentioned in yesterday’s preview, I haven’t seen much of Jennings during the last season and from memory he used to be a bit of a stodgy batsman by all accounts; however there was no hint of stodginess during this innings with the ability to play shots on both sides of the wicket and a highly effective traditional and reverse sweep able to keep the scoreboard ticking. He may well have had a few nerves coming into the game but you can certainly tell that he is in prime knick and high in confidence. The fact that he reached his hundred with a reverse sweep for four only highlights where he is with his game at the moment and the selectors should be praised for bringing him to open at the top of the order. I’m not going to go overboard with the praise after one great innings (I’ll leave that to the hacks who are always happy to build someone up and then knock them down); however if he continues to perform well over the next 3 innings then England are going to have some searching questions at the top of the order with Hameed returning from injury, come the first Test against South Africa. My guess is that one of Hameed or Jennings may well end up batting at number 3 but it certainly heaps a bit of pressure on Cook to start scoring some consistent runs.

As for Cook himself, he looked in better knick than he has done in the past few innings with both him and Jennings both scoring at 3.5 runs per over in the first session to lay an impressive platform for the innings. The thing with Cook in this series compared to 2014 is that his technique hasn’t looked all over the shop as it did in 2014. Yes his technique is fairly ugly with a number of moving parts and it of course only takes one of these to become out of sync to affect his balance but I haven’t seen too much wrong with his trigger movement in this series, it’s just that he keeps missing straight balls that haven’t turned or played down the wrong line to the fast bowlers. Perhaps it’s more mental than physical with the effects of the captaincy debate and being away from his newborn playing on his mind, certainly the ugly heave that got him out stumped seemed to suggest a slightly frazzled mind. Moeen played as Moeen does, playing and missing at a number of deliveries, playing the odd shot of beauty and then playing an ungainly heave across the line to get out after scoring a half century. This is Moeen in a nutshell I’m afraid, there will always be some breathtaking shots and there will always be some fairly loose dismissals as part of his modus operandi, as a bowler and a captain, he is someone who always keeps you interested in the field as a dismissal could always be around the corner. The fact that Moeen copped a load of flack for his dismissal (especially from Boycott) whilst the captain hardly got a mention for his equally ugly dismissal, speaks loads about our commentator’s and media’s mindset. Cook the captain might be fair game to have a gentle pop at but don’t ever have a pop at Cook the batsman. Ca plus change. As for the rest of the batsmen, Bairstow got out to an over ambitious sweep shot and Stokes and Buttler with some skill and a large amount of luck got us to the close without any other damage being down on a wicket where the ball is already starting to turn square.

With regards to the wicket, it was obviously vital to win the toss first and have first go on this surface; however I think the fact that the ball is going through the surface on Day 1 has really surprised the English team. I did mention last night that England may have to counter their initial thoughts about playing 4 seamers if the pitch looked like it was going to turn; however they still stuck with their initial plan of picking 4 quicks. Now whether this is simply a misreading of the pitch or a stubborn insistence that they go with their original plan, I’m simply not sure about; however I believe they have put themselves at a disadvantage bowling at India as the match goes on. You would think that Moeen, Rashid and probably Joe Root are now going to have to get through a lot of overs when India get their turn to bat.

So where does this leave us after Day 1, well the game is certainly delicately poised and England will know that they will need to bat well in the first session tomorrow to win this game. England as a minimum need to score 350+ and will probably be aiming at 400, but with Ashwin and Jadeja bowling superbly added to the fact that the pitch will continue to turn square throughout the game, this will be no easy task. England had a good day today but they will also need to have a good day with the bat tomorrow to have a chance, as put it this way, I certainly wouldn’t fancy England’s chances if they end up with a first innings deficit.

On a final note, it was again heartening to see the full allocation of overs being used with an added bonus of 4 extra overs for those watching the game. It really shouldn’t be that difficult for a Test team to bowl 90 overs in a day and it is something I believe that the ICC should be clamping down on more.

Thoughts and comments on Day 2 below:

India vs. England, 4th Test, Preview

Dec 7, 2016Dec 7, 2016Sir Ronald77 Comments

So England go into this Test 2-0 down and in desperate need of a victory to keep the series alive against a buoyant Indian team; however it hasn’t been this game that has lit up the back pages over the past week rather the constant murmurings about Cook’s position as captain in this team from the majority of the MSM that has been of most interest in the days preceding this Test.

I don’t want to go into too much detail as this was covered in depth in by Dmitri’s ‘What’s Cooking” post but with Newman, Pringle and a few others daring to question Cook’s position as Captain within this team, then it certainly feels like something has happened behind the scenes and that change may be afoot in the not too distant future. As has been mentioned before on the blog, why it has taken our beloved hacks nearly 4 years to work out that Cook is a limited Captain, one who has always been too cautious, one who has never really known what to do with our spinners and one who the word ‘drift’ seems to have been invented for is quite beyond me. We’ve all known this for years, except one can guess that now the ‘KP Brigade’ has all but been silenced, the Director Comma has now realised that he might actually win some games to deflect any criticism coming his way. He may well have privately decided that Captain courageous may not be the best personal to help achieve this moving forward and a change is needed, although it would have been nice if this message had reached Andy Bull, whose nauseous piece yesterday would have had Selvey no doubt purring in approval (For the record, no he shouldn’t bloody relinquish the captaincy on his own terms, he’s actually not part of the monarchy and should be judged on the team’s results, whether you would like him to be or not).

Whether or not Cook does retire as England captain at the end of the series and I think the recent negative chirpings from the Media have been designed by the powers that be to suggest to him that he does, I have no doubt the selectors will be the ones in the firing line for picking such a strange and unbalanced squad. I still can’t get my head around the fact that we picked an out of touch batsman with a dodgy technique, a wicket keeper who hadn’t played a red ball cricket game for over a year and also included 6 fast bowlers in the party, where did they think we were touring? Australia? Oh and don’t even get me started on Liam Dawson! There were rumours last summer that Messer’s Whittaker, Fraser and Newell were likely on the way out as Director Comma looked to reshape the selection process and my guess is that they were kept on with the whole purpose of taking the heat off him when we likely bombed in India. So I wouldn’t suggest that Whittaker, Newell or Fraser pay too much attention to the county fixture list (obviously apart from Fraser, who needs to look at Middlesex’s fixtures) as we all know now that Andy Flower picks the team on character anyway. I’m personally looking forward to the LOL’s when James Vince is picked for the First Test against South Africa next summer.

As to the game itself, it’s good to see Keaton Jennings get an opportunity at the top of the order, and whilst it’s certainly not ideal to have another left hander in the squad, the sheer weight of runs that Jennings scored in county cricket last year meant that the opportunity is very much merited. I haven’t seen too much of Jennings myself (without wanting to sound like Nick Knight) as obviously there is minimal coverage of county cricket on TV; however I’ve heard that he has a decent technique, solid defense and the ability to make ‘Daddy Hundreds’. It is perhaps not ideal that he makes his Test debut in India as I’m unsure about his pedigree against spin (you don’t get too much of that at the Riverside); however it will be interesting to see how he goes on debut. As for the make up of the England side, I still think that they will try and shoehorn 4 quick’s into the bowling line up after misreading the pitch in Mohali, even if Broad is injured. The curator of the pitch reckons it will be the same sort of surface as Mohali meaning that the pitch will play well for the first couple of days and then start to break up on Day 3. Whether or not that is the case, I hope England actually take a proper look at the surface before making the decision on their bowling attack, as if the pitch is a complete Bunsen, then having 4 fast bowlers virtually hands the victory to India.

As ever, England will need to bat well in the first innings to set a competitive total whether they win or lose the toss, although this is something that they’ve spectacularly failed to do in the last couple of games. There has been much talk and some criticism of Bayliss’ request for England to become more aggressive with their batting, but in my opinion that simply means that the team needs to bat with a bit more intent, take the ones and twos on offer and punish the bad ball when it comes along. In a sense I agree, after all if you let Ashwin just bowl to you in the second innings of a game then he is going to get you out sooner rather than later; however that also doesn’t mean that our batsmen should be trying to plonk India’s bowlers into the stand every other ball as that has got batting collapse written all over it. It certainly will be interesting to see how the England batting unit responds to Bayliss’ request.

As for India, they rightly remain the favourites to win the game. Kohli and Pujara are in a rich vein of form and are quality batsmen, they have a lower order that can add valuable runs and take the game away from you (I would certainly class Ashwin as a true all rounder these days) and a potent seam and spin attack that knows how to utilise these conditions well. They will have some concerns about Rahane’s form as he has looked out of touch all series, but with this batting and bowling attack aided by some clever and combative captaincy from Kohli, I doubt they will have too many concerns over whether they win or lose the toss tomorrow.

So will we have a competitive game or simply more of the same? As ever Day 1 thoughts and comments below:

Meet Your Champions – The Annual Press Awards

Dec 4, 2016LordCanisLupus39 Comments

Welcome, welcome, to the Annual Journalist Poll Winners announcement. While I look at you data for the supplementary awards, we all know one in particular gets the passions burning on here. BUt we’ll come to that after this year’s Best Journalist of the Year award.

Winners – 2014 George Dobell, 2015 – Jarrod Kimber

FIFTH – GIDEON HAIGH

FOURTH – NICK HOULT

THIRD – JARROD KIMBER

SECOND – TIM WIGMORE

FIRST – GEORGE DOBELL

Melinda and George — George thrilled with the news he has won this again.

And now, the top ten “worst” journalists as voted by the readers of this blog and the editorial staff. It is usually one of the most awaited posts of the year, for some reason, and I have no idea why!

From last year’s top 10 we lose Alec Swann (10th), Martin Samuel (9th), JOHN ETHERIDGE (8th) and Jim Holden (4th).

So, here we go, with a logjam at 8th!

8th = Stephen Brenkley (down 2), Peter Hayter, Mark Nicholas, Will MacPherson, Malcolm Conn (all new entries)

All garnered two points for the cause. Slightly surprised that Stocks wasn’t in there given your love for him on here, and slightly surprised a self confessed non-journo like Conn popped up. But there’s enough to get your teeth into here.

7th – Andy Bull (new entry)

Nominated by quite a few, the author of The Spin certainly gets pulses racing around these parts. Me? Never been on my radar.

6th – Oliver Holt (new entry)

A new entry, almost impacting on this poll like Jim Holden did last year, for one article/cause celebre. Unlike Holden, Holt has no track record worth a light on cricket, and his nonsense appeared to be bandwagon jumping rather than something set deep in his cricket soul. Placed this high because one of the editorial staff was really pissed off with him.

5th – Derek Pringle (Up 2 places)

Old habits die hard. Way clear of fourth, but due to lack of meaningful pulpit, he’s slipping down the table. Still can’t mention an intense cricketer without invoking Ramprakash, and still can’t mention anyone who isn’t a ra-ra team man without mentioning Pietersen, this plank of the Essex media has delighted us for year, irrelevancies that we are. He works, though. Without him, The Cricket Paper is bereft of something to give a toss about.

4th – Simon Hughes (down 1 place)

#39 was placed fourth on my chart, and he indeed finished clear of Pringle but well adrift of the podium. Despite placing higher in his own influential chart than the three winners, the thing is that we think he’s a bit of a joke. A conceited one, never failing to insert himself into stories, but a joke nonetheless. But enough of the pretenders….

So to the TOP THREE

THIRD – MIKE SELVEY (down 2 places)

Our champion is dethroned. He threatened the top spot, and secured a number of first choices, but he’s now not the figure he used to be, and the Pringle drop is sure to happen. Unless he sets up the long-promised blog. Selvey has been the bete noire of many on here, and many feel he has let them down, been a disappointment, had a fall from grace. Me? Never liked him, never cared that much about him, until he nailed his colours to the Giles Clarke / ECB mast, and now he’s just seen as a management stooge. I didn’t rejoice in his dismissal, but I also wasn’t putting a candle out in sorrow. It was a close fight between him and second, but the runner-up pulled it out…..

SECOND – ED SMITH (unchanged)

I placed him second. Selvey got more first place votes, but my weighting and the fact the editorial staff placed him very high meant he pipped the retired one into second. I mean, what can you say? Let’s keep this brief. You write long words. You read lots of books. You are educated. But you copied a piece and got caught. And your credibility will never recover. You may hope it goes away, that people forget what you did, that the New Statesman doesn’t care. But you did what you did and we all know.

FIRST – PAUL NEWMAN (Up 4 places)

More will be written on this award in due course (which rather gives away one of the Dmitris this year). It was a very close thing this year, and Newman has moved into the slot that Selvey occupied because of the tone, the outlet, and really, due to his consistency. His consistency in writing annoying prose. His consistency in attacking all but those who need to be attacked. His consistency in just not making sense. There always seems to be a personal edge to all of his work. The usual suspects cop it. Always right about Pietersen being sacked. Until very very recently, a supine, pro-Cook stance. There’s attacking Compton. There’s the illogical pushing for Buttler. And beneath the surface lays Andy Flower, and this year’s Jim Holden Article of the Year (as highlighted by nonoxcol). I had my say on that nonsense.

https://beingoutsidecricket.com/2016/05/07/the-anatomy-of-plants/

I voted him number 1, a good number of you did too. It seems like he should have won it before, but he has now reached the summit. He benefited from Selvey’s release, and FICJAM’s relative (imposed) silence on cricket matters, and stormed through. He is this year’s Being Outside Cricket Worst Journalist of the Year, as voted by us on the site.

Until next year……will we have our first repeat champion, after Derek, Mike and Paul have taken one prize each? Will Dobell get his third award for best journalist?

More poll results around or after Christmas, but I know how much you all like this one. So have it now!

The 2016 Dmitris – #1 – Tim Wigmore

Dec 3, 2016LordCanisLupus5 Comments

It’s that time of year again. December brings the Dmitris. Like Wisden Cricketers of the Year but on a shoestring budget. Like Sports Personality of the Year but without a gala occasion and no Andy Murray. In the past two years they have been awarded to people, groups of people, numbers, teams etc. They aren’t all about merit, but significance to the blog, and major events. I’m not limiting them in number, but year 1 had 10, year 2 had 7 (I think).

The first Dmitri this year is awarded to a journalist who I think has contributed to matters discussed in this blog, and who I know a number of you regard highly. It is for Tim Wigmore, who finished a very close second in the Poll for favourite journalist.

OK, let’s get something out of the way. I’ve met Tim a couple of times, and also spoken to him a little off line, but not a lot. So this is most definitely not an award because I am in any way friendly with him. However, my votes, which count for more in the poll (because I’m an authoritarian dictator) did propel him over long-time leader Jarrod Kimber into the top spot for a while before a usual suspect had a late rally. Jarrod did not make my top three this year, although that’s not any major reflection on him – he did not make Death of a Gentleman this year after all!

So why Tim? Well, first of all George and Jarrod have won a Dmitri and so they can’t win it again! The poll is separate, but influential in the Dmitri awards. He was by far the highest scorer of those that have not got one. There are many reasons why. What we see from Tim is pure grunt work. He’s not a test match reporter like his more glamorous peers, but he’s very much an international cricket man. His work on the Associate nations, especially in The Cricket Paper, is absolutely top notch, but it isn’t confined to that – his work for cricinfo and occasional forays into the national press resonate. He attacks his subjects with brilliant passion, has a wide range to his brief, and importantly to us on here, he goes on the attack when he thinks the game is going wrong, and because he so transparently believes in his position. I think he’s the best out there at what he does.

The Editorial board were discussing this at our meeting on 22 November, and compared his output to others in the up and coming group. Compared to Chris Stocks and Will McPherson, we thought Tim had the better pieces, the more tricky and meaty subjects, and yes, we probably had less cause to be annoyed at the pieces than with the other two.

I wish Tim all the best going forward, tackling the Associate agenda with the gusto he’s shown so far, doing the grind on the county scene, and hopefully getting the big break if he so wants it. Let’s put it this way, without his input into the Cricket Paper, we’d be left with a lot of Stocks and Pringle. Good for copy on the blog, but not on my blood pressure.

So the first Dmitri of 2016 goes to Tim, for the slot reserved for our favourite journos, and joins Dobell and Kimber/Collins in the Dmitri Award Hall of Fame. As great an honour as there is in the game I’m sure! But it’s a clear message from us that Tim should keep on keeping on.

The Final poll results will follow in the next few days.

What’s Cooking?

Dec 2, 2016LordCanisLupus111 Comments

I thought I’d break off from the Adelaide story to put a short (ha) piece up on some of the noise coming out of the media after the defeat in the 3^rd Test in Mohali. It seems that now, and only now, some of Cook’s staunchest supporters in the press, and increasingly on Twitter and BTL, are worrying about his limitations as a captain. It seems that he is “too conservative”, that he is “muddled in his thinking” and that he too often reverts to “defensive captaincy”. So, now in media land, this means an open questioning of his role as captain. The almost silent question of “is he up to it”? When Newman starts posing the questions, there is something in the air. I’m not at all sure what that is, to be honest. Is it getting at Cook? Is it a vicarious attack on Bayliss, who is presiding over a one day revolution that he has to claim the credit for because Eoin Morgan is completely persona non grata with the press and TV media, but is not exactly pulling up the trees as time goes by with the test team? Why, and this probably speaks more about me than anything, do I fear the dead hand of the Venus Fly Trap, a flower of much aggression, in all this.

What we are getting in India is what we were programmed to receive by the pundits, especially after Bangladesh. It was going to be 5-0. It was because England’s spinners wouldn’t be able to bowl India out, whereas India’s spinners could bowl us out. We were going to be provided turning wickets, which we know is our weakness. We were going to be given result wickets, as the previous series against New Zealand, and those from before against Australia and South Africa had been. We were going to be bedding in new players like Hameed, like Duckett. We had fragile Adil, Woakes who had never bowled in India, and would be without Anderson for at least a couple of tests. Hell, even a draw or two would be an achievement.

So where is this volte face, and believe me, as a watcher of our press, this is a volte face coming from? The first line of sight is hanging on an article by #39 in the Cricketer, where Cook looks forward to the day when he is just an opening batsman in the ranks, and not a captain. Cook has been in the job for four years, and all his previous captains got worn down by it. With the absolutely nonsensical schedules imposed on him by his masters at the ECB, it’s no surprise he’s knackered. Add to that he’s just become a father again to a child he has barely seen, and that wistful thought could solidify rapidly. The thing is, Cook is an experienced media performer (Pringle’s assertion in The Cricket Paper that he isn’t is, like most things he writes, complete crap), and even putting out the suggestion that you are thinking beyond captaincy means you are already opening the door. So despite denials that he meant he wanted to quit, no-one believes him. But you’ve opened the door, and there’s a gale blowing.

Because Cook, deep down, must know this team wouldn’t win in India. There’s too many flaws in the team, too many weak spots to win in the ultimate test for England these days. If everything went right, they might be able to prey on the Indian resolve, but it didn’t, and now he’s 2-0 down with a week’s media space to fill to keep cricket relevant. A somewhat defensive declaration at Rajkot is now held against him – every armchair captain is gung-ho, and would declare half an hour earlier than the one who gets paid to do it – and because that was an impressive performance, England had made a rod for Cook’s back. A second test defeat in Vizag was put down to a favourable toss to win by England, by a ropey batting performance in the first innings, but marked by a decent fightback in the third innings of the match when previous England teams would have chucked in the towel. A poorer game in Mohali, where his reticence to change tack after a tactic had worked, when it stopped with Ashwin, Jadeja and Yadav in that first innings, is now used against him. Coupled with four ordinary innings since his second innings ton at Rajkot, and we have ourselves a story.

Now, people, you haven’t come to All Out Cricket, and a staunch Cook supporter piece is here for your delectation. No, as usual, it is the media with me, and the modus operandi of English cricket. Journalists have now started speculating about handing over the reins, and citing poor captaincy? Now? Cook hasn’t been awful for about 18 months now, and although I’m not confusing him for Richie Benaud at this time, his captaincy has hardly changed dramatically. If these people cared about the role of captaincy itself, they’d have been outside the Headingley gates in 2014 with pitchforks, asking what the hell was that they had just witnessed when trying to deal with Angelo Mathews and Rangana Herath. Cook then was treated like a protected species, for to give in to common sense then would be to invoke something altogether more disgraceful. But denying that doesn’t get you the epithet “Cook Fanboy” while pointing it out gets you the “KP fanboy” and judging by the usual cretin in the Guardian BTL, that latter one still very much counts.

At that time we were being told that a series winning captain in India, and an Ashes winner as well was “still learning”. Now we are being told that his captaincy may not be seen as taking the team forward. At that time, Cook’s captaincy was like an anchor on a dinghy, while now, while not great, isn’t the horror-strewn calamity that Swann, Broad, Anderson and KP couldn’t bale out. The funniest thing about that time was that it is referred to as a time where Cook faced “intolerable media pressure”. Did he bollocks. They lined up to save him, praise his every positive move over and above its real significance, and participate in Operation Protect Cook(y). People in the press openly admitted that if he’d got to a hundred at Southampton, they’d have stood up and cheered. This was an ECB line, it was a pro-Cook, anti-KP line, it was railing against the louder voices of social media, and it was one of the key tenets of the schism that enveloped English cricket.

So why now, people? What aren’t you telling us? Someone is clearly muttering something, because even though we have no idea how good journalism works, we know how this thing works, because we’ve seen it happen. Is Strauss talking? It appears the most likely as Bayliss is a Strauss appointment, and Cook a Hugh Morris/Paul Downton one (Morris originally, Downton post Ashes 2103-14). Is it the Venus Fly Trap, through Newman, who is laying his poisonous seeds for sins of the past? Something is afoot, and I think we all want to know what it might be. Going to tell us good ladies and gentlemen of the press? Why have Pringle and Newman turned? Now?

———————————————–

My thanks to those of you who have appreciated the Adelaide pieces. I really enjoy writing them and vamping up the photographs. I also know they are pretty long reads, so instead of trailing the Adelaide test religiously, I am going to space them out, although I will put something up for the anniversary of Day 5. I was thinking of trying to be Being Outside Cricket on that fateful Tuesday morning when most people awoke to the news. It might, or might not, work. I’d have torn into KP, that’s for bloody sure! I will produce Day 3 and Day 4 over the weekend, and then put them up at appropriate times. They don’t garner the hits and comments that other posts do, but blogging is, by its very nature, self indulgent.

December is also time for other traditions. I award my Dmitris… yes, my ego is still big enough. The rules are that individuals can’t be nominated for a second time, but if they were part of a collective (eg, the four horsemen journos in my first iteration) they can be put in on their own. There’s no rule of thumb per se for them, except I usually give one to a “good” journo, and that one is written already, and the winner of the poll, and I can reveal we have a new winner this year, so I have to write that. I give one to an international performer, and one to an England one. The rest are random. The first year I did 10. Last year 7. It will probably be around 7 again.

I also have the poll results to announce, as we produce the annual “Top Journalist” list, as voted by all of us. As I’ve said, Mike Selvey has lost that honour, but who has taken it out of Ed Smith, Paul Newman, Oliver Holt or Simon Hughes? All will be revealed soon.

There’s also the annual media review, that I didn’t bother with last year. I know how much that is loved, and I would be letting you down if I didn’t do it this year. But as always, time is limited in supply.

And, of course, we have two test matches as well. Visitor numbers are up. Hits are up. November was our busiest month for a long time. Comments are going up too. There’s still appetite for the blog, and that’s great. Maintaining this interest through the year has been incredible. Thanks to all.

Now, let’s get writing.

The Story of Adelaide 2006 – Day 2

Dec 2, 2016Dec 1, 2016LordCanisLupus7 Comments

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA — The Theatre Of Shattered Hope

Day 2

The first day had given England great hope and optimism. Even some of the Aussies we spoke to en route to the game, or in the bar the night before thought we’d shown some fight and ticker, and that this might be a competitive series. They wanted to bury us, still, but they also wanted to see their team tested.

Then there was Malcolm Conn.

One of the routines I got into in Australia was to wake up and get the morning papers, and read them over breakfast. I’d arranged to meet Matt at another silly hour, and got to the ground nice and early. We secured much better seats than Day 1, and then wandered to the north side of the ground for some breakfast. I bought the paper, think it might have been The Australian, and then read the wondrous article from this slack jawed imbecile. No, I;m not giving him the benefit of the doubt about being a wind-up merchant. There’s no acceptance from me for articles that should insult the intelligence of everyone who reads them.

I will try to recount what it said, if I could find it on line. Instead I have had to borrow from Nigel Henderson’s book “It It Was Raining Palaces I’d Get Hit By The Dunny Door”, who had a similar reaction to mine when he read it. In it he quotes Conn:

“Anticipation was replaced by anticlimax as England unveiled its secret weapon to retain the Ashes – boredom. England had the world at its feet but could barely move for much of the day. Indeed one of the greatest moments of animation and excitement from the touring party came before a single ball was bowled, when captain Andrew Flintoff won the toss and batted on one of the most benign pitches ever presented.”

It went on like that. OK, no-one was confusing the previous day with a barnstoming thriller, but it wasn’t dull. Not at all. It was hard fought. Australia bowled well, England kept them at bay, and as the day moved on, the score ticked over. The final session saw England score at nigh on 4 an over. KP had certainly imposed his personality on the game. On my previous tour my mate made a video of my various deluded rantings during play, and I remember never encountering Conn before, and reading his one eyed garbage. I said “if I read Conn saying one positive thing about England before I leave Australia, I’ll eat the hat I’m wearing.”

It speaks volumes that I still remember this nonsense, and felt that it was now down to KP and Collingwood to ram this gobshite drivel down his throat. We wandered back to the ground, chuntering about the old drivel we’d just read, and that Millwall had drawn their 2nd Round FA Cup tie the night before.away at Bradford (we’d played on a Friday night and I had no clue we were until my brother texted me).

So, proceedings resumed at 266 for 3. Kevin Pietersen on 60, Paul Collingwood on 98. KP would face the first ball of the day, the weather was set fair again, the other lads had seats near the Don Bradman Stand to the south of the ground, while Sir Peter joined me an Matt in the Members and we’d secured an additional pass for the day. Saturday at Adelaide in 2002 had been a scorching little affair, with it over 40 degrees. It wasn’t quite that blazing that day.

The key for Australia was to break this partnership early. They started the day with Stuart Clark who bowled a maiden to a careful Pietersen. Collingwood, surely a little nervous and probably short of a little sleep, took up guard on 98 and faced Brett Lee. The camera was ready for the moment should it come. I had to wait for the second ball. Lee erred on to Collingwood’s pads, and he gleefully whipped it through the legside for three runs and a fantastic century.

The cheers rang from the England supporters all around the ground. There were bundles of them in all corners of the ground. Stuff that Australian Cricket Family twaddle up your you know what, James Sutherland. The cheers went on a little, recognising the triumph of a truly fantastic competitor. One of the unheralded ones, one of those us mere mortals aspire to be. It felt bloody good to be there sharing it with him. Magnificent.

But even then I hated small tons, and there was work for Paul Collingwood to do. 100 wasn’t going to be enough, because it was Freddie next and not much else, the form they were in. I remembered how 350 was inadequate in 2002, and that we needed a lot more on this surface.

The rest of the morning pretty much was dominated by Pietersen. There’s a lot I’ve said about Pietersen on this blog over the years (including its predecessor), but I have only ever seen Michael Vaughan be as dominant as this, as fluent as this, against Australia since they became the real world power post-1989. Pietersen clearly had the Australians rattled. There were the rumours here that he was being called FIGJAM (hilariously watered down in one Aussie journal to GIGJAM – the G being for God).

Collingwood settled down after his hundred with a four, and it took a few overs for KP to get his total moving with a 3 off Brett Lee. This had followed a “controversial moment” two balls before. Brett Lee beat KP and there was a large appeal for caught behind. Not Out was the verdict from Steve Bucknor. A little while later the replays showed there was a hot spot. No reviews in those days. It was a gentler time!!!

Pietersen added three off the next over, and then started to put the foot down. The opening ball of a Brett Lee over was greeted with an emphatic pull shot, and the following over smashing an inviting ball outside off stump from McGrath through the covers. Pietersen always said he never found McGrath that difficult to face, and he set about proving it. Two balls later he smashed one past the grumpy bowler for four. A couple of balls later and he smashed a ball on his legs through midwicket for four. We’d not seen someone go for McGrath like this, and certainly not in Australia. That evening, Pidge’s position in the team was being openly questioned. England were now 300 for 3.

Pietersen was now in the 80s, and Collingwood was comfortable letting him go for his shots while staying solid at the other end. There were a couple of little scares, but with supporting England against this Aussie team, I don’t think, as a spectator you were ever comfortable. The one thing I do remember surprising me was it taking them nearly an hour to get Shane Warne on. It was the 14th over of the morning, and he started with KP on 90.

Having scoped Warne out in his first over, KP began the second over from the legspinner with a delicious drive down the ground, with apparent effortless ease. It’s a shot you can’t imagine an English player making against Warne. Watch the video. It’s sumptuous. This took him to 96, and he nearly got all the way off the last ball of the over when a shot through midwicket was brilliantly saved by Mike Hussey, which kept KP to three runs and on 99. Off the first ball of the next over, from Stuart Clark, Pietersen dropped the ball on to the leg side, scampered as quickly as he could, made it home, and let the celebrations commence. I have to say I had a pretty decent position to capture the celebrations…

England had this game by the scruff of the neck. Two men with centuries, the two talismanic Aussie bowlers looking toothless, a warm day, a flat deck. Time to make hay. Time to make the game safe.

Now the fun stuff began. Australia realised that all out attack wasn’t working, and nor was even mild containment. And in a spell of play that we’ll cherish, as if to make Malcolm Conn’s words appear even more hollow, Shane Warne gave up trying to bowl KP out, and instead slung the ball outside leg and tempting KP to biff it up in the air. With Stuart Clark keeping the other end dry, the runs trickled to a stop. A run of four maidens. Defensive cricket. Trying to bore England out. Oh Malcolm. Two runs in five overs. No doubt it was our fault for not reaching it!

The shackles came off when Collingwood hit Stuart Clark for consecutive boundaries, and then took six runs off Warne’s next over. It was as if he’d decided it was his turn to put the pedal down, and let KP sit in the passenger seat. Collingwood, and later on in his career, Ian Bell seemed to do this to KP, with each dovetailing in the pace of play, with rarely both of them going full tilt at the same time, whereas when you saw KP with Freddie, you thought it was a competition. Pietersen had made his century in the 108th over of the innings, and Collingwood was then on 116. At lunch, nearly nine overs later, Pietersen added two runs to his total, and Colly was on 134.

We milled around a bit at lunchtime – the other lads weren’t really accessible at this point – and waited for the afternoon session. England were in a really dominating position and thoughts had to be whether we declared or not. Were we that confident that (a) we’d last to do it and (b) that we should. I’m a great believer in stopping the bleeding, and batting once if you could. 600 had to be the target if we could there. Not hindsight. I’m not one of these who cries out for declarations.

The afternoon session commenced with England on 324 for 3. It was to be dominated by Paul Collingwood. Words we would never think would be spoken in Ashes cricket if we were all being truthful with ourselves. The Aussies had simply given up trying to get KP out, and were starving him of runs. They were, by and large, still bowling to Collingwood. To see Shane Warne bowl outside leg stump crap ball after ball, was a crushing psychological victory. To see Colly pounce on anything loose after all the MBE jibes was just precious. We may have been 1-0 down in the series, but this was Australia playing like, well, England. Clueless, defenseless, boring. It would not last, but it was great to see that they too, could be a dreary team when things weren’t going for them. As evidence, cricinfo’s commentary:

Back round the wicket to KP. Get ready to snore …

118.3

Warne to Pietersen, no run, padded into the off side

118.4

Warne to Pietersen, no run, padded into the leg side

118.5

Warne to Pietersen, no run

118.6

Warne to Pietersen, no run, even wider, and disdainfully kicked away. You can’t blame Pietersen here, why should he swing at this kind of stuff

And Warne round the wicket … yawn

120.3

Warne to Pietersen, no run, wide and padded away. Anyone got any paint I can watch dry?

120.4

Warne to Pietersen, no run, guess what … go on … yup, padded etc

120.5

Warne to Pietersen, no run, and again. “This is rubbish,” says Michael Holding

120.6

Warne to Pietersen, no run, and again wide and kicked away … and the crowd starting to boo, and who can blame them

It’s sad and frustrating to see such an outstanding bowler used in this terribly defensive and dull way, and a full house deserves far better.

At one stage Bill Lawry, that arch Victorian, that staunch Warne supporter bemoaned this “rubbish”, echoing Michael Holding on Sky.

The 200 partnership came up with a cut shot by Collingwood for 2, but Warne’s leg stump nonsense was augmented by McGrath slinging balls wide outside off stump and bowling as negatively. 16 runs from 8 overs was the result. No doubt Conn thought that only England could be boring. Cricinfo tells a little vignette of the commentary at the time:

“This is a gutless way of playing cricket,” says Michael Atherton but Nasser Hussain disagrees. Well, he would, as anyone who recalls his use of Ashley Giles against Sachin Tendulkar will verify

Being there I just recall this being tedious, dull tactics, and almost as if Australia had resigned themselves then of the match being a draw and moving to Perth 1-0 up. Almost a rope-a-dope strategy, luring England in. But I also thought KP just did not look like he was going to get out unless he gave his wicket away. I was pleased we were still going strong.

In the 127th over Paul Collingwood reached his 150, with a lovely shot dancing down the pitch and smacking Warne over his head. Beautiful. Deserved a knighthood. As if inspired by that, off the first ball of the next over, Pietersen smashed a drive through mid-off from a McGrath delivery that just dripped contempt for the great bowler. This was paradise. The pedal was back down. Temptation wore down on Pieteresen, who finally broke the shackles of Warne’s leg stump attack. (This might have been the moment Bill Lawry cheered a Pom). A couple of other cracking strokes, one off Brett Lee, by Pietesen, England, despite being becalmed, had still added 76 runs by the drinks break.

There was now the countdown to see if Paul Collingwood could get a double hundred. 162 at the drinks interval, he took five runs off Lee in the first over afterwards. Five more in Lee’s second over, including a nick through the vacant slips area. Pietersen would puncture this run of nurdles and drives with the odd super shot, but Collingwood kept the score ticking. Three off an over here, four off it there, without seeming to be playing any differently. He passed his highest test score when he drove a Brett Lee slower ball through the covers for four (I’d seen some of that previous career best at Lord’s v Pakistan). He had reached the 190s.

Michael Clarke had come on and slowed the run rate a little, while Stuart Clark was still proving by far and away the pick of the Aussie bowlers and the pressure ratcheted up a little. Double hundreds are always special (I’d seen one in full in my test watching days until then – Marcus Trescothick’s 219 v South Africa at The Oval) and I was praying for him to do it. Five runs off a Stuart Clark over took him to 196, and a boundary away. Then came over number 143.

Michael Clarke bowled it – first ball a defensive prod. Collingwood was known for going for the big shot to get to a century. But no, second ball he takes two to the cover sweeper, and is on 198. The next ball he runs down the wicket, clips it away and immediately wants two. KP isn’t buying it, and a single is the result, and 199. KP takes a single next ball, so with one ball left in the over, it’s down to Collingwood.

The result is one of my favourite pictures, and for a long time the header on “How Did We Lose In Adelaide”

What still gets the hairs standing up on the back of your neck is the shout of “YESSSSSSSS” as Colly knows he’s absolutely bloody creamed it. The ball goes for four down at long on. He raises the bat aloft, greeted by KP who gives him a bear hug. The English fans go absolutely mad. The joy coursing through our veins being nothing compared to the sheer sense of personal accomplishment this must have meant to one of our most unheralded players at the time. Being the camera / moment person I am, I don’t throw things up in the air, don’t clap until I have the shots I want. It’s a bit joyless, it might seem, but you don’t know the joy that above picture means, looking at it even now, ten years on. Yes, I saw that sporting moment. It was a privilege to be there when it happened. You superstar, Colly.

Listen to Bill Lawry’s commentary on the Adelaide video on Youtube. Even he seems delighted he got there. “Wonderful. Wonderful……. Paul Collingwood goes to 200 with a great shot”.

The score was now 457 for 3, and the next landmark, a pretty rare beast in itself, came the following over when a KP single took the score to 458 and the partnership to 300. I’ve been privileged to see two in full in my test match watching days, the other, a bigger partnership, was between Pietersen and Bell at The Oval (I saw the first three or four hours of Amla and Kallis, so that doesn’t count) against India. But with all due respect to the last one, this was much more impressive. The Aussies now could only wait for the declaration.

Then, a few minutes later, it was over:

145.5

Clark to Collingwood, OUT, and he’s GONE! Collingwood is out, he’s edged Clark behind, a swinging delivery driven on the up, takes a thick outside edge and Gilchrist takes the catch. He receive tumultuous applause, a standing ovation from everyone in the ground and every Australian on the pitch. A fabulous innings.

The partnership ended at 303. Tea taken. Nonsense about to ensue. But let the picture below tell you all you need to know about how it was…

During the afternoon session a bloke sidled up to our group and asked if one of us, as Poms, wanted to take part in the Tea obstacle race with an Australian opponent. I politely declined, as you would imagine if you saw me, but Matt, ever the confident one said OK. He went off to prepare while Sir Peter and I carried on enjoying the partnership, and then headed round the back of the stand to get a beer. We got caught in massive crowds, and missed most of the race, only to see Matt, towards the end, not only winning comfortably, but running over the line backwards. This was Adelaide Exile to a tee. Giving it to the Aussies as a Pom in their land. He can feel free to comment, but I’m sure he loved it!

Resuming after tea on 460 for 4, the question now was what would Freddie do, in alliance with KP, and when or if we would declare. I was all for batting the whole day and getting to 600. My colleagues were more of the “give them half an hour”. The first four overs brought no boundaries, but did get KP to 150.

“I hope he doesn’t get out on 158” I muttered. Yes, honestly, I did.

By this time, as the photo angle suggests, we’d relocated down to the sightscreen in front of the Bradman stand. Pietersen had looked like accelerating when he hit another boundary off Warne, but, on 158, he took a risky single and was beaten by Ponting’s direct hit. His third 158 and no double hundred. A truly magnificent knock, not anywhere near as emotional as Collingwood’s but a real statement of brilliance. It remains an annoyance to me that his only hundreds in Australia came at that ground. As he walked off, knowing what the replay would show, he received a great ovation. It does pay us all to remember this, even in among the utter cobblers some people talk about him now. This was dominance, through arrogance, through self-belief. I sometimes think we’re not comfortable with that.

Geraint Jones didn’t last long. His frenetic state of mind was betrayed when he drove lazily against Warne and was caught by Damien Martyn. Maybe we wouldn’t get to declare after all. Jones gone for 1, the score 491 for 6.

Ashley Giles joined Flintoff and there was some breezy batting, if not full putting your foot down, and they added 60 runs for the sixth wicket, with Giles hitting two fours off one Warne over a particular delight, showing just how on top we were. Flintoff had found some decent batting time and looked more at ease the longer he stayed in, remaining undefeated on 38 in 67 balls, including a six off Glenn McGrath who had had a chastening couple of days. Ashley Giles made 27. 551 for 6 was the score with 12 overs left in the days play (which would be ten with the change around) when Freddie declared (too soon, I muttered, worrying about my own pessimism, and thinking, no, the Aussies can’t win from here).

Any misgivings I might have had disappeared with the 12th ball of the innings. Hoggard opened up first, and then Flintoff, no doubt lacking confidence in Harmison to get the breakthrough, struck in his first over. Freddie plonked one in short, it took the shoulder of Langer’s bat, and KP pounced for the catch. A brilliant start. England dominating. One more tonight, especially if it was Ponting (although Hayden scared the living shit out of me too), and we are really on top.

Despite some aggressive bowling, England did not secure that second wicket. A lot of huff and puff, some pressure on their two supposed gun batsman (although Hussey still had that stratospheric average at that time), but could not yield the breakthrough. I was concentrating on getting some cracking final shots, as the sky turned more attractive, and the behind the bowler’s arm pictures are frequently the best.

The end of the day’s play came with the score at 28 for 1 after 8 overs. Time had run out on a brilliant day for England. Day 3 would determine much, and England needed to get Ponting and Hayden as soon as possible to assert a dominant position. The nagging feeling being, that if England could make 551 on that deck, what would the Australians do. We would find out the following day.

It was a joyous Saturday night out in Glenelg that night. England fans could at last walk tall in Australia and you did sense a little nervousness among the home fans, despite the bluster and confidence. After all, you don’t see McGrath having figures of 0/107, and looking toothless. Nor were Shane Warne’s figures of 1/167 in 53 overs also a thought of joy. Lots of time he’d been rendered toothless, partly by the pitch, partly by negativity. This was a canny attacking bowling resorting to wheelie-bin tactics. I don’t recall much of the night, to be honest, lost in my memories of the horrible night that followed, but it wasn’t anything on the brilliant Saturday in 2002 in terms of entertainment. This was a thoroughly different trip, and a different dynamic. We did book some of our accommodation for the next leg of our trip (Augusta and Margaret River in Western Australia, then Fremantle, with Perth booked for the test match itself) and retired back to base in cheery mood.

As I look back, writing this, I can’t help but think that this was one of the best days I’d seen England play. Indeed, the words of Conn, that set the agenda of my day, had to be rammed down my throat (I don’t recall him being particular praising of England in the following days report, but then maybe I didn’t care). I had a brilliant day at a test match, saw two magnificent innings, and seen the Aussies down (but sadly not out). This was the high water mark. You know what happens next. What you don’t know is how the game just amplified what would happen to me. An event, almost trivial, but at just the wrong time, with me in just the wrong frame of mind, that it nigh on broke me apart. But that’s for later.

Reference:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5VFIlw7c35E

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIsfAUPh0PA

Thank you for the nice words about Day 1. I will try to keep up with the pace of this, but it’s taken me nearly three hours to write this, and so you may see me slip. If I do, I have pieces to fill the void… and lord knows how long it will take for Day 5 to be done justice. I’ve started Day 4 already, so that should be fine! Keep comments coming, and give me your thoughts on this test.