Day 2 of Test 2 – Asserting Dominance

LordCanisLupus16 Comments

Back in 2010, when England last met Pakistan on these fair shores, the tests were of dubious quality, and eventually of dubious intention. But although England won the series 3-1, they always had that control of the series, thanks, we tend to forget, for a magnificent hundred that saved our bacon at Trent Bridge by…..*

Anyway, he’s not in our test team any more, and by the end of that series Saeed Ajmal had him fidgeting about like a cat on a hot tin roof. But England’s frail batting in that series, and the awesome, at times, nature of the visitors bowling always kept tests on the edge.  They won a close battle at The Oval. When we saw another such test at Lord’s, those of us on here who worry that such a frail batting side as England are (with two top order places, at least, and possibly three, up for grabs) could ascend to the top of the pile, placed world test cricket’s travails towards the back for a while. This test has them back, front and centre. In Antigua, India are walking over a mediocre West Indies. Here, we are doing the same in this test to Pakistan.

England have done what good test sides do, of course. They’ve taken their opportunity to bat on a great wicket, piled up a massive score, and then knocked off half the top order in no time, with Woakes, yet again, having a terrific day. That two of the more reliable men, or at least billed as reliables, in Hafeez and Younus are struggling is a real concern for the visitors. They simply have to bowl sides out for manageable totals and hope their batsmen can keep them in clover, but I don’t see this Pakistan team topping 500 in English conditions. I may be wrong, and The Oval might be the surface to do it, but it doesn’t look to be in form enough for me. So when England racked up 589/8 in their first innings, the pressure to score nearly 400 just to force England to make a decision looks daunting. Misbah and Shafiq are going to need to play out of their skins.

England were ruthless. Root eschewed risk early, and took the morning session very steadily as Woakes took advantage of his promotion up the order to remind us how good his batting was when he’s 150 wickets into his test career and faded like Stuart Broad! Bairstow and Stokes played their part, and kept the train on the tracks, while Root expanded his game a little more and got past 200. Then, in something I love seeing from England players and always lamented we didn’t do enough of it, he got past the 200s, the 210s and the 220s and piled on. In my days of watching cricket only Gooch and Cook (twice) have made larger scores for England, and of course, almost forgetting Stokes as well – silly me.

Some little nuggets? His is the third 254 in tests, the others by Bradman at Lord’s in 1930 and Virender Sehwag in Lahore in 2006 (his coming in a Sehwag-esque 247 balls). If he’d made 252, he would have been the first person in tests ever to do so. It’s the 5th double hundred of the year, with England having the top two scores so far. It was two short of the English record at Old Trafford (Ken Barrington) and the third highest individual test innings in Manchester.

Oh, and I must not doubt @norcrosscricket stats ever again (x100)

So while England’s mastery is obvious in this match, and Pakistan’s route to survival will need the intervention of weather in some ways, this feels to someone not wedded as strongly to this England team like a disappointment. I want a scrap. I want a match which is won with fight and tenacity. This is a steamrollering and it doesn’t please me any more. Joe Root is a super player, a brilliant talent, temperament to die for, an all round game that one can only marvel at, but….. I can’t put my finger on it. As with Woakes, who is coming good (and yes, I doubted him as well, of course I did) you feel great for people like this. I really do. But it’s the bigger picture. Azhar Ali appears a fine player in the UAE, but he’s like a fish out of water in this series. Why?

That’s enough for tonight, and please keep the comments coming tomorrow. Somehow it doesn’t still feel right having a Day 2 on a Saturday, but I realise I’m an old fuddy duddy now. Day 3 tomorrow, have your say in the usual place. I’m off to read what the “highly respected Cricket Correspondent” ( (c) Charlie Sale) of the Mail has had to say. It’s sure to be enlightening.

* Eoin Morgan, of course…..

Day 1 of Test 2 -The Big Two

LordCanisLupus29 Comments

COOKY

Evening all. Pleased to know, no doubt, that my laptop appears to be in its final cycle of life for reasons best known to itself, so it has taken a while to get up and running. Add to that my little appointment this afternoon, and cricket has been on the periphery. So the round up will be brief.

314 for 4 after winning the toss is a very good position. Joe Root took the honours with a very impressive 141 not out, and must be looking to convert this one into a super daddy century tomorrow. Virat Kohli, a man he is compared to in this new breed of top test batsmen, has been filling his boots with a double in Antigua and it would be nice to match. I heard Vic Marks say on the radio that this sealed the issue with him at number three, which is a little premature given in 2013, when he played his second test as opener at Lord’s he made a 180+. We do seem to be in an awful rush to anoint changes as successes. Joe is a fine player, I still think he’s better suited at 4, but that doesn’t matter at the moment. What does is that he made a century, has taken England into a strong position, and 314 for 4 seems even stronger knowing he’s back tomorrow.

Of course there was a century for Alastair Cook. These are now greeted like Christmas Day – of course, the birthday of our captain – by children. The punditerati fall over themselves to celebrate his genius. They compare his records to the greats – he matched Bradman’s 29 centuries today, don’t you know, and also the most hundreds by an England captain too – and give off the effect that his hundred today is a return to some normalcy. Well, it isn’t, is it? It’s his second test hundred at home since May/June 2013. Since then he has gone home series against Australia, Sri Lanka, India, Australia and Sri Lanka again without making a century, with just the excellent 162 v New Zealand in there to break the duck. It was Cook’s first first innings ton at home since his century v South Africa at The Oval in 2012. Cook’s centuries are becoming more spaced apart – his last was 11 test matches ago – and yet we are constantly reminded of his record. I know, people will think this is just me nitpicking because I am anti-Cook. I’m anti people telling me incorrect assumptions, that’s what I am. Cook has played a very good innings today, and one that may have taken the initiative back in this series. Well done.

I noted the Manchester humourists were crying out no-ball whenever Amir bowled. You pay your money, you are entitled to have your say as long as it isn’t abusive or offensive. Amir took a couple of wickets and was viewed as the pick of the bowlers, while Yasir Shah had one of those days, and now seems a lot more human.

Chuntering will start over Alex Hales and James Vince. The latter is going to get it first, no doubt. James Vince has never convinced me he’s remotely test class, but I’ve also got to caveat that by saying I’ve not seen a lot of him. Vince was one of those guys that came with a reputation, but George Dobell said last year, or even the year before, that he scores runs off bad balls fine, but has real difficulties with good ones. His penchant here seems to be nicking off after playing a couple of glorious shots. Pringle has been a staunch advocate, but he’s selling his shares now, as once again he invokes Ramprakash (what did Mark do to him to make him invoke him so) in the “he looks nice but doesn’t have the temperament” piece. England are in a quandary now with Vince. Boot him out and what do you replace him with? Keep him, and know that one score could be the outlier that Robson and Lyth (two other discards) scored rather earlier in their truncated test careers. The knives were doubly sharpened for Compton, both this and the first time around, whereas the arms are ready to be put around Vince’s shoulders. There there. Meanwhile, Hales is not starting the innings well for us, and those whispers are going to start.

OK, enough from me. This was a good toss to win, and England have made hay. They find themselves in a strong position, and Root going on will make that stronger. Still Bairstow, Stokes and Moeen to come after Woakes too. Let’s all go off and read what Newman has had to say to complete a wonderful day.

Comments on Day 2 tomorrow, and wishing Chris a safe evening and return to England after the events in Munich. Keep as safe as you can, sir.

2nd Test Preview

LordCanisLupus37 Comments

Dmitri on the decks for this one, written on Wednesday night, a couple of days before the game is due to begin. This won’t be long.

As we all know, England came out on the wrong end of a hard fought game, with the best performances by the visitors just about overcoming Chris Woakes’ break out game. With Woakes proving such a success, it is Jake Ball, who let no-one down on his debut likely to give way for the fit for the first test (so we are told) Jimmy Anderson, and possibly Finn may make way for a second spinner (or if Ball keeps his place), or more likely for Ben Stokes. There may be questions around Moeen with Rashid included in the squad, but at the end of the day, they’ll pick who they pick. Whoever they is.

The last time England lost the first test of a series, it was against Australia in Brisbane. That didn’t end well. The last time they lost the first test of a series at home, it was against South Africa in 2012. That didn’t end well either. Pakistan won the first test in England, at Lord’s, in 1996. We lost that series 2-0. So omens aren’t good, are they?

I’m not going to make this a long post, because the joy of these threads are the comments as the game goes by. The press reaction, given how they have the selection committee in their sights at the moment, will also be very interesting. Interest in the series has risen because there is a real contest in prospect. It augurs well. Hopefully the weather plays ball and we get another excellent game.

Comments and observations below. And laughter, as around the tea break and into the evening session, I’ll be having root canal done. Lovely jubbly.

 

Whitaker’s For The Sack – Comma

LordCanisLupus38 Comments

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

Whitaker

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

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

The Four Journos

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Dearth Of Press Men

LordCanisLupus83 Comments
The Fantastic Four
The Poll Winners Party

And there there was one.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Sore Tooth Test – A Dmitri Review

LordCanisLupus31 Comments

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Or was there something else I needed to talk about?

England vs Pakistan: 1st Test, Day Four

thelegglance97 Comments

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

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

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

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

 

England vs Pakistan: 1st Test, Day Three

thelegglance15 Comments

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Day four comments below 

 

 

England vs Pakistan: 1st Test Day two

thelegglance22 Comments

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Day three comments below

 

England v Pakistan – 1st Test, 1st Day

LordCanisLupus33 Comments

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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