England v India – 2nd Test, Day 2 – You’ll Be Back To Find Your Way, Again, Again, Again, Again

If ever a moment summed up the state of English test cricket, it came just after 4 o’clock. Dominic Sibley had just succumbed to another loose shot to mid-wicket having seen off the early new ball threat, and in came Haseeb Hameed for his first test in England, five years or so after a promising debut. When Mohammed Siraj’s full pitched delivery missed Hameed’s bat and clattered into the stumps, the first the former prodigy faced, hearts sank. Two dismissals, two individuals, two moments in time. Two massively different reactions. Stagnation removed, hopeful promise dashed in the passage of two catastrophic cricketing moments. Someone “never up to it” being derided, an individual of unfulfilled promise (rightly) sympathised. It smacks of utter confusion, misplaced hope, wishful thinking and all points in between. What else is there?

Before we get back into this moment, let’s set the scene. England started the day on the back foot after a very bad first day and a very good hundred by KL Rahul. The centurion lasted no time at all, falling second ball to Ollie Robinson (not Anderson, lazy writer), hitting straight to Sibley in the covers. Soon after Rahane nicked to slip and was also back in the hutch. Stuart Broad then tweeted that England were one wicket from the tail and could possibly bowl the visitors out for under 300! There is no shortage of misplaced optimism around this England camp. Standing between “the tail” was Jadeja and that pest, Rishabh Pant. The bits I saw of the latter’s innings was a mix of play-and-misses, slogs that avoided fielders and some interesting shots. He’s never dull, I’ll give him that. He was dismissed when I was on my dog walk, caught off the toe end of his bat through to Jos Buttler off the bowling of the strangely low profile Mark Wood.

Shami soon followed, but Jadeja still managed to milk another 33 out of India’s lower order, and he was not able to swing his bat in the sword dance for 50 because he ran out of partners. However, he showed some assurance, solidity, and it is just utterly amazing to me he, oops, I stopped myself. He does have one test century!

Jimmy Anderson takes the plaudits yet again with a seventh honours board worthy set of figures. It’s incredible, of course, how he is continuing to deliver the goods, and yes, it is worrying how we will do without him. Bowlers do step up when they take their time as the lead man, and that’s precisely what Jimmy did once Harmison and Hoggard left the scene. Robinson, although frequently recording deliveries in the high 70s mph, certainly didn’t look out of place, and Wood is just a puzzle wrapped up in an enigma to me. What was clear was that England, if not bowling themselves back into the game – 360 being a dangerous score on a wicket like this – had at least given themselves a chance.

England negotiated the period up to tea in their usual dogged, slow, methodical, boring, resilient, tedious, fighting, subdued way. I am not entirely sure what people expect these days. These aren’t England’s historically most talented players, but there are plenty out there who want them to do things that didn’t get them where they are now? I can’t fathom it sometimes. I remember a while back, when openers were falling by the wayside that commentators and pundits were saying could we at least find openers to see off the first 15 overs! Sibley generally does that, and, well….

Look, Listen or Whatever – I am not a huge Sibley fan but he got into the team because he made a mountain of runs for Warwickshire. He has made two test hundreds, one in South Africa that was pretty damn good. He is clearly struggling. It is clearly better in this world to be someone struggling but looks good doing it, someone struggling who is a media darling (I’m thinking of Jos Buttler here), someone struggling who consistently gets recalled, but for the love of god, don’t struggle if you are slow or particularly unattractive to watch. I reckon if Graeme Smith had started his test career for England rather than South Africa, poorly or had an early bad trot, he’d have been dumped! I am watching twitter and the vitriol is quite something. Someone, who we love dearly on this blog, has made a point of all the criticism coming from “ex-pros” who are united against him. It’s an outrageous pile on and it will only end in one way. Sibley will be gone. Crushed by the limitations of his technique and an audience almost delighting in telling him he’s utter mince.

Contrast that with the return of the prodigal son, Haseeb Hameed. The lachrymose (thanks Latin teacher) reaction is understandable but rife with double standards. He started his career well, on pitches that all the other top line batsmen in the England team, I think, got tons on. He showed huge promise, but the media and the coaching staff got utterly carried away. You know I warned people not to big him up too soon, and I’ve never been more sick that I was proved right. His career went to pot, he may or may not have contributed to his own demise at Lancashire, and yes, he’s had a nice start at Nottinghamshire, but this is a selection based on 2016 Hameed being there. We desperately need it to work. There is rightful sympathy towards him. Any club player, any cricketer, knows first ball ducks can happen and the absolute sense of humiliation there is in that (reading a book describing Chris Smith’s first ball in test cricket and his reaction tells you a lot). As a human being, of course we feel for him. It’s a pity that cup of human kindness isn’t shared around sometimes to others fighting their way through.

After the fall to 22 for 2 (another bleedin’ typo, Dmitri – get a grip) Rory Burns and Joe Root began the rebuilding job. Burns played very well, getting the breaks you need, and looking really assured the longer he got in. Joe Root was the captain carrying more passengers than the New York Subway, doing his usual thing. Reviews were wasted, India looked less threatening, the 100 came up. All that needed to happen was to see the play through to the close. Then, with Burns on 49, Shami got one through his defence, hit the pad, and while it didn’t look out on first look, on review (Burns reviewed) it was out. A hammer blow.

Joe Root and Jonny Bairstow saw the day out, not without a little flutter (I thought JB nicked it, but another superb decision reprieved him). With the day closing at 119 for 3, India are clearly ahead, but not totally out of sight. One suspects England need to get to 300 to have even an outside chance batting last, and that will probably mean an increased passenger load for Captain Root. It’s a well set-up test match.

There is plenty more out there to discuss, including Tom Harrison’s wonderful interview yesterday which had me feeling a warm glow for the Paul Downton-era ECB, and which I may take on after this test. I also went to The Oval on Tuesday for the Royal London game between Surrey and Warwickshire, where I saw a terrific innings by Tim David, with all the pyrotechnics that you could wish to see in any short-form game, and which the varied make-up of the crowd seemed to absolutely love.

The game is in a tenuous state, run by charlatans and cowboys, supported by a loyal base abused by the great and the good, in search of fresh pastures that might not be there. This test is good despite of the authorities, not because of them. It is fascinatingly poised. I hope it runs an exciting course. England resume at 118 for 3, 246 behind. Oh, don’t worry, I noticed they were 6 (thanks Sean) overs short in the 6 and a half hours play today across both teams. Seems that the punishment’s impact didn’t last too long.

Any comments, please do this below.

Advertisement

India vs England: 3rd Test review

As it turned out, England probably did a little better than some might have expected, but the end result was entirely predictable.  To have made the game interesting, another hundred runs or so were needed, and that was would have required something spectacular.  Even then it probably wouldn’t have been enough on a surface that didn’t especially deteriorate, and with a bowling attack that have at no time looked like skittling India.

There was the odd bright spot, Joe Root batted well, although he once again fell between 50 and 100, a habit he needs to break sooner rather than later if he really is going to be as good as he has threatened to be, while Haseeb Hameed scored an enterprising unbeaten 50 from number 8, batting that low due to a finger so badly broken he is to return home to have an operation and a plate put into the bone.  There has been much discussion around the decision of England not to send him for a scan immediately, but to wait.  It’s one of those where the logic behind it – to not make it clear to India that it was badly broken in advance of him batting – is open to question in terms of the player’s welfare, but the rationale can be partly understood, and it mattered little in the wider picture.  The team medics would have had a pretty good idea how badly it was hurt, and it’s a side issue to the bigger problems England have – except in the sense that he is unquestionably a loss to the team.

What it did explain was the three net sessions yesterday; Hameed attempting to amend his technique to find a way to bat with the injury.  He emerges with nothing but credit, for he appeared in little discomfort in the middle and did a fine job in trying to drag England up to a total that with a very fair wind they might have defended.  Indeed, he apparently had to be persuaded to return home to have it treated, insisting that he wanted to play the last two Tests.  In a series where the collective batting has been little short of dismal much of the time, he’s an unquestioned bright spot – even if some of the praise has gone beyond reasonable and into the hyperbolic.

Aside from that Woakes scored runs, but it was never likely to be enough.  Any highly optimistic hopes of an extraordinary win were heightened when Woakes himself dismissed Murali Vijay with seven on the board, but it was plain sailing thereafter, with Pujara’s late dismissal allowing national hero Virat Kohli to come in for the denouement.  Parthiv Patel completed a fine comeback match with an unbeaten and rapid fifty.

For India, the series is going swimmingly, only the form of Rahane offering up succour for England.  In itself, that is a lesson for those picking on the latest England victim, for Rahane has had a miserable time, but the rest of the team have performed more than well enough.  Blaming one player for all the woes of the batting is ridiculous, as many did when Duckett was dropped, for most teams have one player out of form at any given time.  It doesn’t for a second mean that changes shouldn’t be made, but it does mean that focusing on one doesn’t excuse the others when the side fails to make runs.

If it is little surprise that India have the superior spin attack, it is more of one that their seamers have consistently outbowled England’s.  Only Ben Stokes can be considered to have bowled well, although his five wickets in the first innings comprise all but two of those he has taken in the three Tests to date, so he has hardly been exceptional throughout.  Woakes was below par here, though doubtless playing, being dropped, then playing again does little for his consistency, while James Anderson looked entirely innocuous.  This may well have something to do with only bowling six balls in the entire match that would have hit the stumps, for nothing reassures a batsman so much as knowing that he only needs to play at the ball when he wants to score runs.  Anderson was economical alright, as is often the case when players leave the ball alone most of the time, but did not threaten a wicket.  Whether this is a deliberate tactic on his part is impossible to know, but it needs to be addressed urgently.  Mistakes are created when the batsman is unsure what to expect, at the moment they know all too well.

Stuart Broad may well return for the next Test, and at the moment it should probably be Anderson who makes way based on this match, though that is unlikely to be how it pans out, and given his record, probably rightly.  England need to work out how to take wickets, and Anderson is obviously more than capable.  But if he persists in a safe line outside off stump then it’s nothing other than a waste of a seam spot.  Harsh indeed, for whatever the criticism that can be levelled here, Anderson is and has been an outstanding bowler for England.  Which is exactly the reason for the frustration.

Cook and Bayliss were honest enough to say afterwards that they had misread the pitch, with nothing like the amount of turn on offer late on that they had expected.  With all mistakes, it is a matter of whether it could have been foreseen in advance, and few criticised the three spinner approach based on it not turning enough before the match started.  The lack of assistance meant that England had one spinner too many, with Batty and Moeen sharing light duties.  However, Mumbai is much hotter, and the pitch there expected to be more conducive to spin – it would be a serious mistake for England to replay this match and drop one of them on the basis of what happened here.  Conditions may well be different, though whether two or three is best is open to debate.  If one does go, it will probably be Batty.  His return to Test colours hasn’t been an unqualified success by any stretch, but he is what he’s always been, a solid pro who doesn’t let anyone down.

There is latitude however, simply because England have a six man attack.  In itself, this is a good thing, made possible by Stokes and Ali being frontline batsmen and Woakes and Rashid not too far off the all rounder category either, in other words, England aren’t specifically picking six bowlers as such.  Rashid has been excellent all series, and has taken two thirds of all the wickets to fall to bowlers.  Moeen has been adequate as back up but no more.  Rashid is a match winning bowler, Moeen is a useful converted part-timer who has at least done better than either of the other specialist England finger spinners on this tour, and is probably the best England have.  But while Rashid has more than contributed his fair share, for the spinners to really have a chance to impact a match, they require runs on the board to defend.  Which brings us neatly on to the batsmen.

In England’s two defeats this series, they have failed to reach 300 on any occasion.  While last time around they certainly had the worst of the conditions after losing the toss, the same can certainly not be said for Mohali. They won the toss, the pitch was good, and everything was in their favour.  The match was lost in the first innings, indeed was lost on the first morning, with a collection of poor shots aiding India in dismissing England for a woefully sub-par 283.  From there, even with a spirited fightback on day two, the match had a sense of inevitability about its ultimate conclusion.

It is the failure to be disciplined, and the failure to build partnerships that is the major problem.  Jonny Bairstow is top of the batting averages this series, but on each occasion he has come in with a rescue job to do.  That he has managed to do so on a couple of occasions is to his credit, but it doesn’t change the course of the game, it merely keeps England in the match.  Some batsmen have made a big score and done little of note apart from that – Cook and Moeen in particular.  In the latter case, his tendency towards feast or famine is well known, though it’s an especially fine effort this time around, in the former, without him having a strong series England were always going to be in trouble.  Cook’s record this series aside from the hundred is not materially worse than anyone else’s, the difference is in how critical his role is to England being competitive, and in the first innings as well.  In this match, appearing totally at sea to the spinners was a startling sight – he always has been a fine player of slow bowling.

And yet none of the batting order as constituted in this game are having a terrible time of things.  The left handers are struggling against Ashwin, which may cause some cogitation when considering Hameed’s replacement, but all in all they are scoring runs to a reasonable degree.  What they are not doing is putting it together at the same time.  Cricket is a mental game, and in many ways batting is about mentality more than any other discipline.  The problem of not building partnerships is not a new one, the same problem has been apparent over the last couple of years.  For whatever reason, England seem unable to consistently build totals, even if the individuals themselves are making scores.

What should be a major worry, with England needing to win both remaining matches to share the series is that no pitch so far has been a raging turner of the type they struggled on in Bangladesh.  Indeed, given how the tracks have played, England ought to have been comfortable with them, for India’s groundsmen have been exceptionally fair.  It’s a psychological issue rather than a technical one, for apart from the unfortunate Duckett, no player has looked out of their depth on this tour, they merely keep finding often daft or lazy ways to get out.  In some ways that’s a good thing, for the claim from Cook that England are not that far away from India is not completely unreasonable, but the margin of defeat in the last two games is so large there’s only a so long before such a claim becomes absurd rather than hopeful, and it’s pushing it now.

There are two spare batsmen on this tour, Duckett and Ballance.  It appears neither of them is selectable, which begs the question as to what the point of them staying on the tour is.  There is the possibility one of the batsmen from the Lions in the UAE could be called up, with the debate centring around whether that should be an opener.  Joe Root could move up to open with Cook for example, and with England so often being 20-2 the appeal of putting the two senior players out at the start and getting them to take responsibility for the innings is clear.  If England went down that path, then Sam Billings may be the favoured option to slot into the middle order.  If so, at least there would be no concerns about Bairstow hurting himself keeping wicket – there’d be two other players who could take over, quite possibly for the first time in Test history.

Over the three Tests to date, it’s not impossible to see England winning the next match if they get it right, but the trouble is that over the last two games, they’ve not shown that much evidence that they can. India is not an easy place to tour, as the repeated wallopings handed out to visitors have tended to show.  England might play well and still lose, such is the challenge in front of them.  But it would be nice if they did, they’d then at least have given themselves a chance.

 

HHH – Haseeb Hameed Hyperbole

I picked up a copy of the Evening Standard on the train this evening. On the back there was the repeating of a claim I’d heard already today that this was, in the view of Trevor Bayliss, the most complete performance he had seen from England in his time as coach. But it was when I flicked inside that my heart sunk.

wp-1479157689173.jpg

Now people can say this about me and they might have a point. “Dmitri, if this cheeses you off that much, why don’t you try a sport that doesn’t?” Or you could say “Lord Canis Lupus, if you can’t get excited about a great new talent, why do you watch?” Or you could say Mark “surely a coach pumping up the tyres of a young kid isn’t that surprising, is it?”

I’ve been around the block a bit, and try not to get above myself when it comes to hype. I’ve not anointed Virat Kohli the new Tendulkar, Steve Smith as the new Border or Quentin de Kock as the new Gilchrist. Yet they have a more firm body of evidence than Haseeb. Yes, you can say that Haseeb is a young kid and surely you have to get excited, and believe me, I am. He seems a great lad, a great attitude and approach to the game, a beautiful temperament and very importantly for the sport in this country, a British-Asian batsman with what we hope is true staying power. But it’s so early in his career to be giving us this nonsense.

Bayliss, in the article, say Haseeb reminds him of Sangakkara in his love of batting., wanting to practice all the time etc. etc. Great. That’s not what the headline screams, is it? And even the most naive of media trained coaches must have known how this would be presented. Is there a big deal? No, not really, but English sport is littered with young sports stars who flamed out. Four England players made hundreds in this test match and Haseeb wasn’t one of them, but because we’ve been so desperate for an opener this strikes me as a little bit of over excitement. But I’ll say this once, and then hope it sticks. Judge Haseeb after a year. Judge him after this series, on more difficult surfaces than this on. Judge him on a home series against South Africa. Judge him on how he tackles an overseas Ashes series. We have time to see if the kid is the real deal, or if he gets worked out. We know he has the temperament, we can see that. Now let’s see if he is the package. Pumping tyres is all well and good, but if Bayliss really thought that of him, he’d have had him in the team at Chittagong, not at Rajkot. It looks daft, the headline looks daft, and we invite ridicule with this stuff.

It’s not a lot, but if you can’t see why I’m worried, people, you haven’t been paying attention. This England team, this set-up, over the years has chewed up great talent and spat it out. Sure, get excited, but keep your heads. Say nice things, of course. The lad deserves them. But keep some proportion, for heaven’s sake. Our press have built up enough to knock them down. Good luck HH!

I see George was saying this was the most entertaining England team he’s ever seen. Interesting. I’ve been clearing out a lot of stuff and came across the DVDs of the highlights from Adelaide 2010. So I put them on. I watched us bowl out the Aussies for very little, I watched Cook and Trott make hay, and then KP applying the coup de grace. That team would have murdered this one. And with the bat, which I care about the most it has to be said, they were really, really good to watch. Cook’s knock was magnificent – on the back of 235 – and well, KP was KP. Prior’s demolition of the demoralised was fun. I sometimes wonder if George takes the bowling dry thing too much as lacking entertainment. The MCG morning was certainly entertaining!

OK. Hope that explained my thinking, if you care!

Just thought I’d say that I’m reading Ian Chappell’s book at the moment. It makes me sad. Really sad. Chappelli absolutely raves about Sir Garfield Sobers. I hate the fact I’m in my late 40s and only just missed him makes me really sad. I wish I’d got to see him play, even as a childhood memory. But I don’t. I also went on a holiday 11 years ago where the previous year the star guest for the evening I went to was Sobers. I felt a little cheated to get “only” Joel Garner! The Chappell book is a good read so far, and I might do a review when I finish.

OK. That little ramble over, have a good night, and I’ll speak soon…