Bowling Worries For England And Thoughts On Australian Batting

Over the past year most things have gone right for Andy Flower and his coaching companions. Now, with the score line standing at 5-1 in Australia’s favour, he knows that the World Cup will be anything but plain sailing. There are mitigating factors but the truth of the matter is that quite simply they have not been good enough.

Injury is a major part in this with injuries to Stuart Broad, Tim Bresnan, Chris Tremlett, Graeme Swann and latterly Ajmal Shahzad being important. James Anderson has only recently returned from his short break for paternity leave (by which point the series was more or less lost) although none of these reasons really gets away from the fact that the bowling throughout this series has been substandard.

In the 6^th ODI today, England’s batsman fired and Australia were set a huge total of 334 to win. That they got there with such ease (despite the late flurry of wickets) is strange considering how effective England’s bowling attack are in the longer forms of the game.

You would have to think a first choice bowling attack of Broad, Anderson, Bresnan, Swann and probably Yardy with Collingwood as back up would be enough to hold most teams to a competitive score – yet it seems, unlike in the test matches, our back up bowlers are not good enough.

Tremlett bowls too short and is easy to hit – this will be even more the case on the slow and low sub continental wickets; Finn was dropped from the test side as he is not the line and length merchant England required – something that hardly bodes well for ODI cricket – and Shahzad, while showing moments of brilliance and exciting promise, is still a bit raw. It is right though that he is going as the back-up seamer over the other options although Woakes possibly deserves a chance.

It has not all been the fault of the bowlers though as the batsman have also been culpable in at least two of the six matches. Trott is of course the exception with two hundreds and a fifty in the series. Essentially, if he doesn’t fire, England have had no chance.

Over the past 18 months the lynchpins of England’s batting have been Morgan, Collingwood and Strauss. Strauss has been getting starts (including a couple of fifties) before falling just when he should be kicking on – something that is becoming a feature of his. Collingwood is of course in about the worst run of form we have ever seen from a batsman and Morgan, while looking in great touch, has picked the wrong shot every game early in his innings.

Some of it is surely down to a hangover from the Ashes, a dropping in the intensity perhaps, but in this professional age it cannot be an excuse. We do sympathise with the players as the schedule is truly hectic, as Pietersen said a few days ago, and it remains something the ICC and all the respective boards need to think about.

**************

Just a quick thought to finish… During the Ashes many people commented, both Australian and not, that the Aussie batsman had been adversely affected by 20/20 cricket and ODI cricket. The most compelling evidence for this was when the Aussies were trying to bat for a draw in Adelaide, Melbourne and Sydney and, despite the onus being on crease occupation, they seemed only to have one mode – that of attack.

We had not given this much thought up until now, but it does appear that the Aussies are very suited to limited overs cricket. A Shane Watson 70 won’t make a difference in test cricket, yet in ODI’s can be crucial. Likewise in the bowlers, their most dangerous and game changing players – Shaun Tait, Brett Lee – can only play the shorter forms for fear of breaking down.

We said before this series that, despite the mass media’s acclamation of England, you cannot write off an Australian team who when we last checked were still ranked number one in ODI’s. The sub continent will be different of course but, in this format at least, they are an entirely different proposition.

 

The Joy of Bell and Morgan

The Case For Bell

Leading up to yesterday’s game in Adelaide, there was a great deal of speculation regarding the worthiness of Ian Bell as a member of England’s 20/20 squad, let alone his eventual position as first choice opener. Bell, they said, was not explosive enough and his game was not suited to the shortest form of cricket in much the same way as people said Michael Vaughan’s wasn’t to ODI cricket. He is too classical, too correct and doesn’t hit the ball in the unusual areas that the best 20/20 players do.

Yesterday, however, Bell showed that these critics might as well have saved the effort of writing their words. He may only have got 27 and been dropped twice (although one was really little more than a half chance) in his short 17 ball innings, yet some of the shots he played were breathtaking. Hitting Tait over cover before threading him through the covers twice in the first over, he then launched an audacious uppercut for six an over or two later that the modern master blaster, Virender Sehwag, would have been proud of.

In short, when you have a man in as golden a run of form as Bell and, especially when they have always been such a clean striker of the ball as the Warwickshire man, you would be crazy to leave them out.

Since Bell finally flowered into a genuine world class player towards the end of 2009, he has been one of the gems of England’s batting line up and as such should be a shoo in for the world cup squad. In our opinion we would slot him into the ODI line up in the place of Jonathan Trott. While harsh on Trott, Bell has less of a propensity to get bogged down and finds the boundary more often than his county colleague – something that on the slow and low pitches of the sub continent will be highly important.

Morgan Sparkles

For a man that has hardly hit a ball in anger on the tour so far, Eoin Morgan looked in tremendous touch last night. What always strikes us about the Middlesex player is his extraordinary ability to hit the gaps in the field, something that enables him to seemingly hit boundaries at will.

In the past people have equated Morgan to England’s nineties finisher, Neil Fairbrother, but if truth be told, Morgan is a far superior player. Fairbrother was an excellent manipulator of the ball and was able to keep the scoreboard ticking over but sometimes lacked the ability to hit the big shots and get the pressure relieving boundaries. Morgan on the other hand is just as likely to smash a pull into the second tier of the stand, as he did to Lee last night, as to nudge a hard run two out to wide cover.

Unusually though, for a man with such a track record as a finisher, he couldn’t take England over the line last night although once more he was the backbone of the innings. Moving forward, if Morgan is going to nail down Collingwood’s spot in the test line up, it is imperative that he maintains his reputation as the limited overs lynchpin over the next couple of months. If he continues batting as well as last night – then this should be a mere formality.

Click here for our Facebook page. ‘Like’ us and get regular updates in your news feed.

2010: A Cricketing Year

A few days late perhaps, being as we are in the early days of 2011, but we thought we would do a short review of the year and our favourite sporting moments, it’s heroes and its villains. We will split this into a couple of posts over the next couple of days; one for cricket and one for rugby with a few extras thrown in.

The Highlights

England Win 20/20 World Cup

As we wrote here and here at the time, this was an astonishing tournament for England. Astonishing in that England won a competition in a format which, until only shortly before, they had demonstrated a worrying inconsistency; but also personally so (something that took us by surprise) as, given a tournament that is not a overhyped domestic commercial affair, we heartily enjoyed the shortest form of the game.

Eoin Morgan’s Century at the Rosebowl

Interestingly, given the Compulsive Hooker’s well advertised love for test cricket, the first two highlights that sprang to mind were limited overs affairs. Morgan’s hundred was a wonderful innings and reinforced the growing belief that not only is Morgan probably the finest English limited overs player for quite some time, he is also one of the premier players in the world. In test cricket Morgan’s time will come again, probably sooner rather than later with Collingwood’s current travails, and when it does we look forward to seeing how he gets on with some interest.

India’s Series Against South Africa

With India and South Africa both seemingly being afflicted with the same disease as England, namely winning well only to lose well in the following test or vice versa, and with both a home and away series being played for each side, this has been a fascinating battle. Both sides are so well matched, particularly if Zaheer Khan is playing, that wherever the games are being played it is difficult to know who has the edge. With the Indian leg of the battle cut short in a brutal bit of planning by the BCCI and SACB that left us gasping for more, we are pleased to see a three test series currently being played.

2^nd Ashes Test, Adelaide

Despite the fact that the MCG may have been a greater margin of victory and that it may have been the win that retained the Ashes, it is the Adelaide test that was the highlight for us in this Ashes campaign. England dominated Australia in the second half of the Gabba test and didn’t let off here. A brilliant display of such all round cricketing perfection that we had to keep pinching ourselves to remind us that it was England in Australia we were watching.

The Low Lights

The Pakistani Spot fixing Scandal

With no resolution yet to this saga and an apparent willingness by certain people around the world, not just in Pakistan, to try and sweep this under the carpet, this has been a nightmare scenario for world cricket. With the possibility that we, the cricketing public, might lose the talents of Mohammed Aamir, not to mention any others that may emerge should the skeletons in the closet be aired fully, it really is a sad state of affairs. Pakistan have all the talents in the world but sadly are led and managed by a succession of inept and sometimes downright dangerous (to the game that is) people. Let us hope 2011 sees some appropriate punishments as well as an extra vigilant ICC.

Cricket Scheduling Worldwide

Whether it is the IPL, the Champions Trophy, the English domestic season or simply maddeningly short test series, the cricketing authorities around the world have a great deal to answer for. We’ve said it before and we’ll say it again but that old cliché ‘less is more’ really is true. International cricket matches should be events that whet the appetite; domestic leagues should entertain whilst providing quality fixtures bearing the players themselves in mind and above all they should be fan friendly – something that at some point around the world all the boards fell down on.

Most Entertaining Player Award

Only one possible winner for this award – Graeme Swann. His video diaries are hilarious, his press conferences interesting and amusing and he plays the game with a rare joie de vivre. Well done sir.

Batsman of the Year

Sachin Tendulkar – who else?

Bowler of the Year

Dale Steyn. In a cricketing era where former players and experts generally have bemoaned the lack of quality bowling around the world, Dale Steyn deserves special mention as someone who has bucked the general trend. Fast bowling of the highest class is always exciting to watch and we look forward to him continuing his spree of destruction through 2011.

Villain of the Year

Ijaz Butt. A clown, a buffoon and an idiot are all adjectives that sum this man up. Pakistan cricket doesn’t need him.

Finally, here is a composite test eleven from the 2010.

1. Graeme Smith
2. Virender Sehwag
3. Jonathan Trott
4. Sachin Tendulkar
5. Hashim Amla
6. V.V.S. Laxman
7. M.S. Dhoni
8. Dale Steyn
9. Graeme Swann
10. Zaheer Khan
11. Jimmy Anderson

Thoughts on this and any other highlights or low lights you may have?

Confused Australian’s and Brilliant Razzaq

Two excellent results for both English and general cricketing enthusiasts yesterday. Firstly Sri Lanka disposed of a confused Australia team in a clinical and entirely satisfactory fashion – that is if you aren’t an Aussie yourself – and then Pakistan came back from the dead to beat South Africa in the opening ODI of their series in the UAE.

Firstly the match down under. The opening game of any Summer is always an opportunity to get off on the right foot – to set your stall out for the long days of cricket ahead. Judging by yesterdays game the stall Australia set out was a confused and generally not very well stocked affair – an added bonus for an Englishman coming as it does with an Ashes series looming. Of course it would be wrong to read too much into this game, it was only a 20/20 after all, yet there is some evidence of confused thinking in the Australian camp which possibly suggests that they are not exactly where they want to be.

Before we follow this line of thought any further let us just give due credit to the Sri Lankans who performed clinically and on occasions brilliantly in this, the sole 20/20. Fernando and Malinga were excellent with their changes of pace and general accuracy; Randiv, the off spinner, showed that there might be life after Murali and the fielding was good throughout. The sole blemish being perhaps that they failed to take advantage of any run out opportunities by hitting the stumps directly. As you would expect Dilshan and Sangakarra then ensured there would be no risk of an Aussie comeback.

And so back to the Australians and their strange decisions. By far the most peculiar of these was Clarke’s choice to push himself up the order to open the batting. 20/20 cricket is really a very simple thing. During the first 6 overs you want openers who can clear the infield and take advantage of the fielding restrictions, then you need batsman to follow who can continue this good work but who are perhaps adept at hitting gaps and ensuring that the scoreboard keeps moving (but importantly who can still hit boundaries if the second power play is called) and then the blasters at the end. Clarke does not fulfill any of these roles and should immediately be dropped from the 20/20 side giving Cameron White the reigns. In 50 over cricket there is still room for the batsman who can score 80 from 100 balls or so which makes him a valuable player in that format yet not in this shortened version of the game.

This confused thinking is encouraging from an English point of view as it shows a lack of clarity in the selectors minds. In the past with an all conquering side and numerous excellent replacements ready to be picked at any time being an Australian selector was easy. Now with the lesser talents on show and numerous who are good but not obviously better than anyone else, it is a difficult job suddenly and one that, in this particular case certainly, they are getting wrong. Other indications are the decisions to stick with players like Hussey and North when in our opinion it is clear that there are other options out there.

With the Ashes coming up we can only applaud this state of affairs, hoping that it continues at least to the end of the Summer…. It was also encouraging to see that Australia have picked their own version of Tim Bresnan – too late of course to get him in to the test side, but Hastings appears to be almost a carbon copy. Ineffective but hard working bowling and bits and pieces with the bat.

In the other game, Pakistan, or more accurately Abdul Razzaq, pulled off one of the most thrilling wins we have ever seen. Pakistan are a much beleaguered cricketing nation at the moment and from a neutrals perspective it was good to see them win. With the bowling attack they possess there is no reason why they should not be dining regularly at the top table – sadly however the batting regularly lets them down.

Abdul Razzaq yesterday rescued them from yet another collapse scoring a sensational 109* from 72 balls. Why the South Africans kept bowling it in his areas (i.e. full and straight) we don’t know but either way it was amazing stuff. We have rarely, if ever, seen a batsman turning down singles with a run rate needed of over two a ball and only a dozen deliveries remaining – yet it happened yesterday and was a testament to Razzaq’s ability to hit boundaries when needed.

Breathtaking, brilliant, unexpected and above all much needed for a Pakistan team who have ensured that this series is now alive. On a day in which Mohamed Amir and Salman Butt’s appeals were rejected, it was a something positive that should give much needed encouragement to the rest of the team.

Crickets Championship Future

At last and entirely unexpectedly (at least for the average punter who is not party to the inner whirring of world cricket) the ICC has jumped into action with regard to their plans for the game of cricket over the coming years. Whilst it has not been rubber stamped yet and so could still be potentially hijacked by one of the major powers; the plan appears to be a shake up of the game by implicating various international leagues and championships.

Over the past decade there has been much talk about the decline of this form or that form of cricket, the need to regulate that or this national board etc and simply the problems created by the sheer amount of cricket that is played today. The ICC’s plans are clearly supposed to address some of these issues and for that we find ourselves in the unusual position of applauding them. Whether they succeed or not is another matter – let us look at the recomendations:

• A test league and play off system over 4 years. This one we agree with. When the world was a bigger place and it was rare or impossible to watch cricket on TV, the visit of any touring side was anticipated and appreciated all the more. Tours were longer, series had more importance both as a player and as a spectator as who knew when they might tour again – in short an international series was an event. With the advent of almost constant international cricket and TV coverage from all over the world available seemingly on demand; cricket as a whole has suffered – most of all, of course, test cricket. In short a series on its own is not enough for many people unless you are a cricket traditionalist and so by giving test cricket a wider context it should in theory create more interest. Other plus points include the fact that sides like New Zealand and Bangladesh who, not being the largest draw cards for the paying public, fail to get so many test matches arranged and so will benefit from a guaranteed number of series per year. Equally with all countries having to play a certain number of tests in this time it should cut down on the number of pointless and boring one day series arranged.

  There are potential issues – for example; will the four year competition length mean that things will carry on much as they are now – interest only peaking if you’re side happens to be in the top four and make the play offs? With the final play off games being one off test matches is that a true reflection on a sides ability as the weather etc could be make a huge difference?

  On the whole however this move is a positive one and we look forward to seeing how it pans out.

• A ODI League over 3 years. Again there is nothing wrong with this proposal on the face of things although there are no further details at this stage with regards to how exactly it would work. For example what would happen if India and Sri Lanka arranged yet another series between them (as they are wont to do) despite having already played their deciding matches with regard to the league. We suppose it is up to the boards but in theory there should be less interest in these matches and so hopefully these pointless series could die out.
• A 10 team format for the ODI World Cup. This one we do not agree with. Yes it is true that the last couple of world cups have dragged on to the extent where even the most ardent one day fans were losing interest, and, in theory, by cutting the number of sides this problem would be solved. Yet this would be hard on the associate nations such as Kenya, Holland, Afghanistan and Ireland to name but a few. With no access to first class matches against the top sides (or even A teams of the top sides) the fifty over game is the one aspect of their international lives when they are able to compete against the big boys in a ‘proper’ cricket environment. If the ICC wants to promote the development of cricket and in the long term gain more test playing nations they have to realise that no one will get there having only been exposed to top level 20/20 thrashes.

  This decision also makes a mockery of the performances of Kenya and Ireland in recent world cups – particularly as they have taken a number of memorable scalps in this time. We would rather see the ODI world cup remain as a 16 team format unless the ICC follows up with a credible and imaginative plan for the development of the associate members.

  Finally we presume that the Champions Trophy will be done away with – if not there would be a second ‘ten team’ tournament which would be a world cup in all but name.

• A 16 team 20/20 world cup. No problems here – more exposure for the junior world teams can only help them. See previous point for more…
• The introduction of a 20/20 world rankings table and a league to follow. Hardly a ground breaking initiative on the rankings table and a league seems sensible considering that the other formats of the game will have one. Again potentially if used correctly by the ICC this would be a way of controlling the amount of cricket played.

So there we have it. It is quite possible that using this as a framework the ICC could begin to exert more control over all the individual countries and control the game more effectively whilst dealing with such factors as player burn out etc. What we expect to happen however is that after this is put in place it will simply lead to even further cricket, creating hard choices for the players when inevitably they have to make the choice of playing a test match against Bangladesh or appearing in the IPL for example.

Its a step in the right direction but at this stage no more than that.

One Dayers and the Future of the Game

Crowe’s Comments

There have been some interesting comments coming from Martin Crowe over the past couple of days in the cricket media with regard to the future of test cricket. Crowe has been saying that the world of international cricket should do away with one day international matches and focus its efforts on the preservation of test cricket and the continued propagation of 20/20 cricket. Crowe is a noted innovator and has in the past developed his own variants of the game, his 8 a-side Cricket Max is an example of this, and so perhaps we should not be surprised at anything he says and in actual fact has backing from some fairly unexpected sides. Shane Warne is another who has gone on record saying much the same thing.

This idea raises some interesting questions however and we are not totally sure that we fully support it. Yes the international cricket calendar is over crowded as it stands, yes there is a certain ennui being developed by the repetitive nature of the cricket and yes, even the players seem to agree, frequently complaining of burn out. However to do away with what has traditionally been such a successful variant of the game seems a little extreme.

Couple this with the fact that test cricket is now drawing such pitiful crowds (even recently in the bastions of England and Australia) and, therefore, if the ICC were to rid themselves of the ODI game altogether inevitably revenues would fall.  Factor in that the ICC themselves are such a weak organisation and that even if they tried to enforce something along these lines they would simply be ignored by the respective member countries it is increasingly obvious that Crowes idea would not work.

There are also many other levels at which this is not a practical idea. Currently the only top level exposure for the ICC Affiliate countries like Ireland, Afghanistan and Kenya comes through playing ODI cricket against the full member sides. Remove ODI cricket and suddenly these countries are reduced to developing through the medium of 20/20 cricket and, as we all can appreciate, this would be about as useful a preparation for test cricket as only doing 100 metre sprint training and then running the London Marathon.

We cannot help but feel that if the full member countries and the ICC want to preserve test cricket as the primary game and at the same time maintain an interest in ODI cricket too; they will do much better by simply controlling the amount of meaningless cricket played. Our suggestion would be to limit ODI series to three games only, a similar length 20/20 series – all of which should be played after the test series itself has taken place. Remove such meaningless competitions as the ICC Champions Trophy, endless and frankly dull series between the same countries again and again and suddenly everything will start to feel like an event again. If something matters (and by making these matches more scarce they will inevitably matter more as there is not that feeling of ‘it’s all right lads, there’s another game tomorrow’) then it becomes more interesting to the fans and attendance figures will go up.

We do our best (and usually fail miserably) to avoid clichés and twee statements here at the Compulsive Hooker, yet we are feeling unavoidably drawn into one here (and for that we apologise!). Less is more people – less is more!

*********

The County Game

Interestingly Vikram Solanki, Chairman of the Professional Cricketers Association (PCA) has been saying much the same thing recently. The Friends Provident 2010 20/20 competition has been criticised heavily in many corners over the last couple of months – seemingly never ending (anyone know if it has even finished yet?) and under attended compared to previous years – and even the players are baulking at the demands placed upon them.

Clearly the problems that are present on the international scene are equally as prevalent domestically – all of which leads us to the conclusion that the ECB are just as guilty as any other board around the world – including the BCCI.

Everyone is chasing the short term dollar, rupee or pound whilst not realising or perhaps conveniently forgetting that in the long term they are doing more damage than good to what is the best and most wonderful game in the world.

Akmal’s Brilliance and 20/20 Overkill

The Brilliance of Akmal

If anyone is going to save Pakistani cricket it will be Umar Akmal. Despite looking faintly ridiculous thanks to his liberal application of bright green lip paint (we would call it lipstick but that might offend him!), Akmal is fast proving to be one of the best young batsman in world cricket.

The distinguishing factor of how good a player tends to be is the amount of time he has to play the ball. Akmal, on this basis, looked streets ahead of all the other Pakistani players and demonstrated a range of shots that had the Australian bowlers struggling to contain him. If he can maintain his progress and translate this ability into the test matches it will be a major fillip for the Pakistani team.

In what was a good win in the end for the men in green Mohamed Aamer, Umar Gul and Saeed Ajmal ensured that the Australians were always kept in check. Gul and Aamer are two quality fast bowlers but when you then consider that Aamer is still only just over 18 years old, quite honestly, it is astonishing. Ajmal was famously taken apart by Hussey in the last over of the World 20/20 semi final a couple of months ago and in all likelihood will often go for runs, yet he will always be dangerous too as he proved yesterday. In the tests this Summer we anticipate him to be a major force against both the Australians and the English.

A well done is also deserved for the Edgbaston authorities who ensured a lively atmosphere and excellent crowd proving that Pakistan could do worse than repeat this experiment of playing their home games in England.

**********

20/20 Overkill

In a cricketing world in which having more of everything is deemed to be a good idea and money rules all, it was always likely that there would come a point where there were too many games with not enough significance to hold spectators attentions. This is a favourite theme of ours at the Compulsive Hooker, die hard cricket fans that we may be, and recurs regularly in various forms throughout the worlds cricketing media.

Various players have spoken about it although usually, as soon as the dollar signs are writ large, they quieten and are willing to sell their services. Ricky Ponting, Stuart Broad and one or two others are notable exceptions to this rule. In opposition to the media and these few players, the administrators of the game and certainly the County Clubs, in their quest to ever increase the bottom line, have always ignored the warning signs and ploughed on regardless. When 20/20 cricket came along, it appeared to be the proverbial golden egg laying goose, but now there are signs in England at any rate that this gold has turned to bronze.

The English domestic 20/20 competition this year has been blighted by much lower attendances on average than in previous years. To be sure there has been the occasional game being close to sold out which suggests that given a meaning or significant context the crowds will still come; but seemingly the problem lies in the enormous number of games. In total there are 151 across the entire competition which to us seems ludicrously high. Up until recently there had been talk that a further or 20/20 competition would be formed in some way or another and that the county championship would be shortened to accommodate it. Fortunately now common sense and a proper respect for the real pillars of cricket appear to be emerging with a meeting to be held to discuss the future of the 20/20 game. First class cricket is likely to be left as it is and, if they have any sense, they will reduce the number of matches thereby ensuring a higher attendance for each one.

Crickets Shift In Gears And The Might Of Morgan

There have been times throughout the history of cricket where this wonderful game has metamorphosed into something quite different. Perhaps the first was the introduction of round arm bowling by John Willes in the 1830′s which paved the way for the legalisation of overarm bowling in 1864.

W.G. Grace then initiated a further development to counter the greater bounce that these bowlers were now able to get by becoming the first player to really be comfortable playing off both the front and back foots (before then players had usually played with their weight going in only one direction) and which is safe to say revolutionised the art of batting.

The 1960′s then provided a plethora of changes with amateur cricketers becoming a thing of the past and with the introduction of domestic one day cricket. International one day cricket followed soon after in 1971 and with Kerry Packer’s World Series competition kicking off in 1979 it became recognisable as the game it is today.

The most recent but undoubtedly not the last major development was the introduction of 20/20 cricket in English domestic cricket. Indeed this last initiative could see possibly the biggest changes yet to the very fabric of cricket, threatening as it does the popularity of the longer forms of the game, but certainly on a lower level there have already been marked changes. These were never more apparent than in yesterdays first one day international between England and Australia at the Rose Bowl.

Batting first Australia scored 267-7 in their 50 overs, the only batsman to make a half century being Michael Clarke who scored 87 not out from 97 balls. England then chased this total down with four overs to spare to win by 4 wickets. Eoin Morgan this time doing the damage by scoring a brilliant 103 not out from only 85 balls.

Only 10 years ago 267 would have been considered a good score with the upper reaches of the 200′s being very challenging and the Valhalla of 300 being a comparatively rare occurrence. Indeed of the all time total of 360 three hundred plus innings totals achieved, only 87 occurred prior to the year 2000 and with a measly 12 being prior to 1990. (This is despite the fact that many games used be 60 over matches rather than the current 50 back in the early days of ODI cricket). 267 was never likely to be enough on a flat pitch and Clarke justifiably or not is shouldering most of the blame.

Clarke has come in for a large amount of criticism in the recent past due to his pedestrian performances at the 20/20 world cup, yet, in the longer 50 over games, we were still backing him to come good which in some ways he did. It could be argued that he batted very well, rescuing Australia from he depths of 97-4, yet the lack of acceleration at the end of his innings showcased his shortcomings once more and, as ever in this situation, meant that he left a lot of people unsatisfied. Morgan on the other hand is a very modern cricketer and showed this by playing what was probably the perfect innings.  In many ways it started similarly to Clarke’s, building slowly with Luke Wright from a similar score, always comfortable in the knowledge that he has in his armory and ability to score at 10 an over if needed.

This article is nothing new or revolutionary and this topic has been covered on many occasions before, but it simply struck us more forcefully than it ever has before whilst watching last nights match. 5000 one day international runs, a strike rate of 77 and an average of 42 but somehow, suddenly, he’s not good enough. Clarke is of course a brilliant player in the longer forms of the game and a major talent. With that in mind we suspect that he will be able to alter his game and adapt to the demands of modern limited overs cricket but right now, if we were the Australian management, we would rather the big hitting Cameron White was batting at 4.

**************

Mighty Morgan

Morgan’s innings yesterday is undoubtedly his finest yet in a one day shirt for England. With his previous hundred coming against Bangladesh it is a fine achievement to score one against the might of Australia. Admittedly it was a rather callow attack featuring a 19 year old on debut but this should not take too much away from him.

There was a moment when England slipped to 97-4 with Luke Wright and Morgan newly at the crease where we felt the old England nerves creeping in. One or two more wickets and we felt it was game over and with Wright having not achieved a great deal in an England shirt we were backing Australia for the win. We had of course not taken Eoin Morgan into account though and he typified this new look England team. Never panicking and always thinking, it was an exceptional innings, and made us feel guilty for ever doubting England.

Cricket’s American Dream

New Zealand played Sri Lanka last night in the first of two 20/20 internationals in Lauderhill. If you are a person of a cricketing background you would be forgiven for asking  something along the lines of, “Where is that in New Zealand?” No doubt making the assumption that, being a game between two senior test playing nations, it was being played at some far flung Kiwi ground.

The more astute (or indeed simply perhaps anyone who has been to Florida) would by now have realised that it is in the good old US of A. Last nights match was the first of a two game series and was the first ever senior international contest played on US soil. Whilst in many ways the Compulsive Hooker is as big an exponent of developing the game worldwide, we fear what might happen to the game if the Americans were to get hold of it. In this nightmare (for a cricketing purist) scenario we can envisage several things that might change:

• 20/20 cricket would likely still be too long for the American attention span, leading to four 5 over innings per side.
• Fielders wearing a baseball style catching glove.
• Probably even more advertising than the IPL.
• Substitutions of players being allowed.
• The death of the all rounder as players specialise even more. The same set of batsman would ‘hit’ in each innings.
• The amount of straightening at the elbow a bowler is permitted being raised from 15 degrees to 30, effectively legalising throwing….
• Etc.
• Etc.

Joking aside, the ICC would never permit most of these to happen; yet the American’s have a history of ignoring world governing bodies and setting up their own variants of international games. Four quarters in a football match (sorry, soccer match) anyone?

Above all though we simply do not see Americans taking to the sport. Any game played there will likely garner a small crowd due to the huge diversity of different nationalities resident there; some of which should, by statistical chance come from a cricket loving country. However, to really take off, the game must tap into the properly ‘American’ demographic and with baseball being so popular we are far from alone in thinking these current efforts will end in defeat for the ICC and USA Cricket.

For more on this read Jenni Rutherfords excellent article on Cricinfo here. For an American take on the game, here are two articles (here and here) from this weekend’s Miami Herald which provide a small bit of amusement. Not least for differences in our mutual language – apparently ‘shag’ has a different meaning over there – and inevitable misuse of cricketing terms.

*********

Incidentally New Zealand won convincingly with Sri Lanka folding to 92 all out in pursuit of 121 to win in what was clearly a game which neither side particularly cared about. Dan Vettori went as far as to say, “We have to treat this with respect. This is an international game” which to us suggests that if he had to remind himself and his team of this salient point, it clearly didn’t mean anything at all.

This raises a much larger issue which we will only touch on in this article as it really deserves a much closer look. Essentially cricket is already suffering from a surfeit of matches worldwide with meaningless one day tournaments two a penny. If America as a cricketing market was to take off this would only increase, which in turn would put major pressure on the existing senior cricketing nations to play regular matches there. Presumably this would also mean limited overs cricket (unless the Americans showed unexpectedly long attention spans) which in turn would negatively impact on test cricket’s status worldwide.

A Newfound Love of 20/20

Its official. The Compulsive Hooker has been converted to 20/20 cricket. We still retain our cricketing purists natural bent towards test cricket, but right from the start this tournament has been captivating and most importantly a genuine contest.

With the Super 8′s stage well under way, there are, by our reckoning, 7 teams still in with a chance of reaching the knock-out stage, current world champions Pakistan being the only ones likely to be going home. Yet even their fate is not completely decided as if they win their last game well and England beat the Kiwis there is still an outside chance. Extraordinarily England are currently the only team looking certain to qualify for the semi’s, which considering their travails in the group stage is unlikely.

Of the others Australia, typically, have looked an awesome unit. Their fielding has been better than any other teams, with their catching in particular superb. In this shortened form of the game, fielding takes on an added significance. A half chance taken, or direct hit to effect a run out can be crucial in stopping a batting sides momentum and it is interesting that the one side looking likely to go home, Pakistan, have dropped a large number of chances.

The Aussie game plan, like the South African one, revolves mainly around pace bowling. In Nannes, Tait and Johnson they have genuinely fast and intimidating bowlers, which so far in this tournament is paying dividends. This is then backed up by a level of hitting ability which is unusual in 20/20 cricket, Warner, Watson, the two Husseys and Cameron White all having their moments. Warner in particular, much as we don’t like the idea of a cricketer focused on 20/20 cricket, does seem to have been fashioned particularly for the shortest form of the game. His ability to hit more or less any type of ball for six is extraordinary. The Aussies have a genuine chance to win the tournament, although of course being English fans we will be hoping they come unstuck somewhere along the line!

South Africa, similarly to the Aussies have been relying on the pace of Morne Morkel and the, until last night, devastating Dale Steyn. To watch these two reduce Afghanistan to 32-8 was as awesome as it was sad for the Afghani’s. The fairy tale came to an abrupt end under the pace, bounce and swing of these two brilliant bowlers. Yet, as David Lloyd pointed out on the commentary during last nights England vs South Africa game, the Proteas are like a school yard bully. Tough and domineering until you take the fight to them and stick it up their noses instead, at which point they are wont to fold. Last night Kevin Pietersen, Craig Kieswetter and briefly Paul Collingwood and Eoin Morgan demonstrated exactly how to play a South African team.

England, using a more balanced method of attack having brought in Yardy who bowled his left arm tweakers very effectively, look like (and it worries us to write it in case we jinx them) the real deal. For the first time in our cricketing memory an England limited overs team looks like a genuine contender for the title. Michael Lumb and Craig Kieswetter must be praised for their positivity at the top of the order, as despite neither having made a major contribution, the fast scoring starts have been crucial, allowing England’s high class middle order of KP, Collingwood and Morgan to come in and dictate terms.

Of the others, India cannot be written off although their bowling looks a little lightweight. India have also never been the best fielding side in the world and this was illustrated against the Australians in the Super 8 stage perfectly. The number of times Australian batsman sneaked two runs to an Indian boundary fielder was astonishing.

Sri Lanka, touted as the potential winners by the Compulsive Hooker prior to the tournament, have had an up and down couple of weeks. The one constant though has been Jayawardene whose peerless batting has made him the leading run scorer in the tournament. As long as he keeps firing there is no reason they shouldn’t progress to the semi finals as they have the requisite quality in all disciplines. Similarly to Sri Lanka, New Zealand have also had a mixed bag of results and probably need to beat England on Tuesday to qualify. Difficult to write off in any situation, we do feel however that the Super 8′s will be as far as it goes for this gutsy team.

West Indies, the host nation, are struggling and to our eyes look to mercurial to really threaten the more clinical teams at the tournament. Their batting hasn’t really fired and their bowling, like India’s does not look particularly threatening. All is not lost although they will have to win their next two games to have a chance. As they have tournament heavy weights Australia and India to come, we feel it unlikely that they will progress.

The most captivating thing of all, though, is that this tournament has shown that if you have good bowling attacks, 20/20 cricket can be a genuine battle between ball and bat. Watching Pietersen’s battles with Dale Steyn last night was brilliantly exciting. Some balls beating the bat, others travelling great distances and crucially one not dominating the other. Whilst there have still been a high number of sixes hit (particularly by Warner and Watson), unlike the extended slog fest of the IPL, they have been interspersed by periods where the ball has been difficult to get away and this factor alone has meant that the tournament as a whole has kept our interest.