One Day Ennui

At the beginning of this ODI series it was considered in most quarters that an England win would be a mere formality yet, with their third consecutive win under their belt, Australia have bounced back. This underlines the point that they are not as poor a team as some would suggest and that, certainly as far as ODI cricket goes, England are not yet the consistent outfit they are in test matches.

We wrote last week about Prior’s inclusion over Davies and, despite a couple of ducks so far, it is still too early to really criticise that decision at this stage. What will be worrying Andy Flower though is the lack of runs emanating from the middle order; Morgan, Collingwood, Yardy, Wright and Bell have all yet to fire with the bat which inevitably puts the bowlers under huge amounts of pressure. If England are going to challenge for the World Cup title this dearth of runs will have to be addressed.

The Ashes was characterised by an England side being extraordinarily well organised and playing extremely good cricket. So far this series has been a virtual reversal of that with the two run outs that top and tailed the innings being symptomatic of a team in poor form.

It is, however, far from a disaster and England will know that they are missing several key members and that at full strength they are probably the better side. This ODI series, with the World Cup around the corner, feels a little unnecessary  and we would not be surprised if the England players, if they were being totally honest, aren’t particularly interested in playing. This might seem unprofessional of them as well as possibly sound as if we are trying to find excuses in a classically English way, yet they remain only human and have been away from home along time with the promise of much more to come.

Regular readers will know of our traditionalist leanings, favouring test cricket strongly over all other forms, yet even the most ardent limited overs fan would probably agree with us when we say seven ODI’s is too much for a one series. With the world cup coming up (on a totally different surface which scuppers the argument that it is effective preparation) and, bearing in mind it is in a format which means the whole tournament will feel like it has gone on for about three years by the time if finishes, a rest would have served England better.

Australia, it is true, have reaped some benefits from their recent wins with Shane Watson and Brett Lee in particular finding some form and confidence although, even they, are surely wishing it was over now.

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

Ashes Review: Australia (Player by Player)

Simon Katich (97 runs @ 24.25)

Unfortunately for Australia, Katich’s injury robbed them of perhaps their most consistent player over the past 18 months and some much needed solidity at the top of the order. Got starts in both games before being found out by a combination of Shane Watson’s running and the moving ball. Doubtful perhaps whether he will ever play again although Phil Hughes travails at the top of the order had most Australian’s wishing Katich was still there.

Rating: 5.5/10

Shane Watson (435 runs @48.33, 3 wickets @ 74.33)

Watson must be a frustrating character to have in the team you support. Obviously hugely talented, a fine stroke player and someone who rarely fails. Unfortunately Watson inhabits that middle ground though of not failing but never quite succeeding which, if Australia are honest, is one of the major reasons why their batting never quite fired. Openers are there to score hundreds and on this basis, despite Watson being Australia’s second most successful batsman, he shouldn’t be at the top of the order.

Surprisingly underused as a bowling option although this was as much to do this Australia’s strange selection policies rather than his skippers apathy towards his bowling. Watson is a very decent fourth seamer so why play four front line fast bowlers?!

Rating: 6.5/10

Phil Hughes (97 runs @ 16.16)

Hughes is not currently a test match opener. Against attacks who don’t swing the ball perhaps he might succeed, but any bowler who moves it off the straight will always find him out. Clearly talented and possesses a reasonable temperament so the rudimentary elements are there and it is paramount that Australia work with him. Struggled against Tremlett in particular and is surely going to be returned to state cricket for the foreseeable future.

Rating: 3/10

Ricky Ponting (113 runs @16.14)

We never thought we would see Ricky Ponting struggle against England as much as he did in this series. The pressure, his middling form and perhaps his age all contributed to a series performance which has perhaps meant the end of his career. Possible that lack of other options will continue to ensure he is picked but unlike the other modern great, Sachin Tendulkar, his time appears to be up.

Didn’t look in bad touch entirely as a number of rasping pull shots indicated and he habitually got to 10 or 12 before nicking Anderson or one of the other England bowlers to slip. The catch by Collingwood to dismiss him at Perth will live long in the memory.

Captaincy is always difficult when you’re under the cosh and this was no exception. Often appeared to run out of ideas and could perhaps have stood up for a better balanced side the MCG.

Rating: 3/10

Usman Khawaja (58 runs @ 29.00)

To hear the Australian press you would think a modern Don Bradman had been discovered. Whilst this is clearly over the top and a testimony to the paucity of good news for any Aussie supporter, he did look the part and should be around for some time. Confident, composed and with a lovely pull shot was one bright spot in the Sydney thumping.

Rating: 5/10

Michael Clarke (193 runs @ 21.44)

When your captain and vice-captain average 16 and 21 you know you’re in for a tough series. A shadow of the player he has been in the past and it looks like the scorn the Aussie media and fans alike show for him is finally getting to him. His one major innings came in a losing cause at Adelaide although it tells you all you need to know about his series when you consider a part timer, Pietersen, dismissed him off practically the last ball of the day to set up and England win the following morning.

Showed some good signs captaining initially with some interesting field placings and willingness to do things his own way but was eventually simply overwhelmed by the English juggernaut.

Rating: 3/10

Michael Hussey (570 runs @ 63.33)

Brilliant for the first three tests, it was astonishing to think that Hussey was on the verge of being dropped at the beginning of the series. Almost singlehandedly kept Australia in it in the early stages of the Ashes and his partnership with Haddin at the Gabba was a once in a career performance whilst his hundred at Perth set up the win for the Aussies. The problem is that no one else supported him.

Rating: 8/10

Marcus North (49 runs @ 16.33)

Finally dropped despite scoring very few runs for some time. Probably not a test player on balance as despite his hundreds he scores too many innings below 10. Useful bowling and on that basis alone could have probably played instead of Xavier Doherty.

Rating: 2/10

Steven Smith (159 runs @ 51.80, 0 wickets)

Australia used to laugh at the English when they selected a bit part player but now the boot is on the other foot. Clearly not a number six player due to a technique with more holes in than your average sieve, he looked more comfortable when at seven. The fact that he then was hardly bowled suggest that Australia would have probably been better off without him in the team. Selecting a specialist batsmen at number 7 is something that not many sides do after all…

Rating: 2/10

Brad Haddin

The one player that would possibly get into England’s side on a form basis although even his contributions tailed off by the middle of the series. An excellent hundred at the Gabba and some uncomplicated wicket keeping mean that he, like Hussey, was one of the few who could put their hand up and say they contributed. Latterly, Australia’s vice captain as well.

Rating: 7/10

Mitchell Johnson (122 runs @ 17.42, 15 wickets @ 36.93)

If Johnson could reverse the averages achieved for batting and bowling he would be a devastating all rounder indeed. Chronically inconsistent he is undoubtedly the Australian version of Steve Harmison – someone who when on song is an incredibly dangerous player but, sadly, is rarely on song. His spell in Perth won the match and was reminiscent of Wasim Akram at his best and, even when bowling poorly, still has the habit of picking up the odd wicket here or there. Unfortunately this is negated by the fact he is going for over four an over.

Rating: 5.5/10

Peter Siddle (14 wickets @ 34.57)

Workmanlike, ever willing but only occasionally dangerous, Siddle was nevertheless probably Australia’s best bowler. A memorable hat trick at the Gabba followed by six wickets at the MCG, he only took two other wickets outside of these two venues. Solid lower order batting of the best annoying tail end variety his efforts were ultimately not nearly enough.

Rating: 6.5/10

Ryan Harris (11 wickets @ 25.54)

Harris is a bowler who appears to be without much about him yet was in his three games prior to injury, was undoubtedly Australia’s best and most consistent bowler. Hurried England’s batsman and moved it enough to be a threat. Will want to forget his King Pair in Adelaide though.

Rating: 7.5/10

Ben Hilfenhaus (7 wickets @ 59.28)

Despite taking a wicket with the third ball of the series, Hilfenhaus consistently struggled. Little swing and not a great deal of pace meant that in spite of his consistency (his economy rate was 2.62 in four games) he was ineffective all series long.

Rating: 2/10

Doug Bollinger (1 wicket @ 130.00)

Someone we feel who was a victim of the selectors ridiculous whims and was clearly unfit at Adelaide. When totally match fit someone we feel who is still amongst the best four bowlers Australia have.

Rating: 1/10

Xavier Doherty (3 wickets @ 102)

Remember him? It seems an age ago now, but Doherty was flawed pick right from the start. An appalling first class record was not belied by his performances and his time is unlikely to come again. Did get KP out – on 227.

Rating: 2/10

Michael Beer (1 wicket @ 112)

The man whose name inspired a thousand awful puns and was another ridiculous pick by the selectors. With only five first class games under his belt he did at least look better than Doherty, yet may quickly find himself on the scrap heap anyway. Still someone who is not going to run through a side.

Rating: 2/10

Extraordinary England and Australiadesh…

An England Wishlist

At the start of this test match, in discussions with some fellow armchair experts, we suggested that we needed only a few more things to happen and we would be more completely satisfied at the end of an England test series than we have ever been before. These were, in no particular order:

• Ian Bell to score a hundred.
• Matt Prior to score some runs.
• Swann to take a few wickets.
• The match to finish with a win for England.

With the first two of these objectives able to be ticked off and the fourth looking imminent in the morning (possibly at the hands of Swann thereby completing the third item on our wish list) we are already approaching this aforesaid state of nirvana. Whilst technically we are jumping the gun by celebrating the series win today, it is of course more or less a given with Australia yet again trying to ensure it is not an innings defeat – although with the deficit still lying at 151 runs that too will prove to be futile. This England team are fast becoming a side who can be relied upon to deliver and, unlike in 2005, are promising to simply get better and better.

We said at the start of the series that the key to winning the series would be in the batting and particularly their opening partnerships. In short, with a perceived similarity in quality of their bowling attacks, the side who scored more runs would win. England won this particular battle and won it convincingly, however, this alone would not have resulted in such thumping margins of victory. What has turned these prophesied close victories into absolute thrashings has been the enduring and consistent quality of England’s bowling, something that was in evidence again today. On a flat pitch with plenty of opportunity for the batsman who is willing to graft, England again ran through the Australian batting to set up what will surely be a 100 run innings victory. All the bowlers were exceptional with even the wicket less Swann containing the batsman and ensuring that the pressure was maintained.

Lessons From Bangladesh

Earlier this year England completed two clean sweeps against Bangladesh. In almost all these games Bangladesh found themselves in a position where if they could bat well and crucially bat time, they would have drawn the game. Every time, without fail, Bangladesh appeared to decide that this wasn’t an option and came out all guns blazing – inevitably going down in a plethora of stroke play by large margins. It has been interesting to see that Australia appear to have been taking lessons from the Bangladeshi’s in this department over the last year.

Shane Watson in particular looked like he was attempting to set a target for England to chase by lunch on the fifth day and several of the others got out chasing balls that, bearing in mind they were batting for the draw, they would have been better leaving alone. We firmly believe one of the things has had led to England being the very good side that they are now is that, quite simply, they are extremely difficult to beat. Over the past two years, on several occasions, England have batted five sessions or more to draw the game. The Aussies, here as in Adelaide, appear not to have a clue how to go about this; so much so that one wonders if they might approach Paul Collingwood about the possibility of becoming their batting coach now he has retired – expert as he is in these situations.

Commentators Curse

One final thought for today on commentators of this wonderful game. As in the journalistic world the notion that ex players make the best commentators is clearly rubbish. Some are excellent it is true, Mike Atherton take a bow on both the writing and TV fronts, yet most are either average or so jingoistic that the notion of impartial coverage has clearly never occurred to them.

One commentator (we think Ian Healey), clearly in the midst of a pleasant dream in which Australia are twice the side they are now, said that ‘neither side have dominated the other in this series’ and then (definitely) Healey said Johnson was one of the best fast bowlers in the world. Both statements clearly severe cases of self delusion.

Warne too has gone from a man widely credited with an excellent cricketing brain to someone, whilst not in the Ian Botham camp of ridiculous inane comments, has also lost some credibility by his apparent belief that success is an Australian birthright. Whilst it has been mildly irritating having to listen to some of these ex players, it has been worth it for the amazing back tracking that they have been forced into – worth the Sky subscription alone!

The Ashes Are On But It’s Not All Bad For England

So much for almost having their fingers on the urn then!

England were outplayed in every department of this game, yet again finding the pacier, bouncier pitch of Perth not much to their liking. It is our considered opinion though that there is no reason to panic and that England remain, on balance, the finer of the two sides.

Before this test series started the general consensus was that it would be a close affair fought tooth and nail to the end. After the Adelaide induced hubris of the fans and pundits, if not the team themselves perhaps, and considering England’s track record of winning well only to follow up with a serious low soon afterwards, this result shouldn’t have been entirely unexpected.

The positive view point from England’s perspective is that it was a sharp, bitter taste of reality and a reminder that there is still much work to be done in this series. For Australia of course there were plenty of good things to take from this test. The astonishing return to form of Mitchell Johnson; the batting of Watson (not that he has ever failed exactly – just this time he scored more than his usual 50 odd) and of course the once again peerless batting of Michael Hussey. If Ricky Ponting is indeed out, there is no question as to who should replace him in the number three slot (and probably as captain) leaving a probable debutant at 5. Ryan Harris, too, bowled well in the second innings although scoreboard pressure and silly shots had ensured the fight had long gone out of England by the time he mopped up the tail.

The fact remains though that without Hussey and Johnson playing so extraordinarily well England would have likely been in this game still. The key for the rest of the series in Australia’s case is whether Johnson can maintain his form – something that his previous track record suggests might be tricky.

Hussey on the other hand appears to go on and on and at this rate will be in serious danger of breaking some longstanding records. England need a plan to him immediately and preferably one that doesn’t involve bowling a succession of short balls to feed his pull shot. They’ve proved he can pull like the best of them and, as England fans, we desperately don’t want to see anymore… In fact it’s a bit like Doherty’s dismissal of Pietersen in the Adelaide test – Hussey did get out to the short ball so, if it was a plan, it worked eventually – the problem was he had over a hundred by then.

Tremlett deserves praise albeit he was one of the main contributors to the short ball mania in the second innings and perhaps struggled a little at the left handers in the Australian side. Nevertheless it was still a hugely impressive comeback and one that is likely to have secured his place in the team for a while – potentially at the expense of Steve Finn.

Whilst he was inconsistent and expensive, Finn does have an uncanny knack for picking up wickets which is useful in any bowler. We would hesitate to drop him for Boxing Day at the MCG as some have suggested – he is after all the leading wicket taker on either side.

Looking ahead, there have been some calls by ex-players, Flintoff and Jonathan Agnew amongst them, to play five bowlers at the MCG as it is likely to be another bouncy result wicket. Considering the batting woes in this test we would hesitate to play a side along these lines as we think it could weaken what was already a major problem for England in this match. Despite the inconsistent performance of the bowlers in this test England still managed to take 20 wickets so we would suggest this isn’t really why England lost.

The possible swap, Bresnan for Collingwood is a non starter in our eyes. It is true that Collingwood contributed little with the bat, but I’m not sure who else would have taken that catch at slip off Ponting on the first day for one. As we saw someone describe him on Twitter, he is a cockroach of a cricketer and will surely score some runs at the MCG now that, once more, his place is under threat.

All things considered there is no need to panic, or indeed conversely get carried away on the Australian side. From England’s point of view the plan should be simple: Namely, get Hussey out early and bat better. If they can do this there is no reason why they shouldn’t wrap things up in Melbourne.

Aussie Squad For 1st Ashes Test: A Confused Selection?

As promised, the Australian squad for the first Ashes test was announced this morning. Bizarrely however, rather than the usual 12 or possibly 13 a board would normally name for a home test, a bloated squad of 17 players has been announced. We, the fans, already knew that there was a degree of confusion as to the Australian selector’s views on the best eleven – yet we didn’t quite expect this.

In the squad there are:

• 7 batsmen (Katich, Ponting, Clarke, Hussey, North, Khawaja, Ferguson)
• 2 all rounders (Smith and Watson)
• 1 keeper (Haddin)
• 2 spinners (Doherty and Hauritz)
• 5 seamers (Johnson, Bollinger, Harris, Siddle and Hilfenhaus)

This is a tour squad for a 5 test series – not one for a single test!

What we suspect is going to happen is that after much praising of the youngsters and talking about their various ‘big futures’ the eleven will line up as follows:

1. Watson
2. Katich
3. Ponting
4. Clarke
5. Hussey
6. North
7. Haddin
8. Johnson
9. Hauritz
10. Siddle
11. Bollinger

Essentially more or less exactly the same as the side that just lost to India 2-0 and, from an English point of view, exactly the one we would want to face. The only confusion here would be who to play out of the seamers as one of Hilfenhaus, Siddle and Bollinger would have to bow out.

An alternative side (and one which we would feel more nervous playing against) would see Smith come in for Hauritz, and Khawaja and Ferguson in for Hussey and North. Mind you if the Compulsive Hooker had been asked our opinion by the ACB we might have recommended the two Phils, Jacques and Hughes, as well. After all there is not much difference between 17 and 19 is there?

If the Aussies do name the 12 as above (with possible variations on the seamers) quite frankly it all seems a ridiculous exercise and one that can’t help but give the English a little more confidence. This Ashes is being competed by two ‘mid table’ sides and, without either side having the true stand out players of the early part of the decade,  confidence and a settled side may well end up being the deciding factor.

If we were Australian we’d be worried that all Andrew Hilditch and company are doing is undermining this!

ICC Awards 2010: Swann Loses Out To Sachin

Sachin Triumphs

The winners of the ICC awards were announced last night and whilst they were on the whole more or less as expected, we did feel that Graeme Swann was pretty hard done by not to pick up a single gong. Cricket is, as ever, a batsman’s game – something that hasn’t changed since the early days of cricket 200 years ago when the batsmans totals were counted whilst ignoring the bowling figures – and this was represented in last nights awards ceremony yet again.

Tendulkar won the ICC Cricketer of the Year award for the first time in his illustrious career and arguably deservedly so. Scoring over 1000 runs with six centuries in only ten test matches he has had as good a year as he has had before – combine this with the first double century in a one day international and you have a potent mix. Equally, Sehwag, scorer of over 1200 runs at an average of 85 with his own collection of six tons is also arguably a deserved winner of the test player of the year award.

Sadly for Graeme Swann this left him without a category in which he could could triumph. Originally left out of the shortlist for the Cricketer of the Year award by the ICC’s selection panel, he was only added later when the ECB rightly created a furore and demanded his inclusion. That he couldn’t even make this original sixteen was a mistake so elementary and so entirely characteristic of the ICC that you really worry for the future of the game in their hands. Once on the list he rightly made it to the final four although we always felt that this was as far as he would go – had he been selected for the prize it would have highlighted the original failure to include him – quite apart from the other players own merits.

The second selection mistake – although one not acknowledged – was his lack of inclusion in Sehwag’s category of Test Player of the Year. Comfortably the worlds leading wicket taker in this time with an astonishing seven five wicket hauls and one ‘ten for’ (list here), Swann also managed almost 500 runs and three fifties. A brilliant all round record and one that in our opinion could and perhaps should have knocked Sehwag off the top of the list – to not even get a nomination is appalling quite frankly. Factor in his performances in ODI and 20/20 cricket and you have a mix that could have easily been justified in winning the top award.

Possibly in the end the quality of the opposition Swann faced in this period (i.e. 4 tests each against Bangladesh and Pakistan and only 6 against top ranked sides – Australia and South Africa) told in the final decision going against him. Summing up therefore – whilst it is difficult to have any real issues with the two players selected – Swann has arguably been hard done by throughout process as a whole and will have to be content with the knowledge that most sober judges reckon him to be the best spinner in the world right now. As fervent England fans we would like to thank the great man for a sterling years work and say please keep this vein of form up long enough for the Ashes to stay firmly in England’s grasp – you’re going to be key Swanny!

For the record – here are his figures over the year:

Other Awards:

ODI Player of the Year: Shane Watson can feel justifiably gutted not to have won this award – more wickets than anyone else and the second highest run scorer over the same period – not even AB De Villiers, the eventual winner, with his 855 runs in 16 games could quibble too much with this. An exceptional year for both players but Watson should have sneaked it with his all round performance.

20/20 Performance of the Year: A strange category this knowing that there is no test or ODI equivalent – added to the fact that realistically it is something that only a batsman could win – was won by Brendon McCullum for his 116 not out against the Aussies. Fine innings though it is, cricket is all about context and therefore in our humble opinion it would be very difficult to argue against Hussey’s 70 odd against Pakistan in the World Cup semi final at St.Lucia. Under immense pressure and with near impossible odds Hussey took Australia through to the final which given the World Cup situation should have been more than enough to win the award.

Other than that it was all pretty straight forward. What are your thoughts – do you agree?

Watson and Afridi: Studies in Irritation

Another great day of test cricket yesterday at Lords, albeit one in which the Australians assumed the ascendancy rather than our preferred choice, Pakistan. It was a day which threw up some exciting moments interspersed with some really quite extraordinary ones. Let us now go through the main contributions:

Shane Watson

A friend of the Compulsive Hooker, occasional contributor Dingo, has long been saying that Watson is a better all rounder than Flintoff and, appallingly, he now has further evidence to use in this argument after one of the most extraordinary bowling displays at Lords ever witnessed. Extraordinary because it must be rare that such an innocuous and friendly bowling display takes five wickets and appalling because it is Shane Watson that has achieved this… Watson is a man of many obvious qualities; a good batsman with a tendency to get out when set, a purveyor of medium pace trundlers, immaculately coiffured hair, an impressive ability to show show his feminine side and a world class pout – yet despite this he is almost universally disliked by fans in all countries…

We dislike him mostly due to his sulky demeanor as few players look closer to breaking down and crying when something goes wrong as Watson does. Yet we have now discovered a worse side to him, one that makes us cringe even more, and that is when things are going unbelievably right for him that he ends up being the first on the new Neutral Honours Board at Lords.

His figures of 7.5 overs, 5 wickets for 40 runs make for all the more interesting reading when you realise that approximately 28 of these runs came off him in the space of about 12 balls during Shahid Afridi’s whirlwind innings. Four of his wickets were proper batsman, all of whom were dismissed LBW, bowled or in Afridi’s case tricking him with a slower ball, leading us to assume that some strange mystical powers were at work on Watson’s behalf. Quite honestly there can be no other explanation.

And no Dingo – this does not make him better than Flintoff – it simply means that the Pakistani batsman are hopeless.

Shahid Afridi

Afridi has tricked us. As we posited here, we had discussed the possibility that perhaps the captaincy had given him an air of responsibility and he would be a revelation in this test series. Sadly for Pakistan, this particular leopard has failed to change his spots and played an innings of breathtaking irresponsibility yesterday. Walking in five wickets down, with a deficit of around 150 runs, a calm head was needed. Instead what he brought to the part was a village green attitude of ‘if I can reach it – its going’! We can understand what he may have been trying to do in that there have been some great counter attacking innings played from similar situations, yet there is a difference between counter attacking and choosing the balls you are going to try and go after rather than simply swinging from the start.

Pakistan’s side is a very inexperienced one with debutants at numbers 3 and 4. They need guidance and an example set by their captain – not what appears to be an exercise in self destruction. Some people may argue that this is the way that Afridi bats and therefore we can’t be too critical. However this is absolute rubbish and we hope that Waqar Younis, Pakistan’s team coach, pulls him up in private.

Match Situation

Australia comfortably on top although there still appears to be some movement for the bowlers. If Asif and co can knock over the rest of the Australians quickly, the Pakistani first innings collapse not withstanding, they may be in with a slight chance. It is Australia’s game to lose though – no doubt about it.

England vs Australia Series Wrap

Australia, having found their usual one day form over the last two one dayers, ensured yesterday that neither side will go into the Ashes in November with any bragging rights at all. This was always likely to be a series of little relevance and so it has proved. Interesting entertainment, enjoyable cricket and has allowed one or two to state their cases once more, but other than that not much meaning.

The point has been raised that by having a series like this it devalues the meaning of a genuine Ashes contest, but in our opinion, this is not the case. It has served as a tasty hors d’oeuvres and in that sense is welcome – Ashes cricket after all is about test cricket, no other form, and therefore the Compulsive Hooker has little problem with our appetites being whetted. Coming as it did after some long months of pretty uninteresting cricket against Bangladesh it was a welcome relief to be honest! (But never fear – fans of uninspiring cricket have more to come with a further three one day games against Bangladesh this month!)

If the result has little relevance; what did we learn?

What we have learnt is that looking at the averages seems to mean little when looking at who was dominant over who. Australia had four regular bowlers averaging under 30 with the ball and all conceding less than five runs an over. England on the other hand had two bowlers averaging under 30 and most still going at over five an over. Yet England won 3-2! Things were more even on the batting, but it is an interesting aside to see that once again as in the Ashes, England seem to have won the crucial exchanges without dominating in terms of wickets taken.

First of all the bowling. It is clear that an Australian attack with Shaun Tait in it is a much more fearsome thing than without him. Yesterday Tait bowled a ball clocked at 100 miles an hour, only slightly slower than Shoaib Akhtar’s record, and ripped the heart out of England’s batting. Demonstrating just how difficult it is to bat against such extreme pace; Tait took 8 wickets at 12.38 and went for less than four runs an over! Predictably there has already been talk about whether he might return to the longer forms of the game with one eye on the Ashes, and worrying as that prospect is for Englishman, it is unlikely to happen given Tait’s record at breaking down if required to bowl more than 8-10 overs a day.

Likewise Harris also proved a handful on occasions, taking 10 wickets in four games, with his ability to bowl up above the 90 mile an hour mark suggesting that he is around to stay for a while. With Bollinger also thrown into the mix and Hilfenhaus, Siddle and possibly even another young gun like Hazlewood to come in, the Australian bowling stocks don’t look bad at all.

For England it was a different story with only Swann and Broad really having good series. Anderson had his moments too, notably at Old Trafford, yet in three of the five games he went for more than sixty in his allotted overs and yesterday for 75. Bresnan also belied his recently acquired status as a good limited overs operator with only one wicket in the series. Call us fickle but, having witnessed his performances in this series, we are doubly concerned about any potential Ashes involvement he might have! As an opening bowler Sidebottom would surely have been a better selection (limited as he is also by conditions), but Bresnan’s batting in the end saved him (mostly) from our ire. Swann, who despite being strangely under bowled, was his usual excellent self and these days really is the heart of this England team.

The batting was strangely inconsistent for both sides in this series with almost everyone contributing something at some point. The much maligned Clarke top scored for Australia and did much to win the fourth match for them, although the pedestrian finish to his 87 not out at the Rose Bowl also possibly lost them that match. Watson got starts without going on and looked in a continual sulk; all of White, Hussey and Ponting contributed well at some point; but on the whole the batting was fractured with generally only one man performing at a time.

England’s batting was also mixed. Strauss proved he can score quickly enough to be a threat at the top of the order although, despite his 87 in the third match, he is guilty perhaps of not going on and taking the game away from the opposition. Morgan won the man of the series award for his excellent contributions in the first three games – his hundred at the Rose Bowl was a brilliant exhibition of how to pace an innings. Collingwood had a quieter series but showed his worth last night with an excellent 95 as all others struggled against the extreme pace and Bresnan did well at 7. The notable failures were Kieswetter, KP and Wright though for varying reasons.

KP looked in great touch but was too frenetic, looking to smash everything for four; Kieswetter was undone by a mixture of good bowling and poor shot selection but deserves another chance. Wright on the other hand, despite his important 35 at the Rose Bowl, looks too high up the order at six which begs the question – what is he there for? Currently he appears to be doing the Mark Ealham bits and pieces role from a front line batters spot which is probably a luxury England can’t afford come the world cup next year.

All in all it was an entertaining series and one that should encourage England for having won with only three batsman really firing. The potential shortfalls are easily apparent though and it will be Andy Flower’s priority to remedy those over the next 9 months up until World Cup time. Australia on the other hand won’t feel despondent and Ponting will be pleased with the way one or two have come through and taken responsibility, particularly in the last two matches. There is a depth to Australian cricket that means they are rarely going to be too far off the pace and so it showed here.

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.

World 20/20: India and Australia Looking Good

The major nations of world cricket got under way last night, India playing South Africa in a true heavy weight clash and Australia facing reigning world champions Pakistan. Like before, some thoughts:

India vs South Africa
India won by 14 runs.

Suresh Raina: Another limited overs specialist, Raina currently holds the record for the most ODI’s without a test match appearance which quite honestly simply goes to show how much depth India have to their batting. Yesterday his timing, footwork and ability to hit a ‘long ball’, as they say, were masterful. Who needs Sachin, Sehwag or Gambhir?

Kallis and Smith: Whilst on paper they did well putting on 97 together, in the end there were too many dot balls which meant that De Villiers and Morkel had too much to do in the last 5 overs. Kallis was the less guilty partner but we are not sure about the merits of Smith at 3. De Villiers can give the ball a serious hit and should probably have come in as Kallis was the man still batting.

The Game: Not the most exciting spectacle in the end as the Indian’s always looked too strong. Having watched the South African’s fail to compete we are very worried about our semi final prediction for the Proteas. Our basis for this prediction was that South Africa have one of the stronger bowling attacks around. The absence though of a selection of spinners to slow things down appears to be a flaw in their make up. Steyn, Morkel, Kallis and Kleinveldt’s bowling all ‘traveled’, in cricketing jargon. India on the other hand look strong and. unlike the Protea’s, have quite the selection of slow bowlers. We are not sure this proliferation of average bowling is good for the game of the cricket but it appears to be a crucial element of this tournament. More on that later though.

*********

Australia vs Pakistan
Australia won by 34 runs

Shane Watson: Brilliant innings from Australia’s opening batsman. Inevitably a great deal of the focus when Australia play is on David Warner, however, last night Watson proved that they have another powerful batsman at the top of the order. Scoring 81 from only 49 balls and hitting 11 boundaries, including 4 cleanly struck sixes, he proved how important he is to this Aussie side.

David Warner: Warner must be the most graceless batsman in world cricket, effective yes, good at 20/20 cricket yes, but we would still not pay to watch him. Classic moment came when he was interviewed during the game and said that he hoped that if he performed well in this format for Australia, he might get a go in the test matches (or words to that effect). Being Australian he obviously still considers test cricket to be the pinnacle of the game, but if he thinks that, in this age of specialisation, 20/20 cricket is a route into the test side he is probably much mistaken!

David Hussey: Brilliant innings of 53 in 29 balls just when Michael Clarke had threatened to push Australia into a quieter middle period. At one point hit 4 sixes and 28 runs off one Mohamed Sami over. For a man who appears to be so thin he might snap at any point, he hits the ball with immense power.

Mohamed Aamer: Figures of 4 overs, 3-23 including one wicket maiden, belie the fact that his young prodigy is only 18 and already Pakistan’s ‘go to’ bowler. We can’t find the requisite statistic anywhere but we are almost certain that no man will have ever bowled a triple wicket maiden in the final over of a 20/20 game. Not only that but on two of the other three balls, Kamran Akmal ran out Steve Smith and Dirk Nannes giving the Pakistani’s an extraordinary 5 wickets in 6 balls.

Australian Seam Attack: We were astonished to find that the Australians had left out the IPL’s best bowler Doug Bollinger, yet on this basis we can see why they thought they didn’t need them. Nannes, Tait and Johnson provide a fearsome three pronged attack, which also has the added value from a neutrals point of view that something is guaranteed to happen almost every ball. None of them are exactly line and length specialists, instead relying on pace, swing and aggression meaning that they will regularly end up with figures similar to Nannes’ yesterday of 3-41 from their alloted 4 overs.

Catches Win Matches: Yesterday’s games demonstrated this amply.

*********

So after the first 6 games our predictions made before the tournament are looking way off the mark. Sri Lanka go into today’s game against Zimbabwe having to win to qualify, which isn’t perhaps as simple as it sounds with Zimbabwe beating Australia in their warm up games. England then face the West Indies later knowing one win will see them safe through to the Super 8’s. With the Windies already qualified, and England facing a potential banana skin against Ireland on Wednesday, it would make life much easier for their supporters if they did it the easy way. How often does this happen with England though!