Could it get much worse?

Well, yes, probably. Still, not only did England throw away a great start, but then Collingwood scored runs. Were they good runs? From the sounds of it, the pitch is good. Every other batsman got himself out. Sorry, Collie, but they weren't that good. Now, I'm not going to say that I wish he hadn't made them, but... I do wish that someone else had made them instead. If he makes a ton tomorrow, he can't really be dropped can he, so who will be? Not Strauss surely. Shit.
I can think of a couple of former England batsmen whom I didn't like to see make runs.
First there was Tim Robinson, he of the pseudo Gooch backlift, slightly mincing gait and poodle perm (he was on tv recently and his hair looked suspiciously straight). He used to murder medium pacers, in particular the '85 Australians. Then he kind of limped on for a while, scoring runs every time it looked like he was about to be dropped. I remember one innings in particular, in 1987, the first test against Pakistan. He made a hundred on an easy paced pitch (Old Trafford?), when Imran wasn't playing. I can't remember whether Wasim was playing or not. Ooo... the joys of cricinfo, let's have a look... Why can't I put links into this post? The button isn't there. Mmm... Oh well, the match was indeed at Old Trafford. Wasim was playing. So was Imran, but he didn't bowl, so Pakistan had 4 bowlers, one of whom was arch trundler (a la Collingwood), Mudassar Nazar (although I seem to remember him taking a 6 for in 1982... Yes, yes, he did, at Lords, 6 for 32. How do I remember? I can't remember the names of colleagues of work who I sit next to everyday. At least I remember the important stuff, eh?)
Anyway, the next, and far more significant object of my ill will was... go on, guess... debut in 1991, played for Worcestershire, dropped 6 times, yeah, that's right, Hicky, the great white hope, whom Curtley Ambrose (amongst others) steamrollered. Talk about mental scars. For years, any ball pitched half way down the wicket made him flinch. And still they picked him. I know he averaged abourt 33 in his test career, but he was the anti-Hussain: very few of the runs he made were important. When the chips were down he could be relied on to get out. Atherton's declaration when Hick was on 98 in Sydney made me strangely happy. I am a sick, bitter and twisted man.
England could do with a batsman like Hussain at the moment, or even better like his mate Graeme Thorpe (there I go again)/ Tricky situations and difficult batting conditions brought the best out of both of them. Hussain, in particular, seemed almost perverse, the way he would score runs when the ball was darting around (notably in that first test in NZ a few years) or when the team was up against it (I remember 2 great rearguard hundreds, against Australia and India, both at Headingley, both in the second innings, both in what were ultimately losing causes)
Yeah, well, those two have gone. So who's going to replace them? The primary candidate in the current line up is Ian Bell, but at the moment, he isn't really shaping up. I thought that his century in the last test might be a turning point, but he's followed that up with two low scores, two soft dismissals. His century was hardly chanceless either.
Pietersen frustrates me. He can't really be faulted for the number of runs he scores, but still, I have the feeling that he could score a whole lot more if he had even just one braincell in his head. Whenever he gets out in a daft way, people say "well, that's the way he plays", and yet, he has grafted, on more than one occasion, and when he does, he seems to do really well. Perhaps they should put him on sedatives.
Anyway, all is not yet lost. There could be something in the pitch, hopefully, for our battery of bowlers, who must be getting pretty sick of the batsmen. I mean, really, they haven't posted an above par score since... not counting Bangladesh... errr... against West Indies the year before. Ok, Ok, they score a few runs against South Africa last winter. Still, even against Australia last summer, when they had first use of some great batting pitches, they scored well enough, but never as well as they could or should have done, I don't think. Also, as previously mentioned, they've got into a habit of collapsing, which England teams of years gone by found very hard to get out of. In fact, it was only really during the last series in Pakistan that England got into the habit of scoring heavily. What's happened? McGrath at Lord's, Warne at Trent Bridge, the pair of them at the Oval on that last morning. What if Pietersen hadn't been dropped by the latter off the former?
It was good to see Vaughan back at the top of the order. He seems to be a different player up there. Perhaps Strauss should be the new Thorpe. That's it!!! Oi, Duncan!!!
Finally, spare a thought for Jimmy Anderson. Is Liam Plunkett any good? I do hope he wasn't selected because of his batting. Then again, we could do with a few runs from him tomorrow morning.

Stop sweeping!

Losing quick wickets is a very bad habit to get into.

Keep 'em coming

Does the next test really start tomorrow? It only seems like a few days ago that I was listening to the end of the last one on the radio. It was just a few days ago. They don't hang around these days do they?
So Straussy has gone home. I've read the odd bit of press about how he shouldn't have been allowed to play just two tests if it was known that he was going to head home before the third. Well, that's ridiculous. This is the twenty first century. Do we really want players to have to miss the birth of their first child in order to open the batting? No. Good. Also, it makes things more interesting for us spectators. A bit of speculation is all we need. I've made my feelings about Collingwood quite clear. Sorry, Paul, but you ain't up to it (much as it pains me to have to agree with Mike Gatting once again). I'd like to see Alistair Cook in the team, just 'cause, well, he's one for the future. Chances are though that Collingwood will be there again, blocking for hours like a dodgy Morris Minor on the motorway, breaking down before the next services. Select thy metaphors carefully.
This blog has been shamelessly anglocentric up 'till now, but the test series down under has been interesting, principally because there have been signs of life in the West Indies team. It's been so sad to see them hammered over the past few years. Finally, however, it seems like they might be on the way back. OK, so they're getting beaten again, but not hammered. There is a difference. Bravo to Dwayne and as for Lara, well, I think he's the best batsman I've ever seen. He's certainly better than Viv Richards. Not only is his record better but for most of his career, he's been playing in a losing team. He's probably not the easiest bloke to play alongside but even so, you've got to admire him. In a couple of years, he'll retire I expect. Will such a high backlift ever be seen again?
It looks like Jimmy Anderson might be in the team tomorrow. When he first played for England, he looked so good. I really thought that he'd be a feature for the next decade. What went wrong? He certainly lost that banana outswing. His action always looked slightly suspect, the way he lowered his head at delivery. It would be great to see him performing well again. He's looked a bit lost these past couple of years.
So can England's succeed in this final test? Losing that first one must still rankle. Winning the toss tomorrow morning is essential, I think. After Ponting's mistake in choosing to bowl at Edgbaston, the Ashes were won by winning the toss and batting first. The flip of a coin is so very important.

Eggs not hatched

Yesterday's disappointment that the game was most likely heading for a draw has become a feeling of unease that we're going to get beaten. The bowlers did pretty well. When the last wicket fell, the commentators were even talking about the possibility of England getting a lead. Now all the talk is of the pitch breaking up (watch it, Shahid) and England needing to bat the whole of tomorrow. Whenever people start muttering that Pietersen is getting a bit big for his boots, he seems to do the business, so here's hoping that that's the case tomorrow. Bell also seems to be playing pretty well. Freddie seems clueless against Kaneira but then he seemed clueless against Warne at first. See straws, clutch them, that's my policy.
I didn't see Inzaman's run out but it is a shame if the good spirit in which the series has been played is dissipated by that incident. Unusually, I agree with Agnew about this: throwing the ball at the stumps like should be strongly discouraged.

Mud Pie

Baked for a long time. The ball didn't bounce very much did it?
I woke up, switched on the radio, found out that Pakistan were batting. My heart sank. Then I heard that they were 73-3. Heart lifted a little, but only a little. Even listening to the radio, the pitch seemed slow and flat. I realised how slow and how flat when I went down to watch at my Dad's a little later on. A good length for the seamer's was almost a half volley. Pitch any shorter and the ball just stopped. It reminded me of sodden pitches which I played on as a kid. Only the ball probably did a bit off those. I don't envy our seamers.
As for our spinners, well, there weren't too many signs of improvement. It's not looking good for the rest of the winter. The Indians must be pretty happy. Pakistan only have one world class batsman: Inzaman. India have three: Sehwag, Dravid and Tendulkar. I don't think Laxman is too far behind either. If the pitches in India are like those in Pakistan, which take the sting out of our seam attack, then the Indians will bat forever before unleashing Harbajan and Kumble. Come on Ash. What's going on?
One good thing: no Collingwood. Bell even bowled pretty well, better than Collingwood would have done maybe. I'm not sure about his catch though. Commentators for the past few years have been almost universally adamant that debatable catches shouldn't be referred to third umpires, because the replays almost always suggest that the ball might have grounded. Personally, I think that that's because, in those situations, the ball almost always has been grounded. The catcher might think he's caught the ball cleanly. He will be able to persuade himself quite easily. It's not really a question of honesty, not when the ball hits the ground and the catcher's hand(s) almost simultaneously. Yousuf wasn't out.
What a joy he was to watch too. He reminded me a lot of David Gower, with a lazy backlift towards fourth slip before bringing the bat around and gently down. Batsmen like that really are a joy to watch: Dujon, Gower, Laxman, Mark Waugh. Inzaman lacks a little grace but makes up for it perhaps by being extra easy. He really is very cool. As for Afridi...
It was great to see the crowd's reaction to his entrance. It was great to see a crowd even. Congratulations to the authorities for letting so many people in for free. Perhaps test cricket isn't so unpopular on the subcontinent after all. Perhaps it's just that the people out there haven't got a whole lot of money. Duh.
Anyway, I won't be tuning into tomorrow with much hope of England having made inroads. Unless England bat like idiots, which is quite possible, given the quality of Pakistan's spinner(s) and the likely size of Pakistan's first innings total, the most likely result is a bore draw. When I started watching cricket, that was the likely result of ever test match everywhere. Test cricket really is so much better than it ever was. It is a shame that an extra flat pitch can still make it a bit tedious. The contest between bat and ball stops being a contest. Batsmen fill their boots. Averages are bloated. People say cricket is boring. Sometimes it is. I quite enjoyed watching it this morning, but I did read a lot of the paper whilst doing so.

The other imposter

So it's a few days now since the end of the last test. I doubt that the dust has settled yet in Multan, but then it probably never does. What a match. England currently seem incapable of playing a dull one. Everything was looking so good with Bell and Trescothick piling on the runs in that first innings, but then, as is England's wont, they let it slip. So they bounced back on the fourth day, when Inzaman and Salman Butt were building a lead which looked like it could become unassailable, but 198 was always going to be a decent total, albeit one which was makeable. It seemed though, that the lack of experience in the middle order finally let us down. Thorpe would have retired anyway by now, even if he hadn't been discarded before the ashes, but that's who was needed in such a situation. Not Collingwood. Oh dear.
Now I'm not the kind of person to call for people's heads after one defeat, but I was never much of a fan of Collingwood in the first place. Have England ever had a more inept number 4? I can't think of one. Hussain was a walking wicket for a couple of years before getting to Sri Lanka in 2000, but I think he batted at number 3, and he was a good captain, and he'd made runs in the past. Anyway, Collingwood batted at 7 at the Oval. What changed between then and last week? Nothing. He's not good enough to bat in the top six in a test. If proof of this were needed then it was provided by his dismissals. In the first innings, he edged a ball from arch trundler Shabbir which didn't deviate in the slightest and missed what was described as a straight one on TMS in the second. Anyway, now that Vaughan is fit(tish), and after Bell scored a few, there's no reason for him not to be sub again, which, quite frankly, seems to be his best role.
The other disappointment in the match was the bowling of England's spinners. It wasn't that great, was it? To have nearly won a test on the subcontinent with the spinners only taking two wickets between them is quite an achievement in itself. Giles bowled so well in Pakistan last time. Will he bounce back? He's made a habit of starting badly in the past few years, last summer and the summer before and in Bangladesh before that, so there's hope. I don't think there's much for England if he doesn't improve. It was quite depressing to see Shoaib Malik bowl. He's described as a part timer, but he spun the ball a lot more sharply then Giles or Udal. Then again, that might be because he's a chucker. Don't get me wrong. I'm not one of those who thinks Muralitharan chucks the ball, not for a moment. Malik's arm did look a bit crooked though, and I'm guessing that he was born with a straight one.
Anyway, as I think I've said before, I do get very excited when England win a test, but I can usually remain philosophical when they don't. In this instance, I haven't found it too difficult, partly because I quite like Pakistan. The only team I really hate to get beaten by is South Africa, for some reason. Probably because they have a habit of thanking God, like American sportsmen (and thank god they don't play cricket). Pakistanis sound like lovely people. I don't find it hard to feel happy for them.
Still, I wouldn't mind if their team got hammered in the next two tests. Odds are that they'll both be drawers, but England have bounced back before. Any complacency must have been expelled by that defeat. I'll be at my Dad's again tomorrow morning to watch. Life is sweet.

England beat Argentina

So what.
I left to go to my Dad's at 9.30. Pakistan were 160-1. I imagined that they'd go on to score over 500 and that we'd be batting to save the game against Kaneira et al. You'd think I would have learned during the summer to have a little faith. Two wickets had fallen by the time I got to my Dad's. Two more fell in that first over after tea and then, towards the end, Kamran Akmal played what was, in the circumstances, not a very clever shot to be caught at second slip. Sami didn't look like much of a batsman did he? England might bowl them out for little more than 300 on a pitch which has yielded huge first innings totals in previous test matches. Once again, even without Simon Jones, the bowlers did the business.
I think England showed what a good team they've become today. When I was panicing, well, not panicing so much as willing to give up, the bowlers were calmly going about their business, confident that a break would come, and that after one there would be another. Meanwhile Pakistan showed once again how they're the cricketing equivalent of Holland's football team. Their batsmen are great to watch. Wristiness like that is sublime. Then Salman flashes when he should be pressing on to a ton. Yousuf misses a yorker by a long way, as does the new number 6 and finally Kamra, oh Kamran. Thou hath the head of a melon and the brain of one too. Only Inzaman is left. I don't know why, but I love guy. He seems singularly amiable. He's a tryer and he's bloody good, only not good enough for me to want to get up at 4 o' clock to watch him continue.
It was great to see that there were a few people in the ground today. By all accounts it seems that Pakistan is a great place to visit, that the people are amazingly welcoming. I'd love to go and watch some cricket on the sub continent. I had thought that Sri Lanka would be the best place to go, but it might be Pakistan, given that going there wouldn't involve associating with the barmy army. Too late now though, I think. Maybe in four years' time, God willing, Inshalla.

Back once again, it is the incredible...

Rhyme animal? Not this time, Chuck, no. It's a test match, involving England. I realise that I've been a bit slow on the update this past month or two, but, let's face it, there hasn't been a whole lot happening to make me feel compelled to write. The Super Series turned out to be a fiasco, predictably after the Ashes perhaps, serving only to restore a bit of the Australians' old confidence. Ganguly was sacked, finally. Actually, that whole saga was quite interesting. If his behaviour was anything like what Chappell described in his inadvertently open email, why did the Indians put up with the Prince for so long? Very odd. I digress. Two days to go. England lost their second tour match. Jones and now Vaughan are out injured. The players haven't had a chance to practice on the type of pitch, a low, slow turner, which is bound to be prepared at Multan. Things aren't looking too good.
Well, that depends on which way you look at them. Even the Australians were bored by their team steamrolling everyone (and are probably becoming bored again). There seems to be little danger of the England team following suit. No matter who they come up against, they seem to like to make it into a bit of a contest. This next test could go either way, and that's good.
In the tradition I've established of remaining positive in the face of contrary evidence(and vica versa), I reckon after their disastrous displays in the first two tour games the England batting line will come good when it matters. Strauss won't like the fact that he missed out on a century in his debut Test against Australia, having scored one the first time he faced New Zealand, West Indies and South Africa, so I wouldn't bet against him doing the business at Multan. Old Ooders outbowled everyone, Kaneira and Mushtaq Ahmed included, in county cricket last season. He and the King of Spain will be a deadly spin pairing. As for Collingwood, well, I guess he could score a few runs. Vaughan and Trescothick only averaged in the 30's in county cricket when they started playing for England. There's just something I don't like about Collingwood. He's boring.
Still the best news of all, for me at least, is that I'm going to be able to go around to my Dad's to watch the action on Sky. It'll be a bit different to the balcony in the south of france where I followed England's last Test. Frankly, I wouldn't mind being on the balcony, in the sunshine, listening to TMS, but sharing toast, tea and newspapers with my Dad while he says, once again, that he's never heard of any of the Pakistanis (apart from Inzaman maybe) will be pretty good.