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.
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.
posted by djbrd at 10:26 pm
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home