Crunch time for KP

September 4th this year must have been pretty sweet for Kevin Pietersen. He had been captain of England for one month, had won a Test match (with a century) and thrashed the ever impressive South Africans 4-0 in a one-day series. The new captain had sailed the good ship England into calm balmy waters. How different it looks now just a few matches later. England has lost three of its last four matches, all by large margins. In the last match England were thrashed by a rampant India. Some stunning batting by Sehwag and Gambhir complimented by some ferocious hitting by Yuvraj saw India make 387. For most of their innings England looked woeful and a target of 187 looked out of reach. Bopara managed to push England to 229 but in the end India was victorious in every aspect of the game. KP’s reaction was to suggest that India had played really well and there wasn’t a lot he could do about it. That may work for the first match of a series but it is England’s job to stop them playing well!

Tomorrow’s match is a key one, England must show some fight and resolve. Yet another big loss will damage confidence and England has to be competitive. Even if India win, England has to show that it could have won. KP has to show what he is made of and get the players to perform better.

The reef is looming large for Her Majesties Ship will KP be able to turn her around?

England the new Choker Kings

Since its return to International cricket, South Africa has been known as the ‘choker’ of world cricket. That is that when the pressure is really on and the chips are down they fail – finding ways to lose. However, when it comes to one-day cricket it really should be England that should be kept away from small toys and gas ovens. Last night’s debacle in Antigua was the latest in a long line of embarrassing vital matches for England. This time it has cost the England players a cool $1m each. Stanford’s Superstars played excellent 20:20 cricket. They bowled, fielded, caught and batted with real professionalism and passion, neither of which was evident in England’s pitiful display.

There is a strong choker pattern in England’s last three big ‘must win’ matches; they were annihilated in all three:

20:20 for 20 Nov 2008: Eng 99, SS 101-0 (12.4 ov)
World 20:20 Sept 2007: Eng 135, Aus 136-2 (14.5 ov)
World Cup 2007: Eng 154, SA 157-1 (19.2 ov, yes it was a 50 over match)

Amusingly the 20:20 for 20 was supposed to be a way for England players to make some ‘serious’ money to make up for their absence from this year’s IPL. That is why the side did not include 20:20 specialists, the ECB only wanted England players there, whether they deserved a place or not.

Are Australia, the new England?

Blimey did Australia take a beating in the second test against India; I don’t think I can remember Australia taking such a thumping. I saw quite a bit of the match and the 300 run victory to India was completely deserved. India out-batted Australia and then out-bowled them. They even out-fielded them at times. Australia’s performance was that bad that it reminded me of a few of England’s – it had the classic Team England traits:

• An ineffective first-day bowling attack that somehow gets into a ‘reasonable’ position then blows it big-time
• An un-spinner that the opposition love facing
• A poor batting performance on a flat track, followed by
• The other side smashing it all around with little difficulty that makes everyone think ‘oh, this really is a magnificent batting wicket’. A fielding captain who daren’t put his un-spinner on, followed by
• 58-5 and 195-10 in the second innings with a complete inability to hit the ball and an opener that thinks he can help by smashing the ball out of sight

So can we enjoy a winter of Aussie bashing? We will see, it was only a week ago that India had to bat all day to save the match. India was magnificent at Mohali ... can they do it again next week?

It's not about money

The Stanford games are not about money. Not about money at all. It's all about pride. How do I know this? Because Kevin Pietersen says so: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/england/7680092.stm

For me, people go down in my estimation when it is clear they are not telling the truth...

Sachin Tendulkar

Sanchin Tendulkar today became the leading run-scorer in Test Match cricket, overtaking Brian Lara's figure. His innings of 88 also saw him be the first player to reach 12,000 Test runs. The innings was also his 50th Test fifty (which is not a record), falling twelve short of what would have been his 40th Test century. The graph below charts Sachin’s remarkable Test career, the centuries are shown in orange; the 150 and above scores are shown in gold with the double centuries in red. His career average has been above fifty for almost a hundred Test matches since April 1997. Remarkable.

What is not shown on the graph is the way that Sachin Tendulkar has made his runs. His technical excellence, strength of shot combined with sublime timing makes it always a joy to watch ‘The Little Master’ bat. In addition he has managed to do all this whilst being constantly under an intense media spotlight and to act, almost without exception, with decorum and humility. Without doubt Sachin Tendulkar is by any measure of the game of cricket a true great.

There will always be arguments amongst cricket fans about the best batsman. Is it Lara or Tendulkar? Where do Ponting or Kallis measure up. In a few years all these batsmen will have retired, let us enjoy them while we can.

Graham Hick

Graham Hick has just retired from first class cricket. In a remarkable career he made 136 first-class centuries and averaged over 50 (52.23). He is also one of a select few players who have made single, double, triple and quadruple centuries in first class cricket. In addition, he was a dominating one day player making a further 40 one-day centuries, five of which were made whilst playing for England. Graham had a difficult entry into Test cricket, it took him more than a year to make a half century and his reputation is such that most people consider his Test career disappointing. Interestingly, for someone who had such a slow start to his career Graham’s figures after 19 matches are almost identical to Michael Vaughan’s. After 19 matches Hick had made 1091 runs at 33.06 with one century whilst Vaughan had made 1095 runs at 36.50 with two centuries. The graph below shows that he had a more prolific spell in the middle of his career before tailing off in a long decline.

Michael Atherton famously declared England’s innings closed at Sydney with Hick on 98 not out. It is commonly believed that this event undermined Hick’s confidence and led to his decline in Test cricket. The graph below suggests it is not that simple with his average high point occurring after that innings. It must have had some effect though and interestingly I have heard Michael on TV saying that in hindsight he wished he had not declared.

Whatever people believe about Graham’s Test career one thing is certain; his first class figures are remarkable. He must surely go down in history as one of the best county players of his generation.

In deep

There are a variety of unusually placed cricket grounds around the world. When I was but a lad I played the one or two games at Grenoside CC in Sheffield. Grenoside is on the side of a large hill…and so is the cricket pitch. The wicket area was flat(ish) but not much good. The worst position to field, by far, was in-the-deep down the hill. It was a tricky place to be. For a start you could not see the batsman play his shots because he was over the lip of the hill. When a shot was played down the hill the first I heard was the fielders shouting that there is a ball coming, followed by a short sprint in the general direction of the ball. Of course I had no chance because I am on a steep hill and the ball just accelerates passed and on down the rest of the hill. In reality you are not a fielder but a ball fetcher – a ball fetcher with at least another 100 meters to go. Getting into a position where I could throw the ball back took a while and the fielders just milled about vaguely amused. It really wasn’t much fun fielding down the hill.

It seems that the England cricket team, like those who played at Grenoside, are not playing on a level playing field. The members of ‘Team England’ have a place in the Pavillion at the top of the hill and seem to be forever having their tea while talented county players flail away unnoticed down the hill. The squad for the tour of India was announced today and Michael Vaughan is not on it. We knew this prior to its announcement because Vaughan has been given a three month sabbatical. Sabbatical? Vaughan’s recent Test form has been terrible. He gave up the Test captaincy and made himself unavailable for selection. He then returned to play for Yorkshire so he could make some runs and get some form back – something he failed miserably at. He was rewarded for all this by having his central contract renewed and now has been given a sabbatical… he must have compromising pictures of Geoff Miller and Max Moseley or something. Cricket is supposed to be a competitive game and surely the selection process must be the same. What on earth must the players who just missed out on a central contact feel? How can the current selection policy possibly be on a level playing field?

Money-go-round

The team to go to Antigua and play the Stanford ‘big money T20’ games was announced today. According to my conspiracy theory it should contain as many of the New Zealand test side as possible… and guess what – it does. It includes Alastair Cook, surely the most unlikely T20 player there is. The only hard hats passed out when Cooky is at the middle are the ones used to have a quick snooze under. It also contains ‘Big’ Steve Harmison. A few months ago people probably thought his international career was over. They had forgotten about the great conspiracy. A test recall and some moderate figures clearly means he is a show-in for Antigua. With people like Cook and Harmison around the likes of Graham Napier didn’t stand a chance…

I have said before that I think central contracts are too long. Steve Harmison, despite spending half the year as not good enough to play for England has been awarded another contract. Michael Vaughan, who made himself unavailable for selection, does not play ODIs and whose form for Yorkshire has been woeful has also had his contract renewed. Is there no requirement for players to deserve their yearlong contract?

Conspiracy, what conspiracy.

Batsman, Captain, Off Spinner?

King Kev is of course the best batsman in the England side - by some considerable margin. He is also the best off spinner, so why is he so infrequently used? It will be interesting to see if he bowls himself in India. I think he should although captains are notoriously reluctant to bowl themselves. This article from the archives makes interesting reading: Hussain impressed with Pieterson
...as well as one amusing comment:

"Vaughan, who was virtually strokeless throughout his tedious 222-minute innings of 45."


That is one thing that has changed, Vaughan is rarely strokeless.

Back from Holiday

I had it all set up in my mind. Just before the T20 match in Antigua on November first I was going to mock up a picture of a wooden spoon on a pile of cash. England and West Indies were seventh and eighth in the ODI rankings and that makes them the bottom two of the ‘major’ nations. I go away on holiday and something remarkable happens: England thrash South Africa. If they win the last match they will move to number two in the rankings. Given the poor form England have shown in one-day cricket recently it seems logical to assume the improvement in form was due to me going on holiday. In a purely altruistic move and for the sake of ‘Team England’ I am willing to go on holiday more, I wonder of I can get a sports grant...