Is Fast Bowling a Dying Art?

As the dust settles on England’s 4-0 whitewashing of India this summer, a couple of things spring mind. Firstly, for all the hyperbole before the series started, India’s batsmen have really failed to perform here in England. Perhaps that was down to a lack of preparation time before the series started; India managed to fit in only one warm up match before the first test at Lords? Or perhaps it's due to the fact the Indian players haven’t had a rest this year, with the World Cup, IPL and a tour of the West Indies all crammed in to a busy four month period. Either way, they haven’t been able to come to terms with batting in England this summer, and as a result have only passed 300 once all series.
 
Secondly, and perhaps more worrying is the lack of good fast bowlers in this Indian squad. It’s fair to say that India have had some bad luck with injuries this summer. For me, the loss of Zaheer Khan in that opening test at Lords was a huge blow to them, but the remaining seamers in the squad have just not been good enough. Praveen Kumar did well enough before injury also curtailed his participation, but the reality is Sreesanth, Sharma and Singh were just not threatening enough on a regular basis.
 
It must be a worry for India that there are not more fast bowlers coming through their ranks, challenging the test squad. Rahul Dravid spoke recently about a talented new generation of batsmen emerging to challenge the likes of Tendulkar, Laxman, Sehwag and himself, yet he didn't mention any new bowlers breaking into the side.
 
Some might argue that Indian crickets prioritisation of limited overs cricket ahead of the longest form of the game is stifling test cricket. India co-hosted the One Day World Cup earlier this year and a feature of that tournament was how many teams played with two or even three slow bowlers, opening their bowling with spin to take the pace off the ball. Maybe this was down to slow sub-continent wickets, or perhaps it’s a wider shift in the way limited overs cricket will be played in future?
 
The fact that the tournament was dominated by teams like India, Sri Lanka and Pakistan, all employing these tactics perhaps shows that fast bowling is a dying form in limited overs cricket and as a result the production line of fast bowlers is drying up in these countries?
 
Of course this brings us back to the fundamental problem with test cricket; it's not as lucrative as the shorter forms of the game, and it's not as popular, in some countries at least. In England, test cricket is still seen as the pinnacle of the sport, in fact the shorter forms of the game are often treated as feeder programmes for the test side, such Alastair Cook leading England’s One Day team for example, before he is inevitably promoted to test captain. However other nations do not prioritise in this way.
 
Rahul Dravid made the point in a recent interview that India's problem this summer hasn’t been their decision to prioritise limited overs cricket over test matches, rather it was a case of a ridiculously overloaded schedule. India currently play overseas series during their own domestic season, something that would never happen in England or Australia. As a result, Indian players have heavy workloads, because they will play in the IPL and then fulfil their touring obligations with the national side. You could say “forfeit the IPL”, as England players do their domestic competitions such as the Friends Life T20, but the IPL is so big now, and such emphasis is put on it by the Indian authorities, it is almost impossible to see that ever happening.
 
However, it is something the Indian authorities are going to have to find a work-around for otherwise the shorter forms of the game will continue to dominate schedules, and as a result the players coming through the ranks will be nurtured with this in mind. If test cricket is no longer a priority, gone will be the need for genuinely fast bowlers, and batsmen with classic technique like Dravid and Alastair Cook will become extinct too, in favour of swing-from-the-hips batsmen and bowlers that can bowl accurate yorkers on a regular basis without the requirement for any variation.
 
As discussed previously on this blog, there is room for both limited overs and test match cricket to be played alongside one another, but the administrators of the game need to manage teams schedules properly. Otherwise test match cricket will struggle to compete with the more lucrative formats of the game and art of fast bowling may well become a thing of the past.
 

England's Perfect Equilibrium Takes Them To The Top of Test Cricket

 

 

At Edgbaston on Saturday 13th August 2011 England beat India by an innings and 242 runs, a mammoth victory that saw them climb to the top of the ICC test cricket rankings, replacing India at the top after their comprehensive 3-0 series victory.
 
Quite a feat, and to quantify that further, its scarcely two and a half years since Andy Flower was appointed Director of Cricket and Andrew Strauss became Captain of an England side languishing in sixth in the same ICC rankings.
 
In the past 2 years Flower and Strauss have transformed England into a well-oiled machine which has demolished Australia, Sri Lanka and now India in successive test series, winning 8 out of the 9 series the two have presided over, drawing only the 2009 tour of South Africa.
 
So how have Strauss and Flower orchestrated England's masterplan? Let’s start by looking at the bowlers.
 
The term “hunting in packs” might be slightly clichéd these days but it does accurately describe how England go about their business with the ball. There isn’t necessarily a stand-out bowler that you would throw the cherry to to get a much-needed wicket as you would have in the Andrew Flintoff era perhaps. Instead pressure is built by the whole bowling attack, bowling consistent lines and lengths, asking questions of the batsmen with every ball, testing their patience and technique and not letting them settle or get a free hit at the other end.
 
Look at how England took Indian wickets Edgbaston. Apart from Dravid in the 1st innings, who got a snorter from Bresnan, the rest of the Indian batsmen gave their wickets away, lacking patience and not being able to cope with the short stuff that was served up. England bowled to plans and India obliged by succumbing to the pressure. 
 
And we’re not talking about inexperienced batsmen here – England's bowlers have dominated the likes of Tendulkar, Laxman, Gambhir and Dravid in this series, probing away on a consistent line outside off stump and not giving any runs away, waiting for the batsman to try and force the issue and make a mistake, which has invariably happened. If that's failed, a few short balls has done the job, either way, India haven't been able to cope with it.
 
And it doesn't half help that England are the best fielding side in world cricket too right now. The bowlers know that any edge they induce is almost certain to be pouched. Imagine being an Indian bowler on the second evening at Edgbaston when Eoin Morgan was dropped at slip by the normally-dependable Rahul Dravid? No wonder Indian spirits were so low during that mammoth England innings in Birmingham - India had chances to make inroads, but they dropped a sack-full of chances.
 
Having a bowling attack like England's certainly helps, but the batsmen still need to score runs, and right now England's batting lineup are delivering some big scores. Alastair Cook has broken all sorts of records of late and is taking a lot of the plaudits right now, but all of the top 7 have contributed runs in the last year. Teams know England are capable of scoring colossal totals now and will wonder or even doubt that they'll be able to compete with that.
 
I remember the days when England would struggle to pass 300 on a regular basis. Now it is the teams England play, not England themselves that falter with the bat.
 
Right now England have the perfect equilibrium between their batsmen and their bowlers; the batsmen are scoring big which gives the bowlers plenty to work with and the bowlers are running through batting lineups and giving their batsmen low targets to aim for. It's a simple game when both components are firing!
 
Some people have said that England are top of a form of the game that is dying a death and that perhaps their opposition, rightly or wrongly aren't as concerned about test cricket as they once were and as England still are. It'd be foolish not to acknowledge that fact, but at the same time England can only beat was is in front of them. Australia and India are undoubtedly going through transitional periods, but these things are all cyclical - they will be back. And don't forget, Australia took great pleasure in tearing through England series after series, so we shouldn't feel too bad for them!

For now England are top dog and deservedly so. With the first Test Championships taking place in England in 2013, they will be hoping for a long reign at the top of this great game.

Edgbaston: England vs India Day One

If this really is a contest between the top two sides in test cricket right now, India have got a funny way of showing it!
 
Expectations were high as Virender Sehwag and Gautam Gambhir, the touring sides premier opening batsmen both returned from injury at a newly developed Edgbaston for the 3rd test of this series. However, as has tended to be the case so far this summer, India were again bowled out cheaply, for just 224. On a slow Edgbaston wicket, patience was the requisite virtue, a quality few of their batsmen were able to show.
 
Apart from Rahul Dravid, who to be fair got an absolute jaffer from Tim Bresnan, this was a story of India gifting their wickets away, unable to resist temptation and going after balls they really ought to have left the hell alone. Gambhir and Laxman both succumbed cheaply after promising starts, Gambhir going for one outside off and playing on, and Laxman hooking straight down long on's throat.
 
That was after Sehwag had gloved his first ball to Matt Prior and Tendulkar had been caught at slip by his nemesis, Jimmy Anderson, both off the bowling of the in-form Stuart Broad. The finest batting line up in the world all back in the hutch for under 100. Funny old game.
 
England did well yesterday, but they didn’t have it all their own way. For the first hour, notwithstanding Sehwag’s departure, India were on top. It is a great quality England have developed that they are capable of winning a session even when their opponent is on top. Despite India’s good start they still went in for lunch 4 wickets down
 
The home side stuck to their task and managed to get wickets through patience and perseverance. They probed on a line just outside off stump and all too often the Indian batsmen couldn’t resist taking a swipe. When Tendulkar came in, Anderson returned to the bowling attack and the Little Master’s first stroke to him was an ugly flat batted swat that got nowhere near the ball – the Indian batsmen just don’t know how to play England’s bowlers.
 
MS Dhoni and Kumar showed more resolve, putting on a decent rear-guard stand to post some kind of total (yes, it could have been even worse then it was!) Dhoni in particular played some fantastic shots, bludgeoning the England attack for a while, but in the end their total is well short on what is actually a good pitch at this stage.
 
Starting today on 84-0, England will now look to bat all day today and most of tomorrow to put India out of the game. England made a habit in last years Ashes of scoring big and batting once, doubtless we will see the same plan employed here. It is therefore imperative that India's bowling attack makes early inroads. Kumar has looked their best bowler so far this series, if he can get a couple early on, who knows?
 
One player who I really hope delivers if he gets the opportunity in this innings is Ravi Bopara. He's had a lot of criticism since those 3 consecutive hundreds in the Caribbean 2 years ago, I hope that, if he gets a chance today (or tomorrow) he bats well and scores plenty, because he is a talent and he needs to start delivering at this level now.
 
If England win today as well, the ICC might as well issue their amended rankings at close of play tonight, because there will be no way back for India after that. They have to win today's play; it's as simple as that.
 

Could The Community Shield Be Played Abroad?

I read with waning interest a story yesterday about Wesley Sneijder leaving the door ajar, again, to a move to Manchester United. "Someday baby, who knows maybe" was very much the theme, as indeed it has been all summer. God I can't wait for the football season to re-start, just so that all these boring rumours can be put to bed, at least until December.
 
Anyhow, what struck me other than another footballer showing deft touch in giving non-committal quotes (do they get trained in that? Oh, they do!) was where the quotes had emanated from. Beijing, to be precise. Sneijder and his Internazionale colleagues are in the Chinese capital to play great rivals AC Milan in the Italian Super Cup.
 
What a great idea, I thought. What a great way to sell your league abroad, with possibly the most hotly contested match in your league (perhaps in all of Europe) being played in front of a potentially massive new fan base.
 
And so I thought, why not get England's equivalent, the Community Shield, on the road to play in front of new crowds?
 
Manchester United have recently returned from a pre-season tour of North America having acclimatised, worked on their fitness, oh and racked up nearly £10 million in appearance fees during the course of their trip. United took on the cream of the MLS, as well as Barcelona, beating the European Champions 2-1 (Wembley is now forgotten lads!)
 
Playing Stateside in the summer is certainly a good way of getting fit for the upcoming season, playing in 40 degree heat at times will improve players stamina for sure, and playing Barca no less is as stern a footballing test as you can get, even if it was a below par side, but I sense a golden opportunity here for the Premier League to sell their product, in much the same way their Italian counterparts have done.
 
Aston Villa, Blackburn and Chelsea have all been involved in a Premier League Tournament in Asia recently; the PL brand clearly travels well. What would be better than the English games big curtain-raiser taking place in similar climes to new and potentially lucrative new audiences?
 
This Sunday the Community Shield takes place between Manchester United and rivals City at Wembley. The game will sell out and no doubt be a reasonably good game given the local rivalries. Everyone wants to win a cup, and it always bodes well to get a new season off to a winning start, but does that game have to be over here?
 
The Premier League has discussed at length overseas matches involving English teams. They have mentioned the possibility of a 39th league game being played abroad, or an end of season play off to decide either Champions League or relegation places, neither of which sit well with fans because they would require fundamental changes to the way our league is decided at present.
 
The Community Shield is a stand-alone match between the cream of the English game; a showpiece. Playing it on foreign soil might upset the local fans that would normally, loyally, trudge up (or down) to Wembley, but it wouldn't effect the rest of the season whilst also satisfying the leagues obvious desire to raise the Premier Leagues profile in other parts of the world. It could be played in a different continent every year; it would also be a potential money spinner for the various FIFA constituencies around the world that are so un-trusting of English FA - there's nothing like a little hard cash to smooth relations.
 
It's still a dramatic change, I get that. Home fans love the Community Shield and want to go and support their team. There is also the fact that it satisfies sponsors and pays money back to the Wembley development fund, but the Premier League is global now, and rather than playing a 39th game, or an end-of-season play-off abroad, I reckon putting the Community Shield on tour might be a pretty good compromise.
 

England On The Brink of World Domination

"That's a Cherry, a Peach, a Rip-snorter" enthused Shane Warne on Sky Sports yesterday, as Jimmy Anderson sent VVS Laxman's timbers kart-wheeling across the Trent Bridge outfield. There really is no more glorious a sight on a cricket field than seeing stumps sprayed across the turf courtesy of a fast bowler in prime form, and Anderson certainly was in prime form yesterday.
 
In fact, Anderson has been in devastating form all summer and India have not yet learnt how to cope with his swing and seam movement. But Anderson isn't the only one the tourists haven't figured out yet. Broad had re-discovered his form and is bowling better than at any other point in his career right now and yesterday Tim Bresnan joined the party taking 5 wickets in his role as enforcer, a position that seems to suit him better than the jobs previous incumbent, Broad, and he fairly terrorised the Indian batsmen yesterday, peppering them with uncomfortable short stuff - he took 5 but it could have been more with the amount of edges he induced.
 
Unlike Broad’s enforcer carnation though, Bresnan still pitched the ball up occasionally, and it was this variety that helped Bresnan secure his 5-wicket haul.
 
In short, England are developing a bowling attack to be feared the world over, with pace, seam and swing all thrown into the mix and executed with real skill and aggression. On top of this, they still have Chris Tremlett to come back, and lord only knows how he will fit back into the side now that his replacement, Bresnan, has staked such a strong claim. Evening Standard writer Tom Collomosse suggested both Bresnan and Tremlett could play in the next test at Edgbaston, the latter replacing injured Jonathan Trott in a move that would see Ian Bell promoted to Trott’s number three spot, with England playing 5 bowlers and Bresnan batting at 7.
 
It would be bold, but England’s bowlers are destroying India right now, so why not continue to make it uncomfortable for them? Also Bresnan and Broad are in fine form with the bat, as is Prior, so England would still have enough in the batting department. However, England’s selectors are nothing if not consistent, so I won’t be surprised to see a batsman replace Trott – perhaps Bopara, with Bell moving up to three? We shall see.
 
Anyhow, why mention Warne at the start of this piece, you might ask? Shane is fast becoming my favourite cricket pundit. He’s witty, takes the mick out of Nasser Hussain (which is always entertaining), but most importantly, he speaks with the experience of a man that knows what it's like to play for the best team in the world and what's more, what it takes to remain there too.
 
When he talked about England’s intensity at Trent Bridge yesterday it was like he was talking about the great Australian team he was apart of for so long. England’s bowlers have hunted in packs in both test matches so far this series and have terrorised all of the Indian batsmen. Yesterday Yuvraj looked totally out of his depth, Dravid was out in single figures and captain Dhoni left an in-swinger that had him plumb LBW without troubling the scorers. Even Sachin left one he never should have which had him LBW too, albeit after a splendid half-century.
 
In my lifetime, I can vaguely remember watching the West Indian side of Walsh, Marshall and personal favourite Curtley Ambrose, as well as the great Australian attack of McGrath, Gillespie, Lee and Warne. Both those sides destroyed opponents before they’d even marked out their crease and whilst England have a long way to go before reaching those levels, they are developing an attack that will be as feared by opponents as their great predecessors were in their hayday.
 
England had Australia 2-3 in Adelaide last year and India 37-4 here yesterday, and India boast Dravid, Laxman and Tendulkar in their ranks. This is the destruction of cricketing institutions, first Australia on their own patch, and now India, albeit under-strength, but still the world’s number one team, being crushed and made to look very ordinary indeed.
 
Warne knows this England team is going places. He was talking about this England side in the way we used to talk about his Australian side for so long. England are winning the close tests and are crushing opponents by an innings or hundreds of runs when their opponents struggle. England are ruthless and devastating and in Andrew Strauss they have a leader that will never let the team rest on their laurels.
 
Great teams have bowling attacks that almost always get their opponents out for below par scores and batsmen that can score big and tire the opposition out by keeping them in the field for days on end. England have both of those attributes working in tandem now I believe; A group of bowlers that will scare opponents before they even take to the field, who know how to bowl in different situations, and how to get the best out of the conditions they are presented with.
 
Sehwag, Gambir and Zaheer may return for the third test, but I wouldn’t bet against another England win – they are looking superb right now.

Bell Likes India's Spirit

Summers of Cricket in England are almost always epitomised by one stand-out event or theme. Take the moment Andrew Flintoff and Australia's Brett Lee embraced after that memorable 1-run England victory at Edgbaston in 2005. Or the Pakistan ball tampering row in 2006. Or when Mitchell Johnson was torn apart by the home crowds during the 2009 Ashes Series.  Or the spot-fixing scandal last year.
 
2011's summer of cricket will almost certainly be remembered for the Run Out That Never Was, when Ian Bell took it upon himself to walk out of his ground on the presumption that a boundary had been scored and tea had been called. Neither was true, and when India whipped his bails off and appealed his dismissal, the umpires were right to judge him out.
 
Bell and partner Eoin Morgan then remonstrated with forth umpire Tim Robinson on their way off the pitch before England’s captain and coach, Andrews Strauss and Flower went to speak to their Indian counterparts over a cup of tea to query whether their appeal had been made within the "spirit of the game". With that on their conscience, and with a Trent Bridge crowd close to boiling point over the decision, India decided to withdraw their appeal, thus reinstating Bell to continue his magnificent innings (and it was magnificent, lest we forget).
 
I recall a football match once, when Robbie Fowler, then of Liverpool, fell in the penalty area. No appeal was made for a penalty, but the referee gave one all the same. Fowler himself told the referee it wasn't a foul, but football referees never change their minds, do they? The resultant penalty was duly stuck away, and we all debated why the referee wouldn't listen to the folk on the field during Match Of The Day later that night.
 
It was a harsh decision, but the referee is there to make decisions. He did and so and therefore it was right that it stood.
 
Yesterday was farcical: An umpire’s decision overturned as a result of some pressure from opposing fans and managerial figures for me shows a weakness in the constitution of the sport rather than strength, as some of the pundits suggested afterwards – Geoffrey Boycott said it was “A great day for Cricket.” Hmm.
 
It is quite conceivable now that later on in this series, without a review system in place, an Indian batsman may be given out caught behind say, knowing full well he didn't touch the ball and as a result of Bell’s reprieve, want to appeal to Strauss’s "spirit of cricket" sensibilities and ask for him to withdraw England’s appeal against him. Previous experience of this England team would suggest that, to put it kindly, they play hard, and therefore may not be too co-operative in such situations. This sets a dangerous precedent and it remains to be seen whether it will yet come back to haunt England.
 
Yesterday was unique. The run out occurred after the last ball before tea, when it looked to the naked eye that a boundary had been scored. However, rules are there to make sport fair to both sides, and I don't see how yesterday was fair to India.
 
Imagine being India yesterday - going into tea with a bonus wicket after a tough two sessions. You'd be thinking that, with an injured Trott in next and then Prior to follow, you'd be able to make inroads and put the brakes on England. 15 minutes later you're being told that your team should allow the man who has already amassed 130-odd quick runs back in because the spirit of the game dictates you should. I'd hazard a guess that their fast bowlers would have been pretty dispirited themselves after that!
 
I love the game of cricket and it's quirky rituals and traditions - some of which can be frustrating at times, but they are the essence of what makes the sport such a special one. But when you allow player power and an emotional crowd to dictate the agenda and override the rules, should they see fit, then the sport loses credibility.
 
Rahul Dravid had the task of talking journalists through Bell’s reprieve from an Indian perspective at the end of play last night. His pre-rehearsed answer in front of the Sky Sports cameras about the unanimous decision within the Indian camp to withdraw the appeal, adhering to the spirit of the game of course, all sounded good, but when Ian Ward, the interviewer, pushed further and asked, "It was out though, right?" Dravid's response said it all. "IT WAS OUT!.......but the spirit of the game blah blah blah."
 
I defy any competitive sportsman or woman to argue with the way India must have been feeling last night.