Time to move on for England
It seems strange to finally be writing the post-mortem of England's defeat in Brisbane after picking over the bones of their capitulation since the first session of day one.
Unfortunately almost every concern about England's selection and preparation proved justified.
But Duncan Fletcher, the coach, and captain Andrew Flintoff must now erase Brisbane from the minds of England's shell-shocked players.
England are fortunate that they have a chance to make amends so soon, when the second Test begins in Adelaide on Friday.
Despite the trauma of the last few days, there are a few glimmers of hope.
For starters, they surely can't bat and bowl as badly as they did in Australia's and their own first innings.
And there were signs at Brisbane that England were beginning to find their way with the bat.
Kevin Pietersen and Paul Collingwood caught the eye in England's second innings, although both wasted the opportunity to make a really big score by getting themselves out in the 90s.
Another positive is that Andrew Strauss will surely have learned his lesson about hooking and pulling recklessly on Australian pitches.
And then there is the bowling department. It is now unthinkable that England will repeat the error of not selecting Monty Panesar, who has brought control and wickets throughout the past year.
England are likely to play two spinners at Adelaide, so Ashley Giles keeps his place.
Giles represents one of England's few selection successes, having contributed with the bat in both innings.
However, it would be nice if England could one day find a number eight batsman for whom scoring 20 runs isn't regarded as a success.
The man to make way for Panesar will be James Anderson, who finished with woeful match figures of 1-195 on his return to the Test arena.
Steve Harmison will keep his place only because there is no viable replacement since Sajid Mahmood has looked desperately short of confidence and consistency of late.
My England team for Adelaide: Andrew Strauss, Alastair Cook, Ian Bell, Paul Collingwood, Kevin Pietersen, Andrew Flintoff, Geraint Jones, Ashley Giles, Steve Harmison, Matthew Hoggard and Monty Panesar.
www.robwightman.co.uk
posted by Rob Wightman @ 11:23 am
2 comments
2 Comments:
I agree with your comment on a 'glimmer of hope'. Scoring 370 in the forth innings of a test match, when facing a completely hopeless situation, demonstrates character, despite both Collingwood and Pieterson being prized out by ‘Australian methodology’.
I do not believe that the selectors need to tinker with the batting line up.
Bell experienced a rare second innings failure, Cook and Collingwood demonstrated that they had taken heed of their failings in the first innings and Pieterson, who was unfortunate to get out the way he did in the first innings, averages 54 in the series and hasn't got going yet.
Flintoff returns from injury and I feel that it is only a matter of time before he finds his touch.
The real disappointment for me was Strauss in both innings, however, he comes to Australia in a rich vein of form and he will learn the lessons of his poor shot selection very quickly.
But what were the selectors thinking of when they failed to select England’s most consistent bowler in the last twelve months.
Whilst Giles showed some success with the bat, can scores of 23 and 24 justify a bowling return of 1 - 113? It is in the bowling department where England has to change. Flintoff aside, with a match return of 4 – 110, Harmison 1 – 177, Hoggard 2 – 141 and Anderson 1 – 195 all lacked the fundamental principles of line, length and consistency.
I agree that Anderson has to make way for Panesar. Should England require extra bowling, they have Collingwood, who surprisingly did not get the chance in the first test, and Pieterson, who seems to be taking on a ‘Boycott style’ role for the England team, however, I fear that both of these do not have the ability to take wickets consistently at this level so at best can only be used sparingly.
To drop Harmison would be unthinkable. Clearly he has a confidence problem and to drop him would only compound this and serve no purpose. He is still a potential match winner and I believe he will return to the form that saw him rise to being the most feared bowler in test cricket.
Finally, the Reed or Jones conundrum! Jones is apparently selected for his superior batting, statistics tend to suggest otherwise. 2006 test averages: Jones 16.7, Reed 42!
So I agree with your team with the exception of Jones.
I think we are largely in agreement, except over the thorny issue of whether to select Geraint Jones or Chris Read behind the stumps.
To be honest, part of the reason why I have gone for Jones is that I know Duncan Fletcher is firmly on his side. And when it comes to selection, that means everything.
Your point regarding their respective batting averages is an excellent one. However, Jones looked in good touch, especially in the second innings when he was unlucky play on when one kept low.
I also suspect the Australians might play on Read's rather fragile batting confidence.
Something I couldn't help noticing during the first Test was Chris Read and Monty Panesar sitting next to one another, chatting. I would love to have been privy to their conversations.
Monty will definitely play at Adelaide, though I'm afraid Read will not.
Post a Comment
<< Home