The 2014 has shown England's inability of shake off the lure of all rounders by bringing in Moeen Ali at number six... and the spinner. The perennial all rounder problem has emerged - how do we judge his success? His already shown form with the bat, scoring a century... but people are whingeing about his ability to take wickets with the ball.
What is Ali's role in the team? Strike spin bowler? Batter? A bit of both? How do we know if he's pulling his weight?
I do think it was a good idea to bring in a second all rounder - Stokes - to support him at eight. This reduces pressure on Ali and Stokes to score runs and take wickets.
But Ali is the only spinner, which feels unfair. I think it's going to be a mess and England should bring in a specialist.
Saturday, July 12, 2014
Saturday, May 17, 2014
Tony Cozier - paid up member of All Rounder Press Mafia
Tony Cozier, perhaps the best known West Indian cricket writer of all time, has shown himself to be a paid up member of the all-rounder press mafia with this piece bemoaning the lack of an allrounder in West Indies cricket.
West Indies cricket lacks a lot of things at the moment - opening batsmen, regularly performing top level batsmen and bowlers, decent fielders, consistency... and Cozier wants to add "all rounders" to the list. Like Shane Watson, Australia's erratic all rounder, or Ben Stokes, who made such a crucial contribution to England's four nil loss.
The West Indies became the greatest team in the world in the 80s without an all rounder. They had batsmen who could roll their arm over with the ball (eg Viv Richards) and bowlers who were handy with a bat (eg Malcolm Marshall).
They don't need an all rounder. No one does. Stop talking about the "all rounder" position like it's a given!
West Indies cricket lacks a lot of things at the moment - opening batsmen, regularly performing top level batsmen and bowlers, decent fielders, consistency... and Cozier wants to add "all rounders" to the list. Like Shane Watson, Australia's erratic all rounder, or Ben Stokes, who made such a crucial contribution to England's four nil loss.
The West Indies became the greatest team in the world in the 80s without an all rounder. They had batsmen who could roll their arm over with the ball (eg Viv Richards) and bowlers who were handy with a bat (eg Malcolm Marshall).
They don't need an all rounder. No one does. Stop talking about the "all rounder" position like it's a given!
Saturday, March 1, 2014
Case Study: Ian Botham
Having a look at the test match career of Ian Botham, one of the 70s and 80s greatest all rounders - scourge of Australia.
First Tests Against Australia
His first two tests (against Australia) England won. Botham played both in concert with other all rounders: Miller and Greig, then just Tony Greig.
Playing New Zealand & Pakistan
His next test against New Zealand, England lost - Botham played alongside Miller but with only four specialist batsmen and four specialist bowlers, meaning the tail was very long.
For the next tests, England dropped a bowler and brought in a specialist batsman, played Botham and Miller - and won then drew.
England then kept the two all rounders formula (Miller and Botham) going against Pakistan, which they won, then won, then drew (a rain-shortened game). And against New Zealand where they won, and won. They also won the next game, which didn't have Miller - it had Botham at six and four specialists. Well one of those specialists was John Emburey, who was a very handy batter.
1978-79 vs Australia
England kept the Botham-Miller combo though for all the tests in Australia which England won 5-1 - a win, win, loss, win, win, win.
1979 vs India
Then against India the firm of Botham-Miller saw England win, draw, and draw. Miller was replaced as the second all rounder by Peter Willey for the fourth test, which England drew.
1979-80 vs Australia and India
England came down a bit for the 79-80 test series against Australia, which they lost 3-0. The first test featured Miller and Botham... and Willey, meaning England had only four specialist batsmen. They lost. Miller didn't return for the second test, but just Willey and Botham saw England lose again. Ditto for the third test. However a combination of Botham and Emburey saw England triumph against India on the way home.
Botham as Captain - the West Indies and Australia
Botham was then appointed captain of the side and had to face the West Indies, at the time the greatest team in the world. For the first test, England used the Willey-Botham combination and the West Indies prevailed.... but only by two wickets. Then there was a draw, draw, draw, draw - not bad against the best team in the world (for all the criticism heaped on Botham's captaincy).
The second Centenary Test against Australia used Willey and Botham and saw another draw.
Then it was touring the West Indies. For the first test England picked only four specialist batsmen, plus Miller, Botham, Willey and Emburey, and lost badly. The second test was cancelled; they dropped Miller and went for five specialists plus Willey-Botham for the third test, and again lost but then drew the fourth test and the fifth.
1981 Ashes: Losing the Captaincy
Botham was kept as captain for the 1981 series against Australia. The combination of Willey-Botham couldn't stop England from losing the first test but they drew the second. Botham was axed as captain, replaced by Brearley, but kept as a player.
He and Willey featured in the famous victory in the third test and fourth test. Willey was dropped for the 5th test with Botham playing as a bowling all rounder and using six specialist batsmen - England won. This formation was kept for the drawn sixth test.
1981-82 vs India and Sri Lanka and Pakistan
England's next tour was in India. The Botham-Emburey combination was used for the first test, which England lost. The next three tests used Botham and six batters, resulting in a draw then a draw, then a draw.
Then the selectors flipped things on the head and used Botham, four bowlers and five batters, resulting in a draw then Botham-Embrey for the final game, another draw. The firm of Botham-Emburey also helped beat Sri Lanka.
Home against India, England went with a Botham-Derek Pringle combination, and won. The second test used Botham-Pringle-Miller and only two specialist bowlers, and resulted in a draw. Botham-Pringle alone for the third test was a draw.
Also that summer England played Pakistan. For the first test they went with Botham, Pringle and Ian Greig as all rounders, and only two specialist bowlers - and won. They kept this formation for the second test and were thrashed. However a combination of six batsman, Botham and a new all rounder Vick Marks, and two specialists, saw England win the third test.
1982/83 Ashes
In Australia for the 82/83 summer, England played the first test with three all rounders, Botham, Miller and Pringle, and two specialist bowlers, and drew. They went with a more conventional 5-2-1-3 formula for the second test, with Botham and Miller, and lost. The third test they added Pringle and went back to 5-3-1-2 and still lost but kept the faith with this combination and won the 4th test. Pringle went and it was back to 5-2-1-3 for the final fifth drawn test.
1983 vs New Zealand
The English summer of 1983 saw Botham up against New Zealand. For the first test he was teamed with Vic Marks, and England won. However Marks wasn't in the team for the second test, being replaced by a specialist bowler, meaning England went in 5-1-1-4... and lost.
But this combination was successful in the third test which England won. For the 4th test England went with six batters, Botham and three specialists - and won.
Unable to make up their mind, the selectors put Botham back to six and went with four specialist bowlers in the next test, against the Black Caps in New Zealand, which was drawn. They changed it again for the next test, with six specialist batsmen, Botham and three specialist bowlers - and lost. The third test saw a third different combination, 5-2-1-3, with Botham and Marks as the all rounders. England drew and lost the series.
1983 vs Pakistan
England kept Botham and Marks and a 5-2-1-3 combo against Pakistan, and narrowly lost. He was injured for the other two games of the series.
1984 vs West Indies and Sri Lanka
1984 saw England against the West Indies, then at their peak, and lose every test. For the first game they used three all rounders, Botham, Pringle and Miller, and lost. This combination (5-3-1-2) was kept for the second test, another defeat. They went with a more traditional arrangement, 5-2-1-3 (Botham and Pringle) for the third test, but still lost.
For the fourth test they moved things around again, playing just Botham as an all rounder and four specialist bowlers (5-1-1-4) - and lost. Then for the final test they once more adjusted the mix, playing six batsmen and three specialist bowlers and Botham - and still lost.
England's selectors of the early 80s were among the worst in history.
A one off test against Sri Lanka saw Botham played at number six without an all rounder and with four bowlers - it was a draw.
1985 Ashes
This series was a rare bright spot for England in the mid 80s, thumping an Australian team weakened by defections to South Africa and their own selectors dogged insistence of playing Simon O'Donnell as a fourth bowler. The old firm of Botham and Peter Willey united for the first test, which England won. Willey didn't return for the second test, which saw Botham and Emburey as the all rounders (if you could call Emburey one) - England lost. This combination was reused for the third test, a draw, the fourth test, another draw, the fifth, a massive victory, and the sixth, another big win.
It was England's most successful run in a long time.
1985-86 vs West Indies
They were brought back down to Earth against the West Indies while on tour. Botham and Willey were retunited for the first test, which was a defeat. The next test England only picked four specialist batsmen, using Willey, Botham and Emburey as all rounders - they lost. This combination was persevered with for the next test, another defeat. The next test was more conventional - five batsmen, Willey and Botham, and Emburey. But it didn't work and England lost again. The selectors showed their inclination to tinker again and for the final test picked six batsmen, plus Botham and Emburey. Another loss.
Botham was out of the team until a match against New Zealand, where he batted at six in concert with Emburey - it was a draw.
1986-87 Ashes
Australia once again offered redemption. Botham batted at number six throughout the summer, with Emburey and de Freitas in support. England were triumphant in the first test, drew the second and the third (which Botham missed), won the fourth, lost the fifth.
1987 vs Pakistan
England kept this combination that summer against Pakistan - five batters, Botham and Emburey - for the first test, which was drawn. So was the second test. For the third test Emburey was replaced by another all rounder, David Capel; England went with a 5-2-1-3 combination, and were thrashed. Emburey was back in Capel's place for the drawn fourth test and drawn fifth test.
1989 vs Australia
Botham was out of the English team for a while. He came back against Australia in 1989, reunited with Emburey in a 5-2-1-3 combination for the 3rd test, which was drawn. In the fourth test, England lost badly. So England's selectors, according to form, tinkered with the line up and played only one all rounder, five specialist batsmen and four bowlers. They lost.
Final Tests
Botham was next in the side for the 5th test against the West Indies. Playing along side Chris Lewis in a 5-2-1-3 combination, England pulled off a victory. This combination was also successful against Sri Lanka.
Botham then played a test against New Zealand in 5-2-1-3 concert with Dermot Reeve, which resulted in a draw.
His last two tests were against Pakistan. In the first England played six batters, then Pringle, Botham and Lewis.... They drew. His final match saw him with Lewis in a 5-2-1-3 combination, which England narrowly lost.
Conclusions
So what to make of the above? Yes, it covered a long period of time and an awful lot happened... but can any conclusions be drawn?
First, on the whole, Botham clearly worked best in concert with another all rounder - but only one all rounder, especially Willey and Miller. These were his teammates during the late 70s, when England and Botham were at their peak. He also had some success with Emburey, Marks and Pringle.
The reason is, I think, because Botham was a bits and pieces all rounder. He was probably the greatest bits and pieces all rounder in the history of the game... but a bits and pieces one nonetheless. His batting was never good enough to justify him a spot in the top six on the basis of batting alone; his bowling never good enough to consistently justify being picked in the bottom four. A Willey or Miller would compensate for him.
Secondly, England's selectors in the 1980s were appalling. Instead of picking two all rounders as they did for most of the 70s and early 80s, they constantly tinkered: one all rounder, two all rounders, three. They chopped and changed captains, and the wicketkeeper (who is the heart and soul of any decent side). Its like they were constantly trying to find a short cut instead of picking players and showing faith - five batters, a keeper, two all rounders, and three bowlers.
Botham won England so many test matches with the bat and ball. Had the selectors been better though other players may have won more.
First Tests Against Australia
His first two tests (against Australia) England won. Botham played both in concert with other all rounders: Miller and Greig, then just Tony Greig.
Playing New Zealand & Pakistan
His next test against New Zealand, England lost - Botham played alongside Miller but with only four specialist batsmen and four specialist bowlers, meaning the tail was very long.
For the next tests, England dropped a bowler and brought in a specialist batsman, played Botham and Miller - and won then drew.
England then kept the two all rounders formula (Miller and Botham) going against Pakistan, which they won, then won, then drew (a rain-shortened game). And against New Zealand where they won, and won. They also won the next game, which didn't have Miller - it had Botham at six and four specialists. Well one of those specialists was John Emburey, who was a very handy batter.
1978-79 vs Australia
England kept the Botham-Miller combo though for all the tests in Australia which England won 5-1 - a win, win, loss, win, win, win.
1979 vs India
Then against India the firm of Botham-Miller saw England win, draw, and draw. Miller was replaced as the second all rounder by Peter Willey for the fourth test, which England drew.
1979-80 vs Australia and India
England came down a bit for the 79-80 test series against Australia, which they lost 3-0. The first test featured Miller and Botham... and Willey, meaning England had only four specialist batsmen. They lost. Miller didn't return for the second test, but just Willey and Botham saw England lose again. Ditto for the third test. However a combination of Botham and Emburey saw England triumph against India on the way home.
Botham as Captain - the West Indies and Australia
Botham was then appointed captain of the side and had to face the West Indies, at the time the greatest team in the world. For the first test, England used the Willey-Botham combination and the West Indies prevailed.... but only by two wickets. Then there was a draw, draw, draw, draw - not bad against the best team in the world (for all the criticism heaped on Botham's captaincy).
The second Centenary Test against Australia used Willey and Botham and saw another draw.
Then it was touring the West Indies. For the first test England picked only four specialist batsmen, plus Miller, Botham, Willey and Emburey, and lost badly. The second test was cancelled; they dropped Miller and went for five specialists plus Willey-Botham for the third test, and again lost but then drew the fourth test and the fifth.
1981 Ashes: Losing the Captaincy
Botham was kept as captain for the 1981 series against Australia. The combination of Willey-Botham couldn't stop England from losing the first test but they drew the second. Botham was axed as captain, replaced by Brearley, but kept as a player.
He and Willey featured in the famous victory in the third test and fourth test. Willey was dropped for the 5th test with Botham playing as a bowling all rounder and using six specialist batsmen - England won. This formation was kept for the drawn sixth test.
1981-82 vs India and Sri Lanka and Pakistan
England's next tour was in India. The Botham-Emburey combination was used for the first test, which England lost. The next three tests used Botham and six batters, resulting in a draw then a draw, then a draw.
Then the selectors flipped things on the head and used Botham, four bowlers and five batters, resulting in a draw then Botham-Embrey for the final game, another draw. The firm of Botham-Emburey also helped beat Sri Lanka.
Home against India, England went with a Botham-Derek Pringle combination, and won. The second test used Botham-Pringle-Miller and only two specialist bowlers, and resulted in a draw. Botham-Pringle alone for the third test was a draw.
Also that summer England played Pakistan. For the first test they went with Botham, Pringle and Ian Greig as all rounders, and only two specialist bowlers - and won. They kept this formation for the second test and were thrashed. However a combination of six batsman, Botham and a new all rounder Vick Marks, and two specialists, saw England win the third test.
1982/83 Ashes
In Australia for the 82/83 summer, England played the first test with three all rounders, Botham, Miller and Pringle, and two specialist bowlers, and drew. They went with a more conventional 5-2-1-3 formula for the second test, with Botham and Miller, and lost. The third test they added Pringle and went back to 5-3-1-2 and still lost but kept the faith with this combination and won the 4th test. Pringle went and it was back to 5-2-1-3 for the final fifth drawn test.
1983 vs New Zealand
The English summer of 1983 saw Botham up against New Zealand. For the first test he was teamed with Vic Marks, and England won. However Marks wasn't in the team for the second test, being replaced by a specialist bowler, meaning England went in 5-1-1-4... and lost.
But this combination was successful in the third test which England won. For the 4th test England went with six batters, Botham and three specialists - and won.
Unable to make up their mind, the selectors put Botham back to six and went with four specialist bowlers in the next test, against the Black Caps in New Zealand, which was drawn. They changed it again for the next test, with six specialist batsmen, Botham and three specialist bowlers - and lost. The third test saw a third different combination, 5-2-1-3, with Botham and Marks as the all rounders. England drew and lost the series.
1983 vs Pakistan
England kept Botham and Marks and a 5-2-1-3 combo against Pakistan, and narrowly lost. He was injured for the other two games of the series.
1984 vs West Indies and Sri Lanka
1984 saw England against the West Indies, then at their peak, and lose every test. For the first game they used three all rounders, Botham, Pringle and Miller, and lost. This combination (5-3-1-2) was kept for the second test, another defeat. They went with a more traditional arrangement, 5-2-1-3 (Botham and Pringle) for the third test, but still lost.
For the fourth test they moved things around again, playing just Botham as an all rounder and four specialist bowlers (5-1-1-4) - and lost. Then for the final test they once more adjusted the mix, playing six batsmen and three specialist bowlers and Botham - and still lost.
England's selectors of the early 80s were among the worst in history.
A one off test against Sri Lanka saw Botham played at number six without an all rounder and with four bowlers - it was a draw.
1985 Ashes
This series was a rare bright spot for England in the mid 80s, thumping an Australian team weakened by defections to South Africa and their own selectors dogged insistence of playing Simon O'Donnell as a fourth bowler. The old firm of Botham and Peter Willey united for the first test, which England won. Willey didn't return for the second test, which saw Botham and Emburey as the all rounders (if you could call Emburey one) - England lost. This combination was reused for the third test, a draw, the fourth test, another draw, the fifth, a massive victory, and the sixth, another big win.
It was England's most successful run in a long time.
1985-86 vs West Indies
They were brought back down to Earth against the West Indies while on tour. Botham and Willey were retunited for the first test, which was a defeat. The next test England only picked four specialist batsmen, using Willey, Botham and Emburey as all rounders - they lost. This combination was persevered with for the next test, another defeat. The next test was more conventional - five batsmen, Willey and Botham, and Emburey. But it didn't work and England lost again. The selectors showed their inclination to tinker again and for the final test picked six batsmen, plus Botham and Emburey. Another loss.
Botham was out of the team until a match against New Zealand, where he batted at six in concert with Emburey - it was a draw.
1986-87 Ashes
Australia once again offered redemption. Botham batted at number six throughout the summer, with Emburey and de Freitas in support. England were triumphant in the first test, drew the second and the third (which Botham missed), won the fourth, lost the fifth.
1987 vs Pakistan
England kept this combination that summer against Pakistan - five batters, Botham and Emburey - for the first test, which was drawn. So was the second test. For the third test Emburey was replaced by another all rounder, David Capel; England went with a 5-2-1-3 combination, and were thrashed. Emburey was back in Capel's place for the drawn fourth test and drawn fifth test.
1989 vs Australia
Botham was out of the English team for a while. He came back against Australia in 1989, reunited with Emburey in a 5-2-1-3 combination for the 3rd test, which was drawn. In the fourth test, England lost badly. So England's selectors, according to form, tinkered with the line up and played only one all rounder, five specialist batsmen and four bowlers. They lost.
Final Tests
Botham was next in the side for the 5th test against the West Indies. Playing along side Chris Lewis in a 5-2-1-3 combination, England pulled off a victory. This combination was also successful against Sri Lanka.
Botham then played a test against New Zealand in 5-2-1-3 concert with Dermot Reeve, which resulted in a draw.
His last two tests were against Pakistan. In the first England played six batters, then Pringle, Botham and Lewis.... They drew. His final match saw him with Lewis in a 5-2-1-3 combination, which England narrowly lost.
Conclusions
So what to make of the above? Yes, it covered a long period of time and an awful lot happened... but can any conclusions be drawn?
First, on the whole, Botham clearly worked best in concert with another all rounder - but only one all rounder, especially Willey and Miller. These were his teammates during the late 70s, when England and Botham were at their peak. He also had some success with Emburey, Marks and Pringle.
The reason is, I think, because Botham was a bits and pieces all rounder. He was probably the greatest bits and pieces all rounder in the history of the game... but a bits and pieces one nonetheless. His batting was never good enough to justify him a spot in the top six on the basis of batting alone; his bowling never good enough to consistently justify being picked in the bottom four. A Willey or Miller would compensate for him.
Secondly, England's selectors in the 1980s were appalling. Instead of picking two all rounders as they did for most of the 70s and early 80s, they constantly tinkered: one all rounder, two all rounders, three. They chopped and changed captains, and the wicketkeeper (who is the heart and soul of any decent side). Its like they were constantly trying to find a short cut instead of picking players and showing faith - five batters, a keeper, two all rounders, and three bowlers.
Botham won England so many test matches with the bat and ball. Had the selectors been better though other players may have won more.
Sunday, February 23, 2014
Case Study: England v Australia 1990-91
England's cricket selectors of the 80s and 90s always seemed to try to squeeze an extra player in the team: promoting batsmen to keepers, adding a fifth bowler or a seventh batsman. Picking six batters, a keeper and four bowlers was too hard for them. They simply could not do it.
The Ashes team of 90-91 is a case in point. It wasn't a bad side: you had Gooch, Smith, Gower, Lamb, Fraser, Tufnell, Atheron, Malcolm, Russell. Those are good players. Yes, Malcolm and Tufnell are comic as well, but they could also win matches.
But the selectors never had faith in batsmen to bat, bowlers to bowl and keepers to keep. They kept trying to take shortcuts.
In the first test they went with a 6-1-1-3 formation - Russell was kept as keeper but Chris Lewis, the allrounder, played at eight. England lost.
For the second test they swapped Lewis for Phil de Freitas, who occasionally the press tried to claim was an all rounder but with a first class batting average of 22, it's a doubtful call, notwithstanding the centuries he chalked up. England used a 6-1-4 formation... and lost.
For the third test they swapped de Freitas for Gladstone Small, but kept the 6-1-4 formation.... and what do you know? They almost one. They batted extremely well in their firs innings, had Australia on the ropes until we were rescued by Rackemann's 9 runs off 102 balls. Australia had retained the Ashes.
Then came the game against Qld and the Tiger Moth incident - although England won the game and should have been feeling positive, and still had two tests to go, they had an attack of the sillies.
England had been rattled by its failure to get out Rackemann in the 3rd test so for the 4th test they added an extra bowler, making way by replacing Russell as keeper with Stewart. England ended up drawing the same - they'd been set 472 to win and were making a decent go of it before running out of time.
This encouraged them to stick with their silly 5-1-5 formation for the 5th test, which they lost.
This shouldn't have been a miserable tour for England - several players were in form, Australia weren't that awesome. I don't think they would have won it had they simply stuck with 6-1-4 formation. But they would have done a hell of a lot better.
The Ashes team of 90-91 is a case in point. It wasn't a bad side: you had Gooch, Smith, Gower, Lamb, Fraser, Tufnell, Atheron, Malcolm, Russell. Those are good players. Yes, Malcolm and Tufnell are comic as well, but they could also win matches.
But the selectors never had faith in batsmen to bat, bowlers to bowl and keepers to keep. They kept trying to take shortcuts.
In the first test they went with a 6-1-1-3 formation - Russell was kept as keeper but Chris Lewis, the allrounder, played at eight. England lost.
For the second test they swapped Lewis for Phil de Freitas, who occasionally the press tried to claim was an all rounder but with a first class batting average of 22, it's a doubtful call, notwithstanding the centuries he chalked up. England used a 6-1-4 formation... and lost.
For the third test they swapped de Freitas for Gladstone Small, but kept the 6-1-4 formation.... and what do you know? They almost one. They batted extremely well in their firs innings, had Australia on the ropes until we were rescued by Rackemann's 9 runs off 102 balls. Australia had retained the Ashes.
Then came the game against Qld and the Tiger Moth incident - although England won the game and should have been feeling positive, and still had two tests to go, they had an attack of the sillies.
England had been rattled by its failure to get out Rackemann in the 3rd test so for the 4th test they added an extra bowler, making way by replacing Russell as keeper with Stewart. England ended up drawing the same - they'd been set 472 to win and were making a decent go of it before running out of time.
This encouraged them to stick with their silly 5-1-5 formation for the 5th test, which they lost.
This shouldn't have been a miserable tour for England - several players were in form, Australia weren't that awesome. I don't think they would have won it had they simply stuck with 6-1-4 formation. But they would have done a hell of a lot better.
Friday, February 21, 2014
De Villiers dropping Watson
A.B. De Villiers is probably the best batsman in the world at the moment. And he keeps wickets. South African selectors are no doubt high fiving at this ability for them to play seven batters.
And having a wicketkeeper who averages over 50 is a wonderful thing.
But he dropped Dave Warner on 43 - a simple chance that a specialist keeper would have taken. How many runs will this cost them?
It's time we started keeping stats for runs caused by dropped catches.
And having a wicketkeeper who averages over 50 is a wonderful thing.
But he dropped Dave Warner on 43 - a simple chance that a specialist keeper would have taken. How many runs will this cost them?
It's time we started keeping stats for runs caused by dropped catches.
5th bowler lust
South Africa's batsmen have scored a healthy total against Australia in the 2nd test - the healthiest against Australia's bowlers for some time. Accordingly, panic buttons have been pressed "We love five bowlers as we've always said," claimed Lehmann, in discussions about Shane Watson coming back.
Now Rogers is in poor form and the jury is still out on Doolan and Marsh as long term (please notice that word, long term) test players, so there is a very good place for Watson to come back as a batter.
But if he comes back, please let it be as a batter who bowls and not a bowler.
Incidentally, Smith, Clarke and Warner offered fine bit part support in the first innings. The art of bit part bowling is underrated.
Now Rogers is in poor form and the jury is still out on Doolan and Marsh as long term (please notice that word, long term) test players, so there is a very good place for Watson to come back as a batter.
But if he comes back, please let it be as a batter who bowls and not a bowler.
Incidentally, Smith, Clarke and Warner offered fine bit part support in the first innings. The art of bit part bowling is underrated.
Case Study: England vs India 1996
In 1996 England played India in a 3 match test series and won 1-0.
England used all rounders during this series but crucially they employed two in every test, using a 5-2-1-3 formation.
The first test, which England won, used Irani and Chris Lewis - plus Dominic Cork (who the press tried to turn into an all rounder) as a handy tail ender.
This combination was used for the second test, which was a draw. Ealham replaced Irani for the third test, another draw.
While England's one-allrounder policy often seems to result in defeat, playing two all rounders works better.
England used all rounders during this series but crucially they employed two in every test, using a 5-2-1-3 formation.
The first test, which England won, used Irani and Chris Lewis - plus Dominic Cork (who the press tried to turn into an all rounder) as a handy tail ender.
This combination was used for the second test, which was a draw. Ealham replaced Irani for the third test, another draw.
While England's one-allrounder policy often seems to result in defeat, playing two all rounders works better.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)