England's test team that won the Ashes in 2005 - Trescothick, Strauss, Vaughan, Bell, Pietersen, Flintoff, Jones G, Jones S, Giles, Hoggard, Harmison. I can rattle off the names easily even now. Several of these were world class: the batsmen, the fast bowlers, and on his day Flintoff. The lesser good players were Jones, a dodgy keeper, and Giles, a not particularly good spin bowler. But both were decent with the bat, which helped when your number six was Flintoff.
In 2005, Flintoff, Jones and Giles all made crucial contributions with the bat, especially Flintoff. It sort of covered for the fact that Jones dropped a few too many easy balls and Giles was no Shane Warne. But they held it together long enough for England to win the series.
England's coach, Duncan Fletcher, loved all rounders, having been one himself (or kind off - his record suggests a bowler useful with the bat). He was big on England having an all rounder and when Flintoff discovered that magic vein of form, Fletcher seemed like a genius. The 5-1-1-4 formula was the way to go! Fletcher also loved bowlers who were handy with the bat, like Shane Udal, or batters handy with a ball like Paul Collingwood.
They kept this formula in Pakistan, losing the test series 2-0. In India for the first test they tried 5-2-1-3 formula, teaming Flintoff with Ian Blackwell, a batting all rounder (he averaged nearly 40 with the bat but less than two wickets a game with the ball) who was played as spinner. It resulted in a draw. They went back to one all rounder for the 2nd test which they lost, but won the 3rd game (Flintoff getting two fifties). So clearly the formula worked - so long as Flintoff contributed with the bat.
At home in the summer of 2006, England kept the 5-1-4 formula for the first test, where they should have won but couldn't push it over the line. They won the second test, lost the third.
The side was feeling unbalanced by this stage - England had lost Giles to injury, so lacked a decent number eight batsman to make up for Flintoff's weakness at six. They had discovered in Monty Panesar a spin bowler who was much better than Giles - England's batting was forever weak.
Then Flintoff fell injured and England resorted to a 6-1-4 formula for the series against Pakistan - which they won handsomely 3-0. Rather it was 2-0 with one victory due to forfeit. But still, it was a good result.
England's team in many ways looked stronger than that 2005 line up: Pietersen, Trescothick and Strauss were still there; Bell and Collingwood had flowered, Cook had emerged; Harmison and Hoggard were still potent, Mahmood/Anderson offered good support; Jones had been replaced by a genuinely talented keeper in Chris Read, and Giles by a decent spinner in Panesar.
England had reason to believe they had the players to ensure a tough Ashes defence.
That is, until Flintoff recovered from injury.
Now Flintoff could have been slotted in at number seven, replacing Mahmood or Anderson, meaning England had a devastating counter-attack option available at seven - like Australia had with Gilchrist.
But Fletcher was wedded to the idea of a five man attack so the bowlers could rest and wouldn't have to work hard.
This meant the team had to be completely restructured. If Flintoff played at six, then the English tail essentially started from there, which meant the batting quality of the lower order had to be boosted. So Panesar was dropped for Giles, a lesser bowler but better batter, and Read made way for Jones, a worse keeper but better batsman.
England's first test team thus had Flintoff at six, a third rate keeper who cost England a lot of runs by dropping balls at seven, a mediocre bowler at eight. Fletcher was trying to repeat the past. Only this time England were slaughtered. Giles and Jones got their little "useful tallies" in the second innings but not enough to stop the onslaught.
England managed to lose the second test despite declaring at 6-551 in the first innings. The batting was weak and collapsed horridly in their second dig, and the much vaunted five man attack couldn't stop Australia's batters from piling on the runs.
Changes were made for the third test, with Panesar being brought in for Giles and promptly taking eight wickets, but England still used the 5-1-1-4 combo and still got thrashed. They dropped Jones for Read in the fourth test but still kept Flintoff at six and were beaten. Ditto in the fifth test.
It was an insanity that was barely commented on at the time. Flintoff was clearly not up to batting in the top six, but Fletcher insisted on doing it anyway - as a result he dickered with the rest of the team with disastrous results.
In hindsight the best thing for England would have been if Flintoff had been injured. Strauss was a good captain and would later take England to being the number one team in the world (without an all rounder). But since he was available to play they should have used Joyce at six, Flintoff at seven and used Read and Panesar all summer.
I still think Australia would have won (they were playing at home, their hunger was too great) but it wouldn't have been 5-0.
(Incidentally after the Ashes, Flintoff became injured, England used the 6-1-4 formation and beat the West Indies 3-0. They did lose 1-0 to India and Sri Lanka though.)
No comments:
Post a Comment