When Ian Bell was scoring at more than a run a ball, it looked like we might actually win this one. How stupid of us to get our hopes up. A disappointing final ten overs, in which wickets tumbled and the scoring rate fell to Chris Tavare levels, saw us limp to just over 300 – not a bad score of course, but it could and should have been much better.
Australia’s successful run chase had an air of inevitability about it. Things looked promising when Cameron White was lbw to Finn, but once Steve Smith started grinding out his runs – the bloke’s a machine at the moment – I think we all knew what the result would be.
It’s a shame really. One more wicket in the middle-overs might have proved decisive. Had we dismissed Smith cheaply, the result could have been oh so different. The problem, obviously, is that our attack just doesn’t have enough firepower. Jimmy and Broad are working their way back from injury, Woakes is trying his best but will never be a world beater, while Finn was bowling military medium pace.
I’d be interested to hear from any bowling coaches out there. Why isn’t Finn’s bowling arm doing a full windmill? His arm seems to come from a funny angle when he’s delivering the ball, and I’m sure this is why his pace is down. There’s something very odd going on. He’s not utilising the full turning circle of his arm, unless it’s an optical illusion.
Over to you David Saker …
James Morgan
D
I am sorry to say that Bopara seems to be working his way out of the side…he is simply not contributing enough. This time a disappointing innings with a bizarre dismissal, and one over that went for a few runs, although he did take an outside edge.
Not really worth discussing, is it? England’s first XI gets taken down by a few Aussie first choice players, some from the second XI and even some from the third…
Australia are in pretty good nick at the moment, aren’t they?
Warner, Watson, Clarke, Bailey, Johnson all missing. I’d argue Hazlewood is one of the preferred pacemen at the moment. So that’s 5 first-choice players who weren’t there and possibly 6.
Smith is killing it. He wasn’t even considered to be in Australia’s best ODI side before the series against South Africa in November last year. That seems pretty unthinkable now.
You could make the argument that he’s ahead of Ponting and Clarke at the same age.
First captain (ever) to make a century on debut in both tests and ODI, I gather.
(A lot of batting records seem to be being made or broken these days; bowling not so much…)
Love to know how Smith transformed into quite such a machine.
England’s bowling strategy fails when there isn’t enough swing. We look toothless.
Not sure this can be fixed in the short term – it’s more a long term strategy failing.
However, I do think it’s incredibly unwise not to be testing out Tredwell in this environment. Either he’s simply not trusted and taking up a squad place better given to someone they will consider playing – or they are going to throw him into a vital WC match with no match practice and no sense from anyone whether he is easily gotten after by a batting lineup like the Aussies.
“Australia’s successful run chase had an air of inevitability about it”.
England have set Australia 300+ in ODIs five times since 2009 – Australia have won four of them. England have never successfully chased 300+ in an ODI against Australia.
On bowling coaching, there is a revelation on this week’s Switch Hit about the coaching of Moeen in Sri Lanka that left my flabber well and truly gasted……
Care to elaborate Simon. I haven’t seen this week’s Switch Hit yet. Cheers.
One of the panel (I think it was George Dobell) said that Moeen had been told to bowl with a more round-arm action in the first six SL ODIs. They (Dobell doesn’t say specifically who) were apparently concerned that batsmen would be able to get ‘under’ his deliveries and launch them. It sounds like they were trying to tamper with a bowler’s action again and doing so on the eve of a major competition with a purely defensive intent (Joe Root- style darts sound like what they wanted Moeen to bowl).
Moeen took 3/280 in the first six ODIs. In the last ODI he went back to how he usually bowls and took 2/39.
To be fair, wasn’t the whole purpose of the Sri Lanka tour to try out these kind of things?
I would prefer we didn’t tinker too much with our spinners. If they want someone to bowl darts they should’ve picked Yardy! Besides, I doubt Tredwell would flat. Giving it air can be a good thing. It’s surely all about variation?
Thanks for the word about variation. That’s my feeling. Not alone for once. :-)
The thing is, Mo is learning to be an international spinner ‘on the job’. We saw how he developed as a test spinner through the summer.
I’m pretty sure they would have worked on the round arm stuff in nets/practice, so surely it was worthwhile giving it a go in a match situation.
I see it as trying another variation rather than a ‘tinkering’. Not really a problem for me.
Third time lucky I hope. First time the letter D was posted without me pressing submit or anything. Wrote again and my post disappeared into the ether. Pout!
I liked Morgan’s post match comments.
Oh dear. It’s not my night. Sorry about all this.
Morgan suggested that we lost the game in our last ten overs and that we had not managed to get the ball to swing enough. Sounds like it was an honest and fair appraisal with huge credit to Bell of course. I did not see all of the game but caught up afterwards. It was a very exciting finish to be sure.
Was it the best tactic to have everyone round the bat for the last two overs?Might we have been better with a couple of bouncers? That would have been my preferred option but I speak in the ignorance of a spectator rather than as player with experience. I would appreciate a more qualified perspective on this.
I think it might be an idea to give Treadwell a chance. Our bowling attack is very samey. The problem is who to leave out. Given that Broad needs this time to hopefully play himself in, it will have to be either Finn or Woakes. Woakes is good at the death which Finn is not. He was also faster. I think it would have to be Finn. Sadly.
At least, as you wrote in your tweet, we can take comfort from the fact that we have not peaked too early. A brilliant observation!
Loved the pout. Sums it up perfectly for me. :-)
On the minus side:
1) Bowling still weak: no true pace (essential on non-swinging pitches), and selectors still leaving out our best spinner. Lack of IPL/BBL experience overall.
2) Batting still inconsistent, with no more than one player really firing at a time. Lack of IPL/BBL experience overall again.
3) No really strong all-rounders (guys who can score a quick 50 or 100, then turn around and take 3 wickets, consistently. Moeen is the closest thing we have, but he’s not there yet. Bopara should have been another Collingwood, but he’s slowly becoming more and more useless.).
On the plus side:
Scoring over 300 against the top ODI team in the world (something we wouldn’t have been able to do under Cook). Kudos to Bell, although I wonder why he doesn’t score big more often, given how good he is…
England are not a bad ODI side anymore, but we’ve got a hell of a lot of catching up with the rest of the world to do. This is what happens when you don’t take limited-overs cricket seriously between World Cups.
My biggest fear is that as soon as this World Cup is over (whatever the result), England will go back to not caring about limited-overs cricket until 2019, putting us even further behind everyone else.
Spot on. We are witnessing an England team starting to make up ground on the top ODI teams, too little too late for WC (which asks serious questions of the ECB scheduling and Ashes rejigging etc.)… my overriding feeling though is of relief that at least we have the makings of a side that can compete who knows even beat one or tow of the top sides which didn’t look likely just weeks ago
According to Hawkeye, there is nothing between Broad, Finn and Anderson at the moment. Woakes is slightly faster. Finn appeared to get more reverse swing than Anderson. When Anderson returned for his final spell, the way he was holding the ball suggested he was disgusted by its condition. But essentially there is no variety in the attack. If there is swing or the pitch is bouncy, then maybe England can compete, otherwise it comes down to hoping the opposition get themselves out. They really need Tredwell for the variety he offers. Someone needs to have a chat with Bopara too. He ought to be doing better than he is.
I thought England lost the initiative after White was out because they didn’t apply any pressure to Maxwell and Smith, particularly when Ali was bowling. At 95 for 3 Australia were unlikely to play any big shots and it was a chance to turn the screw and bring men in on the single.
In Ali’s two overs after White was out, his length balls on off / middle stump went for 10 singles to long on or deep mid wicket. When he tried to bring his length back he got cut for 4. Bopara and Finn were milked for singles and the odd two to deep square. Don’t understand the field settings.
In the five overs after White got out, Australia scored 44 – England bowled 5 dot balls. In the batting powerplay, when England were forced to bring the field in, Australia scored 30 – England bowled 12 dot balls and got a wicket.
Dot balls build pressure, pressure brings wickets. England need to be less afraid of making the oppo play big shots.
Is Broad’s bowling a major concern just yet?
You make a good point Hamish. I remember thinking the same think about giving easy singles away when Mo was bowling. I think they mentioned it on commentary too. Morgan is usually a pretty attacking captain so I was surprised and a bit disappointed.
I have been a bit surprised at the many tributes paid to Morgan’s captaincy because he didn’t do that well at Middlesex last summer. I do realise that in terms of high talent Middlesex do fall a bit short of the England side!
” I have been a bit surprised at the many tributes paid to Morgan’s captaincy ”
I have been utterly astounded by the by the endless tributes paid to Cooks captaincy for the last 2 years..
Oddly, both Cook and Morgan are captaining identically crap sides, with the notable exception that Morgan doesn’t have the liability of Cook’s batting at the top of the order.
Morgan did score a recent century, but prior to that it could be said that his own batting has been a bit of a liability to say the least. However, I do wish him every success.
If we are talking technicalities here, much as I love Cooky, I must have missed all that.
He did have a slip in, but surely the way to attack in ODIs is to get a ring round a batsman and put him under pressure, not just having a slip. I find it bemusing that a new batsman in a tricky situation against a spinner has 3 men on the boundary.
For me, the thing was that Smith was content to milk singles and only started to go for big shots as the innings closed. To a lesser extent, Maxwell did this too. English batters so rarely want to milk 6-7 runs per over without going for a big shot. When they did it, it was during the last 5 overs of the innings when they would have been excused attempting a few big shots to build a total. It suggests a lack of tactical awareness. How is it that Smith, so copiously reviled for his lack of technique by British journos, who has this awareness?
The problem was that England let him, and more importantly Maxwell, milk those singles.
Against the seamers, Smith was clearly shuffling across to off and clipping everything on or outside off to square leg – always a single, sometimes 2, no risk. If they had plugged that gap by bringing square leg up, they would have cut off a load of those easy, risk free shots and at least made him do something different.
Against Mo, there was one man in front of square on the on side stopping the single – again it was a risk free shot to clip a ball anywhere on or around off stump to long on or deep square with the spin. As soon as Mo went wider he got cut through the off side. Having mid on,mid-wicket and square leg on the single would have made them have to do something different, either go aerial or try to work the ball into the off side
Having gone from 75 for 0 to 92 for 3, Australia would have been feeling pressure and it frustrated me that England let them off the hook. Maxwell is talented but prone to ridiculous shots when tied down.
A nerdy stat for you – Smith hit 38 of the 95 balls he faced for singles between mid on and square leg, and another 5 for 2s – that’s almost half his runs.
On Broad’s bowling, with figures so far of 22.5-0-143-0 it should be a concern. Those who assert that he’ll be fine come the big stage might consider how often Broad was performed well overseas in recent years. Nick Knight keeps saying how he loves this strategy of bowling Broad in the middle overs but maybe he needs the extra help of the new ball at this stage of his career? The trouble is so does Anderson and it would be tough on Woakes to take the new ball off him.
Another we should be concerned about is Buttler. He looks out of sorts and has only made one ODI fifty since his 121 against SL at Lord’s (fifteen matches ago). Have teams worked him out – don’t give him any width? Is he having a crisis of confidence because Mark Taylor insists on calling him ‘Josh Buttler’ all the time? England’s middle order looks seriously underpowered without an in-form Buttler – no sixes again from any of them yesterday.
Hopefully that’ll reverse-jinx them into performing against India.
You have highlighted most of my worries.
Broad bowling under par is a real concern. Is he simply taking time to come back from injury or will he never be quite the same again? It would be interesting to see him with the new ball but I see the problem.
What to do about Ravi? So much glorious talent there but so hit and miss. If Ballsnce was fit I would rest or replace him. No other ideas.
I have a mind to bring in Tredwell for variety but who do we drop? Finn or Woakes? If Woakes were to be rested Broad could have a go with the new ball.
I’d actually bring Stokes in instead of Ravi. The mistake in Sri Lanka was that Stokes was competing with Woakes and Jordan who are both bowling all-rounders batting at 8 or 9 – Stokes is definitely a top 6 batsman who bowls, which makes him a replacement for Ravi.
Tough though, because Ravi has played as well as anybody over the last 12 months.
Hamish,
I would have picked Stokes as a bolter in my WC squad – but I understand why they left him out. Given what we have, I would have at least tried Hales and Bell up top with Moeen at six. I’m not a Bopara fan. Only ever makes runs batting second when the game is already lost. Seems to go missing when the game is on the line. His bowling is useful but not enough to cover his failings.
I’m torn on Tredwell. I think England’s bowling problem in ODI’s is that they don’t attack enough with the ball, and they don’t take enough wickets. Tredwell only makes that worse. But he’s usually our most economical bowler – so as I say, I’m torn.
Can’t understand how he hasn’t played a game on tour yet though. That makes no sense.
Was just reading the comment BTL at the Guardian. Noticed Selvey decided to pop his head BTL today.
ohdeer – Thepoetseye 5h ago
I thought Bell’s innings was superb. I thought England played really well, it was nail biting stuff. No offence intended i just thought the article treated the magnificent match winning innings of Smith a llittle lightly.
MikeSelvey – ohdeer 5h ago
STAFF
There you are, betraying a total ignorance of journalism in the digital age and the imperatives to get things online asap, with the capacity to rewrite later if necessary. But then you wouldn’t be able to make smartarse smug comments then would you.
Is it just me or Mike Selvey really has an attitude problem. I don’t think ‘ohdeer’ was anything but polite and at most mindly critical towards the article. It’s almost as if he has built a defence mechanism where any criticism (lets be fair, he has had hell of a lot of it, correctly mind you in the last year) is taken personally even if on this occasion he did not even write the article.
Oh and I agree with Ohdeer’s comments regarding the article.
It is not just you.
Where did this happen? Couldn’t see it on the match report thread. Do you have a link?
Selvey’s comment now appears to have been moderated which is (a) a first and (b) bloody hilarious.
Selvey? Moderated? Oh I really hope so. Maybe he just asked for it to be taken down because he realised it made him look like the idiot that he clearly is these days.
But it would be so much better if it were done without his consent.
Makes losing the ODI pretty much almost tolerable, in fact :)
“Maybe he just asked for it to be taken down because he realised it made him look like the idiot that he clearly is these days”.
He didn’t (see Dmitri’s). I suspect one can say beyond a death and taxes level of certitude that Selvey doesn’t realise what an idiot he is.
http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/jan/23/ian-bell-century-england-defeat-australia-tri-series#comment-46546134
Sorry – been a bit tied up elsewhere and dropped the ball on this one. Thanks for the updates, though. Perhaps not Selvey’s finest hour.
England have yet again safely removed defeat from the jaws of victory. While not pleasant, the feeling is familiar to all England supporters. It’s only what we’re used to. Like the Dickens character, we can feel comfortable in adversity because it give us something to be cheerful in spite of.
Nicely put, Zeph.
Here’s a stat which puts a lot into perspective. Bell and Moeen’s stand (of 113) was the first century stand by an England opening pair in ODIs since…January 2013.
As someone who didn’t see the game, I’m mainly wondering how well they bowled at Bell.
141 off 120 odd is a classy, classy knock regardless, but if he’s found his very best form rather than just a load of ordinary bowling it could make a major difference in the WC.
Not that I imagine anyone is counting but I’ve said here previously (and maybe shortly to be proved quite wrongly) that I’ve felt Bell too easily contained by decent bowling to consistently keep the innings moving at the rate that England ought to be looking for – certainly in situations where he’s the more attacking player, as in partnerships with Cook or Trott.
On the other hand, he’s also a rarely brilliant timer of the ball, and there have been streaks in his career – most notably the 2009 Ashes – when he has pulled out absolutely commanding performances under maximum pressure.
A string of run-a-ball 50+ knocks would be pretty useful right about now.
Just been catching up on all the comments after travelling for most of yesterday. So interesting and informative. A really great blog. Congrats to James and Maxie and all of you.
Thanks Jenny
“You don’t get more than 300 in three out of five games here so far without playing well”.
Peter Moores quoted in the Mail – he doesn’t mention that two were warm-up games and the other was a defeat.
Moores-the-Pity has missed his proper calling — as a minor level political spin doctor.
Well another rubbish pitch that denied us the opportunity to enjoy all round cricket.
Instead of watching a game that pits batting against bowling we saw a game that was decided between the better batting sides. I would love to see pitches that have something for the bowlers to work with.
Personally I enjoy hard fought low scoring games where the bowlers skill is on display rather than the slog fests that have been engendered by T20 wickets.
Ian,
Then you’d hate the way short form cricket is going. Huge bats. Postage stamp grounds. Flat decks. The game seems to have decided that an avalanche of sixes and fours is what it wants to put out there, and bowling seems very much an afterthought. We’re seeing the results of that in India where, apparently, all the players on the billboards with the huge advertising deals are batsmen – and India have a chronic shortage of decent bowlers.
To my mind, the gradual devaluation of the bowlers’ art, particularly in the one day formats, is a huge problem for the game. Nothing worse than seeing decent bowlers become glorified cannon fodder.
Very well said Kev.
That’s what T20 wants, and that’s what Bellerive has been tailored for over the past couple of years.
The sponsors want to see 3-4 boundaries per over, as that’s more exciting in the short format than dot balls and the occasional wicket. Naturally, the game (and ground) changes to suit.
Now when more than half of the games booked for your ground are T20, which style are you going to prepare the pitch for? Particularly at a ground like Bellerive, which hasn’t seen a 1st class test for what seems like forever.
Oh, I don’t blame them for the pitch they prepared at all. My issue isn’t with them – it’s with the sponsors who “want to see 3-4 boundaries an over”. That’s the way the game is going – and I hate it. Once you remove the balance between bat and ball, cricket just becomes an inferior version of baseball, with all of the brute force and none of the charm.
Hear, hear. The more you have of anything, the less value it holds. I have never seen the appeal of basketball because the scoring seems almost continuous – and hence a basket is no big deal.
A six is exciting if there’s one every now and again. Three sixes every over are not exciting.
Allowing thicker bats, and bringing in the boundary ropes, is a bit lile making the goals bigger in football.
Agree with you Maxie. With you all on this.
It’s a bloody shame and I hate it, the ropes ten metres in from the boundary and bats that resemble clubs. Wickets that have got all the life and vitality of Jimmy Saville.
I have always been fairly tolerant of one day cricket even though far to much of it is scheduled. I have never had a moment to spare for T20 a dogs breakfast of baseball, rounders and crickety stuff, utter crap in my opinion.
I opined many years ago at it’s inception that T20 would be the death of longer form cricket and sadly I see no reason to change my view.
Watched Perth Scorchers today in the BB SF? Andrew Tye as a batsman played out a final over maiden then as a bowler took 4/18 as the Scorchers won.
#batsmansgame
Ian,
Totally agree – sadly. I’m very pessimistic about the future of test cricket, save maybe England and Australia. To see empty grounds at Tests in West Indies and India is heartbreaking, as they have long been bucket list tours for me. The market seems to have spoken and they want a form of cricket that holds very little appeal for me.
I wholeheartedly agree with you both. It seems to be a sad portent of things to come.
Bloody hell I’m so depressed now I’m going to open a second bottle.
I think I’ll opt for a Shiraz followed by a Cognac to drowned the sorrows.
I have no idea about the pitch but agree with what you say about a batting slog fest and bowlers finding little to make it a fair contest between bat and ball.
England made 59/6 off the last ten overs. NZ made, wait for it, 122/0 in their last ten against SL on the same day.
For me the Morgan blackmail story raises weird questions. Why were the Met involved, when they have no jurisdiction? Were the Aussie police involved? Has the blackmailer been banged up?
Answers on a postcard please.
To be fair on the LiveECB interview on the Independent website he acknowledges this
… and this was in reply to SimonH say Moores didnt mention that some of the 300+ scores were warm up games…
Yes I saw the video after writing the earlier post. Either Moores was donig a round of interviews and missed out the qualification in the one quoted in the Mail or he was selectively quoted (probably the latter).
I was more worried about the glossing over of the defeat than what happened in the warm-up games. England have been able to score 300 or thereabouts (especially early in a series) for a while. England made 300 in the 2nd ODI in ’13/14 and made 290s in the Lord’s ODI against SL and the 1st away ODI in SL.
What England aren’t doing is winning any of these games. We seem to be so hypnotized by Power Plays and run rates that the result of the match is almost being ignored.
amateur cricket is teh same.. It’s nto a balance between bat and ball. It’s a slog fest (not quite as good as pro’s but it is).. I’d say that’s yet another reason people are playing less.. slogging is fun for afew mins but gets boring very quickly.