When we were growing up, the start of first test of the English summer was a moment to cherish. Hearing Richie Benaud’s voice for the first time in nearly nine months was like ‘putting on a pair of old jeans’ to quote our old friend Billy Birmingham. It was the perfect fit: summer days lazing at home, Gower scoring a sublime century, making fun of Gatting’s ever expanding waistline, and good old Richie, ever the master of understatement, smoothing over breaks in play with his intuitive but peculiarly expressed insights into the action. Those were the days.
Of course, it’s all change now. Richie has long since retired from English television, Lubo Gower is in the commentary box instead, and Mike Gatting is running a pie shop somewhere in Uxbridge (probably). These days we also seem to have unofficial warm-up series against weaker opposition. Last year it was the West Indies, who found Durham in May a little too hot (or should that be too cold) to handle. This summer it’s perennial whipping boys, Bangladesh, who we white-washed away from home before the T20 World Cup. As the result of these games is likely to be a formality, interest in this mini-series seems to be rather low. Therefore, we’d encourage everyone to think of these games as the beginning of a long campaign that builds up the first test at Brisbane on 25th November. That’s right folks, the journey towards the Ashes starts right now.
Winning a test series down under is the holy grail of English Cricket – so planning ought to start right away. That means no recalls for over-the-hill players and no short term horses-for-courses selections like Darren bloody Pattinson. We need to identify the bowlers and batsmen that can do a job against Australia and stick with them throughout the summer. So let’s give Steven Finn the experience he needs, even if the wicket looks like it’s going to suit swing bowlers. We will need a tall quickie in Australian conditions and the highly promising Middlesex youngster is the closest we’ve got. Meanwhile, let’s give Eoin Morgan the chance to prove he’s better than incumbents like Jonathan Trott. Selecting Morgan is an enormous gamble: he averaged just 24 in the championship last year. However, he has shown in limited overs cricket that he has the talent and temperament to succeed … let’s find out whether he can make the step up to Test cricket now.
Most of all, however, I’d like us to settle this six batsmen verses five bowlers dilemma. We need to work out what we are going to do and stick with it – so everybody knows their role before the Ashes begin. Last summer we beat Australia with five bowlers (and Prior batting at six). If this is going to be our strategy this winter, why are we toying with the idea of playing just four bowlers against Bangladesh? If Flower and Strauss think we need five bowlers to beat the Aussies (and presumably they won’t want to change last summer’s winning formula), Prior ought to be preparing to bat six right throughout the summer. However, last night the noises from the England camp suggested we were only going to play four bowlers – as the management feels that’s all we need to bowl Bangladesh out. Such logic is ridiculous. If Bangladesh are that weak, surely we only need five specialist batsmen (plus Prior, Bresnan, Broad and Swann) to get enough runs? It works both ways you know.
James Morgan
I disagree with England’s team selection. Trott is not a No3. Morgan is the replacement for Colly, so he should bat 5 (why move Bell to yet another new position). Also, the selection is so damn negative. We bat all the way down to 9!!!! Yet the bowling is thin. Finn does not bowl long spells and there is no Colly to be the 5th bowler. How is this planning towards the Ashes, when we will need 5 bowlers? So what if the middle order is under pressure (if we lose early wickets) – we need to see how the perform with extra responsibility. I cannot understand how we can win the Ashes with 5 bowlers then turn our back on a system that has brought us so much success … both last year and in 2005. Idiots.
I have this regular discussion with James -a 6th batsmen contributes far more often than a 5th bowler. KP, Colly and Trott can bowl 10 overs between them in a day and therefore, I would stick with the 6 batsmen / 4 bowler combination and therefore the best 4 bowlers can be picked, irrespective of batting capability.
I support the six batsmen argument. In an ideal situation, you bat as long as possible – therefore, the more batting you have, the greater your potential to bat big. But you do not want to bowl indefinitely: in fact you seek to bowl the opposition out quickly, and therefore as the number of overs you bowl are finite, why do you need a long bowling line up, unless your bowlers lack stamina?
As a supporting argument, do we really have so much confidence in our top five that we are happy to bat Prior at 6 and Broad at 7?
I’ve got to agree. As I’ve said before, in practice, when the bowlers play well, four bowlers is enough. When they play badly, you may as well have four bowlers bowling badly as five.
To beat Australia, England will need to regularly post four or five hundred-odd first innings. Although we won last year, the batting looked very light most of the series, and relied on Strauss and the tail to provide the runs.. We’ve got a good opening pair, but our middle order looks fragile a lot of the time. Prior’s batting has gone backwards, and I don’t think one could justify having him at six.