Beaten By The Better Team. So Where Does That Leave England?

There’s no shame in losing to the better team on the day. It’s frustrating but that’s life. The Windies were excellent throughout and England came up short. Kudos to them.

What’s worrying, however, is that England didn’t play particularly badly. We certainly weren’t at our best; but we weren’t at our horrifying worst either. Therefore, when you think about it, this defeat is actually quite hard to take.

The bottom line is this. England picked the best eleven cricketers in the land (well, eight or nine of them anyway) and they lost fairly and squarely to the team ranked 8th in the world (the lowest of the traditional major cricketing nations) at home. So what does that say about the state of English cricket?

We shouldn’t get carried away, of course. It’s just one game and the opposition are allowed to play well. What’s more, it wasn’t long ago that we won in South Africa. Then again, this came against the weakest South African team in living memory. And it wasn’t long ago that we lost in New Zealand and failed to win back the Ashes too.

Overall, therefore, I’m not quite sure how we should be feeling. Should we shrug off this defeat as five bad days at the office or lament a broader malaise? All I know is (a) those 12-1 odds on a West Indies series victory that I mentioned the other day look insanely generous now (as I suspected), and (b) England are still very much a team in transition.

The big question is this. How long is this bloody transition going to last? We’ve been ‘in transition’ since the 2013/14 Ashes whitewash and we’re still no better. Supporters are therefore allowed to feel a tad exasperated.

But before the post-mortem begins we need to give the West Indies the credit they deserve. Their bowling attack very much lived up to the hype, with Jason Holder and Shannon Gabriel to the fore, and their much maligned batsmen showed courage and somehow cobbled together enough runs. The fact they recovered from 27-3 (with one of their openers retired hurt too) displayed tremendous strength of character.

As I pointed out in my series preview, many of the West Indies players have better records against England than any other country. For some reason we seem to bring out the best in them. Yesterday’s star performer, Jermaine Blackwood, is one such example. His Test average might be a pretty dismal 31 overall but he averages as much as 55 against England.

At some point we’ll have to stop underestimating theses guys. After all, they’ve now won 4 of their last 6 Tests against us. Can they keep it up though? The won at Headingley on their last tour to England but lost the other two games by comfortable margins.

So now we come to England. Sigh. Maybe this defeat was written in the Black Lives Matter stars? Or maybe we’re just not very good.

The inquest should begin with selection for this game. Should Stuart Broad have played? Of course. Even if one was intrigued by the prospect of pairing Wood with Archer (and I’d love to see this combination overseas) it was still poor to drop a bowler who’d performed so well in recent times.

At a time when some of Ed Smith’s favourite batsmen are enjoying chance after chance – Joe Denly < cough > and Jos Buttler < cough > – it was a terrible look to leave out the top wicket taker from South Africa. “It’s a batsman’s game, Wardy”.

Although I don’t think Broad’s absence made much difference in the second innings when the sun was out and the pitch looked decent for batting, I do think his absence on Thursday afternoon, when England desperately needed more than one wicket under overcast skies, was absolutely crucial. Conditions were ideal for Broad at that point. Had England taken more wickets at this crucial juncture then it would’ve been a completely different game.

It will be interesting to see if Broad comes back into the side for the second Test. And if so who should give way? Personally, I’d probably leave out Mark Wood as part of a rotation strategy. We need to keep Woody fit and fresh. However, I have so little faith in Chris Silverwood that I half expect him to omit Bess and play 5 seamers for the third time in his short tenure. If that happens I might well break the internet single-handedly!

When it comes to the batting it should obviously be a straight swap – Root for Denly. I don’t think even Ed Smith’s stubborn enough to keep backing Denly after Crawley’s fine 76 in the second innings. I believe Crawley has shown enough to earn a long run at No.3 (with Root slotting back in at 4). In fact, we need to quickly congratulate Smith for identifying a precocious young player despite his modest first class record. This is just the kind of thing that Duncan Fletcher used to do.

However, it’s hard to give Smith too much credit while Jos Buttler remains in the side. He’s still very much the enormous wooly mammoth in the (dressing) room. His footwork in the second innings was embarrassing and he simply has to deliver now. It’s getting absurd.

If Broad was pissed off on Wednesday morning then just imagine how Ben Foakes has felt every day for the last year. Smith’s obsession, man crush, infatuation, fetish, or idée fixe – Ed the intellectual would probably call it the latter – simply has to end. It’s not fair on the other players. The England team cannot claim to be a meritocracy while the vice captain (for this game at least) isn’t pulling his weight.

Jos Buttler should not play in the second Test. He doesn’t deserve to. It’s as simple as that. And yet everyone absolutely expects him to play regardless. Just think about that for a second.

Maybe Jos should do a press conference in the No.10 rose garden and explain why, despite everything, his retention is entirely ‘reasonable’. And maybe Ed Smith should drive to Barnard Castle to test his eyes while we’re at it.

James Morgan

36 comments

  • Good article. I think the defeat isn’t as bad as some (although not many) are making out. I think the toss had a big impact, but I can see what Stokes was thinking. Had we batted second in the better conditions then I think we would have won the game quite easily.
    Broad should have played, as should Foakes. Whether either will come in for OT, I don’t know. I have full confidence that we can win the series, but my money is on a draw at this stage.

  • I could not understand the logic of electing to bat on winning the toss in conditions that favoured the bowlers then compounding the error in leaving out one of our most effective bowlers in Broad.

    • Agreed, but it goes a bit farther. Having seen the weather for Wednesday England should have bowled (even with selected 11) or preferably bowled with both Broad and Woakes playing (even if this meant leaving out both Bess and Woods). I cannot understand the fetishistic focus on Broad, who is a good bowler best in seaming conditions. The conditions on Wednesday were best suited to swing bowling – and Woakes is as good as Anderson in English swing conditions.

      If Foakes is the most mistreated of England players then Woakes is not far behind. But I fully expect the dreadful Smith to repeat the selection of Archer and Wood at OT, backed up by the undroppable Buttler. Smith is the cricketing equivalent of Boris Johnson, an entitled posh buffoon who makes it all up on the hoof.

      • Except that–Smith didn’t select Archer and Wood last week. Silverwood and/or Stokes did. Smith selected Anderson, Archer, Wood, Broad and Woakes.

      • I struggle to see how Woakes has been so badly mistreated. He’s a player who has a very impressive looking record in England–but also one which looks considerably better because of one purple patch which lasted three months out of a seven-year test career, and to some extent by cleaning up a very weak Ireland batting line-up in eight overs last summer–and a truly terrible record elsewhere, other than one innings in Bangladesh. I guess you could argue that he should have played more in England (although when exactly?), but I can understand why, given that England have other good bowlers and that he’s never looked like being a match-winner abroad.

        I disagree about Smith, although I suspect I’m in a majority of one! Clearly he’s run with one or two ideas longer than he should, Buttler being the obvious example, but I feel I can usually see the logic is his selections–which I often couldn’t with Whittaker. I struggle to think of as many Smith howlers during his whole tenure so far as Whittaker made just on either the 2016 or 2017 tours.

        • As far as Smith is concerned his treatment of Foakes should be sufficient for him to find a place in one of the less pleasant circles of hell. However, other decisions include the recall of Keaton Jennings in 2019 and the inexplicable promotion of Craig Overton and Sam Curran as test cricketers. I do agree, however, that Whitakers selection of the likes of Crane, Dawson, Vince, Ball, Duckett, Westley and Stoneman takes some beating :)
          As far as Woakes is concerned the issues go back to 2010 and just after when he was told he had to add pace. This was despite bowling consistently in the low 80s (Anderson’s current pace, circa 2-3mph faster than Curran and quicker than two of the best bowlers in recent times – Philander and Holder). Strange how Curran was not asked to add pace. Woakes was actually a better bowler at the lower pace, but still remains the best in English conditions. 70 wickets in England at 23 is a fine return when he hardly ever sees the new ball, has had many isolated tests and has been treated as 5th choice on occasions by Root. Whether this has anything to do with the rumour that he was one of the players Pietersen was referring to when he told of some who did not want to play with the Prior clique, I do not know.

          • You may not think Sam Curran is a world beater but to describe his Test selection as inexplicable is a bit rich. He averages 27 with the bat and 31 with the ball which is pretty much exactly the same as Chris Woakes who you evidently do rate, judging by your constant championing of him. Not to mention that Curran has played all his Test matches thus far before the age of 22… and was picked by Virat Kohli as the Player of the Series after only making his debut the game before that India series. So hardly a selectorial disaster! And how do you know he hasn’t been asked to add pace?

            • Curran really is dire.. any test or red ball team with him in it must be really scraping the barrel

        • Yes, I can’t see this mania for making people bowl faster either. Wasn’t that part of the issue with James Harris too?

          It made me wonder what you think of the prospects of people like Porter and Coad as test bowlers–who generally seem to be considered too slow.

          The whole selection thing (also in the light of Simon’s comment below) make me wonder what the dynamics between selector and team are. For example, both the recall of Jennings in 2019 (luckily it only lasted one test…:-) and the dropping of Foakes in WI were on-tour decisions by the team management. I wonder if the failure to recall Foakes for the Ashes was because Smith knew that the team managmenet wanted Bairstow (and now want Buttler). Because it’s actually in Smith’s power to do it, isn’t it–just select a squad for a given test match (like: right now!–the original squad was only for Southampton) which includes Foakes but not Bairstow/Buttler. But maybe that would create too much of a rift with the management.

  • With the artificial nature of both preparation and play, you can’t read too much into this. The Windies, as often happens with the away side gelled as a team better than we did with both bat and ball. They have good seam bowling and bowled as a unit, credit to Holder for this, but if we’d taken our chances yesterday afternoon things could have easily been different. Once again it was left to Stokes to provide the challenge. There’s not much between these sides at present and we’re without our best batsman.
    How many more key catches and inept innings is Buttler going to be allowed to get away with. He played pretty well in the 1st inngs when we needed to take then on, but looked all at sea in the 2nd, like Denley, whose woeful knock could well have put paid to his test career, however he’s no failure as he helped put some steel back into our top order batting. His time spent at the crease should not be undervalued.
    Hopefully Broad will come back in for Wood, who on a responsive pitch didn’t deliver the wickets again.
    Apart from a couple of Archer spells, only Stokes looked like taking wickets. I worry about Anderson, as if the ball isn’t swinging he looks no real threat and Bess was merely useful even with the footmarks.

  • “Maybe this defeat was written in the Black Lives Matter stars?”

    Oh you card, James! I’m sure the ICC will investigate as zealously as the recent investigation into India’s 2011 WC win before acquitting everyone (there has just been an investigation into India’s 2011 WC win if you didn’t know – the UK media certainly didn’t tell you). Still, nothing fishy about all those dropped catches and missed run outs, eh?

    This was another effective four day Test. If it had been a real four day Test it would have been ruined and become a three day extended net. Remember that it would be a real four day Test if the ECB had their way.

    As for the “WI shouldn’t be underrated” narrative some are trying to spin, WI have won one Test in the last six years away from home against a team above them in the rankings except England (against Pakistan in the UAE). I would genuinely like to believe WI are having some sort of revival but come back to me when WI win a series or two abroad.

    Why is the world’s greatest all-rounder (TM) bringing himself on as the last option and bowling fewest overs? Botham and Flintoff had their flaws but can anyone imagine them doing this? If Stokes was injured, why is he injured when they’ve just had a lengthy enforced rest?

    • Just to be clear I wasn’t suggesting any kind of conspiracy! It just seemed apt that the Windies would win after Michael Holding’s emotional appearance on TV. Maybe the Windies were able to lift their game to some extent because of BLM. I really don’t know. It was just a throw away reference to the romance of sport and storylines.

    • Re Stokes not bowling, on TMS they said, I don’t know on what basis, that he had injured his foot and might not be able to bowl again in the second innings. Didn’t seem to hamper him much when he eventually did come on !

  • Good article. A couple of points on this WI team
    1 I don’t think Simmons has been given the credit he deserves. He and Holder have got this team to gel, to play as a team and to show resilience at times when other sides could have buckled. This side has shown great discipline, concentration and an ability to both bat and bowl in the way they need to given the match situation.
    2 Holder must be one of the personally impressive visiting captains we’ve seen for some time. He is so knowledgeable and articulate, as well as being exceptionally personable.

  • I agree on Buttler, I’d been willing to give him the benefit of the doubt for a bit, and I also understand where Smith was coming from; Buttler is such a talent in the short form, that it was an experiment worth conducting, and persevering with. However its been clear for a long time that Foakes is by far the better keeper, and Buttler hasn’t looked like scoring serious test runs for over a year, whereas Foakes has delivered when given the opportunity. Time for a change.

    As for Denly, I feel his run in the test team has been a moderate success, when viewed as a transition. He came in at a time when it seemed most of the batting lineup couldn’t hang on to their wicket, so his solidity was welcome. At that point, I think we’d all had enough of seeing 4 & 5 exposed to the new ball every innings. Runs were almost an afterthought (even if they are the aim of the game). Having someone who could see off some balls was essential. However the times have changed, now there are several players in the lineup who have shown they can bat serious time, so if Denly can’t now deliver scores, it’s time to move on.

    Hugely enjoyed this test match though, the Windies have a fantastic bowling lineup, should mean we see more tight contests over the next few weeks

    • Totally agree. I think Denly has done a decent job as a veteran stopgap. He’s batted stubbornly and hasn’t disgraced himself by any means. However, the very nature of stopgaps mean they should stand aside when a better player, or a player with more potential comes long. I think Crawley should play ahead of him now. And probably Dan Lawrence too.

  • Good post. However, for me, this game was lost by the batters – save for Pope twice, Denly in the first innings and Buttler in the second all got some sort of start but the only innings one could correctly call a major one by any of them was Crawley’s 76 in the second innings, and far too many of their wickets were given rather than being taken (nb the Windies bowled excellently, and this comment is not intended to take anything away from a well deserved victory for them).

    • If you’re going to point a finger at the reasons for the result, this game was lost more by the fielding than batting or bowling, as we dropped Blackwood 3 times and missed an easy run out. We had them on the ropes and our fielding let them off. You don’t win games with stats like that.

  • Well the Windies were far better prepared for this socially distanced Test. You know I’m not a tactical expert but as a long time watcher of the game it seems to me that the England of today thinks they are far better than they really are. It’s as though they believe their own hype, well Archer does anyway. Indulge me here; Looking at this team, Stokes is first on the page every time because much like Botham and Flintoff he has the uncanny ability to turn a game round, forget the stats because they have little relevance. Burns is a very good opener in the making, Crawley at 22 a good prospect at 3. Denly has been an efficient stop gap but isn’t the long term answer at 3. Anderson and yes Broad like it or not are ageing bowlers who seem to think they have an automatic right to always be selected. Personally out of Broad and Woakes I’d have picked the latter, who would bolster the lower order batting. Even a fit Curran would have been better. We had 3 number 11s in this game. When the batting is fragile you can’t expect them to dig you out. And Butler….well I think it’s all been said. It’s absurd to ignore the country’s best keeper because this guy is seemingly Smith’s pet project. And yes Root is an excellent bat, but a poor captain. I’d give it to Burns (discuss).

    • I was with you until I ot to the part about ‘even a fit Curran would have been better’. I have difficulty of thinking that even whilst agreeing about Anderson and Broad. Curran is a military medium swing bowler who only moves it one way and then from the hand rather than late.

      • Yes, although I was thinking more in terms of the left arm option and the lower order batting, mind you the top order is hardly doing the business.

    • Interesting comment about Archer believing his own hype… what exactly are you basing that assertion on Doug?

      • Well it presumably thinks he’s so good he can break the rules on team protocol. Now lost his place.

    • Yeah a Curran isn’t better than anyone.l hell, he shouldn’t be there jut like buttler, Bairstow or Moeen shouldn’t

  • Clearly it must been horrendous for Broad to be left out after such a productive year for England with the ball. However picking Wood and Archer together in the same team is not entirely without merit. If England are to win the test championship (or the Ashes down under) they are going to have to win in Australia and/or India. That’s not going to happen with Anderson and Broad as the focal point of the attack, particularly given Anderson is now 37. I could understand them dropping Wood for Broad but at the same time Wood hasn’t done a lot wrong. They’ll never drop Anderson though with the next test being at Old Trafford.

    It could also be argued that the bowling issue is a red herring. England arguably lost this test because, not for the first time, the batters didn’t put enough runs on the board. That has nothing to do with Broad’s non-selection.

  • WI played well but are not a good side. England again are over rated. We crow as if Burns is some great opener , Sibley some prodigious talent, denly is useless, Stokes is world class and will destroy everyone , Pope is the next messiah, buttler is such a talent that he’ll come off..

    Face facts.. burns avg is 30’s… Sibley doesn’t look anything great yet but does have time .. denly isn’t good enough but his job tbh is to chew balls as that’s what this side and formst needs from a top three.. Stokes is in a purple patch but is 29.. no spring chicken.. he needs to deliver consistently .. Pope looks good.. keep him t six and don’t start over promoting a middle order player ffs .. buttler.. well… who cares what someone’s white ball skills are.. this isn’t white ball.. time to go.. has been time to go for a long while.. like Bairstow and Moeen.. should never don the whites or a red ball selection panel again.

    Broad not playing was a mistake but these things happen.

    Archer isn’t white the messiah the media and ECB have made him out to be but again, let’s face it.. bowling stocks are thin on the ground

    England are the better teams and will win the series (asusming weather doesn’t interfere), but both sides aren’t very good and don’t look like being any good unless they suddenly unearth some quality players. Dan Lawrence .. is he the new messiah ??? Or another white ball middle Order player ?!?!?

    Very very enjoyable test match though, far better than a a lot of the one sided crap test and white ball cricket produces most of the time

  • Buttler averages just 31.79 in test matches, with only one century to his name. He is such a talent but just cannot deliver in the longer format. He missed a key chance too, when Blackwood was only on about 20. Foakes averages 41.50 in his five matches to date and is a much better keeper. How many more chances will Buttler get ? Ed Smith does seem to love Jos. I’d bring in Foakes now and leave Buttler to the ODI and T20 squad.
    One wonders how long the ageing Anderson and Broad can keep delivering for England and what bowling talent there is in the pipeline. Anderson seemed a bit jaded in the 2nd innings and remained wicketless.
    West Indies showed admirable application with bat and ball and deserved their win by 4 wickets. They now have a chance to win a series here for the first time in over 20 years.
    Too many of our batsmen threw their wickets away eg Burns, Sibley and Denly in the 2nd innings, rather than being done by unplayable deliveries. More application needed methinks. We had a longish tail in this match and I can see how Woakes would help in that department. You can’t afford to have rabbits at number 9 when your specialist batsmen are prone to batting collapses like the one in the 2nd innings.
    Keeping everyone fit and healthy is also key. So Broad coming in for Wood might be sensible for Old Trafford.
    Another example of low scoring test matches being more exciting than high scoring run fests on roads.

  • Wow, they’re already in the media making it clear Buttler won’t be dropped.

    I wouldn’t blame Ed Smith for this one (and as my comments about him have shown, I’m no fan). This goes higher up in my opinion.

  • Windies were definitely the better side and deserved to win, but I wouldn’t be too harsh on England. The batting failures in both innings were the key – too many got starts then got out both times. Can’t really blame the bowlers for being unable to defend 200 – Archer certainly did his best on an unresponsive pitch.

    Buttler must have something on Smith for him to keep getting picked – time to drop him from Tests for good and let him concentrate on being the best white ball batsman in the world. Denly has been a useful stopgap but he’s done his bit now and it’s time for Crawley to get a run in the side. Let’s take a look at the conditions before we decide on the bowlers.

  • WI’s win bonus if they win the series will amount to £23k for their entire squad whereas England’s bonus if they come back to win 2-1 will amount to about £32k per player. As always, when one of the Big Three play someone else there is only ever one real winner.

    Also, the PCA has just got through its third chairman in eight months. That’s convenient for the employers when the merde really hits the fan….

  • Silverwood has just uttered “we want to give Jos every chance to succeed this summer”. Is he a complete idiot? 40 Tests, 1 century ,lower average than Foakes, and a pretty 3rd rate keeper. He must have something over Silverwood and Smith for this nonsense to carry on. These people are bafoons, and that’s on a good day.

  • I am quietly optimistic. For the first time for a while I think the majority of us (?) would pick the same top 6;
    Burns
    Sibley
    Crawley
    Root
    Stokes
    Pope

    The top three, despite some ugly techniques, have all shown some promise allied to an aptitude to occupy the crease. Root, Stokes, Pope does inspire a little confidence. A definite improvement on Roy and Bairstow. They are inexperienced but have potential.

    We have a strong hand of seamer bowlers, finding the right mix should not be beyond England. Anderson/Woakes (swing), Broad seam, Archer/Wood pace have all contributed to visctories in the right conditions – plus there seems to be a few coming through Curran, Mahmood, Stone, etc.

    Even the spinners seem decent. I like Leach, but was impressed with Bess.

    Yes there are issues to be addressed. Not least the keeping and a relatively long tail, we effectively had 3 No. 11’s at the Rose Bowl. But (possibly despite the selectors) we are a developing team.

  • I’m dismayed to read that Buttler is likely to play, given that he is sveral kinds of dross. Presumably he must possess
    incriminating photos or other such evidence of management.
    We were repeatedly told by Sky that this was a riveting game, closely contested. No it bloody wasn’t – I was bored senseless most of the time..

    • Well I didn’t watch any more than the highlights. Don’t have Sky and find TMS poor quality these days. It did get better as the game progressed but it was a rather soulless affair, no atmosphere and really didn’t come over very well in an empty ground with the BBC lady commentator shouting a lot of the time rather like an echo. I’m not sure what you can deduce from it, apart from the fact that the Windies do look an improving side with some players who are prepared to knuckle down, unlike England, who don’t seem to learn, or indeed want to learn from others, who just do things better than them.

FOLLOW US ON TWITTER

copywriter copywriting