Can’t We All Just Get Along?

So how are we all feeling? My 48-hour hangover is finally receding and it’s time to address the future with a clear head.

England’s Ashes win was surprising and most welcome, but we’re still only halfway through the year’s gruelling schedule. The are tough trips to the UAE and South Africa coming up. If you’re not knackered by the end of it, then our players certainly will.

Although I’d love to bask in our Ashes glory for a little longer, I’ve run out of analytical fuel. There’s nothing more I can add. All the stuff about English pitches and Australian batting techniques has been done to death now. Therefore I’d like to turn to the future.

Over the coming days we’ll discuss what the Ashes has taught us, what we can expect during the next six months, and where England need to improve to compete all around the world.

However, first of all I’d like to say a few words about the reaction to England’s brilliant Ashes win, and what it means for supporter relations and the media (both mainstream and social) moving forward.

The first thing to say – and I’m extremely sad to say it – is that I don’t think the Ashes victory is going to mend fences and rebuild relationships in the way I’d hoped. On reflection, I think my article on Saturday was a tad optimistic.

This is such a shame. I’ve personally done my best to see different points of view, present a balanced perspective, find a middle ground and move on. But it seems as though other people – which includes a few journalists who should know better – are more interested in settling scores than mending fences.

We’ve seen a number of childish articles in the mainstream media arguing that England’s win, which was achieved in the positive and free-spirited style that the critics had called for, somehow actually confutes the critics. Hmmm. They’ll have to explain that one to me again.

The fact that the team recognised the need to play more positively, and that Alastair Cook has become a more proactive captain, shows that even the team itself recognised that the critics were right to an extent and that a change in approach was needed.

And what exactly has this Ashes win got to do with Paul Downton? It’s got more to do with my cat than the Dark Lord. In fact, my cat contributed more to England’s Ashes win by not screwing everything up for a year.

The same goes for all the people that troll us on Twitter. My article on Saturday gave Strauss enormous credit for sacking Moores, appointing Bayliss, retaining Farbrace, and helping the team to adopt a more positive mindset – something I didn’t think was possible when he was appointed. I’m now extremely comfortable with the thought of Strauss navigating the good ship England. Like the skipper, he’s proved he can change.

But what have I got for my trouble and my attempts to find a middle-ground? A bunch of people calling me Piers – yes, very clever, you’ve noticed we share a surname – who wrongly assumed I wanted England to lose and thought they’d rub my nose in it. You can tell which people actually read the blog regularly and those that don’t.

One bloke actually went through two days worth of our tweets (which must have numbered over a hundred) to find one example of our apparent negativity. He ignored the pictures of me drinking champagne, and going generally going nuts, and retweeted an old tweet out of context instead …

When Warner and Rogers were scoring runs for fun in the second innings, I’d jokingly tweeted ‘only England can screw this up’! I didn’t realise that having a laugh made me a nefarious horsefly with no more right to an opinion than a serf or a Mycenaean slave.

Surely it would be more constructive for all concerned to admit that the critics were right about some things, but not about others, and move on in the spirit of reconciliation? Instead all we’ve had is a load of bollocks about mobs and egg on faces. Are these people for real?

Because of this immature and misplaced response to England’s win, I think the backbiting and name-calling will continue I’m afraid. When are supporters going to realise that the real problem in all this was / is the ECB? They’re the ones who have alienated so many people – as Maxie’s passionate and very carefully worded article on Sunday demonstrated.

At the end of the day, people are being told to move on by people who, err, refuse to move on themselves.

Let’s just think about the last two years. The ECB are the ones who shafted the smaller countries at the ICC and made many fans embarrassed to call themselves English; they’re the ones who have sold the family jewels to Sky; and they’re the ones that made a pig’s ears of Pietersen’s sacking.

The ECB are also, and I can’t emphasise this enough, the ones who built Alastair Cook up into some kind of messiah, put unbearable pressure on him, and almost ruined his career. Cook became a target for so many people’s unrest last year because of comments – “the right sort of family” – that a high profile ECB official made. The board basically put a target on the poor bloke’s back.

I have nothing against Cook personally (as I’ve said many times before). He seems like an honest chap and I’d love to have a beer with him. I’m also a great admirer of his undoubted grit – perhaps it’s because I’m a sturdy opener myself.

However, the constant adulation he receives – something I’ve referred to in the past as the Cult of Cook – is somewhat reminiscent of a party political broadcast sometimes. It turns someone who should be a universally respected and popular cricketer, into something of a nauseating pin-up boy. Surprisingly enough, not a lot of discerning cricket fans particularly care for One Direction or Justin Bieber.

The first thing that Nasser Hussain said when Mark Wood knocked over Nathan Lyon’s stumps to secure the Ashes was “Redemption for Cook”! I’m sorry Nasser, but what about the other ten players? Cook himself stressed it was a team effort, but other people outside his control predictably made the captain the big story.

What about redemption for Joe Root – who did far more than anyone else to win us the Ashes with the bat (and who was actually dropped for performing poorly eighteen months ago)? Root is now the number one ranked batsman in the world. Cook deserves a lot of credit for the way he’s worked on both his batting technique and his captaincy, but the praise shouldn’t come at the expense of other major contributors.

Over the last few days we’ve had numerous people comparing Cook with Mike Brearley and WG Grace, as Cook has become the first England captain to win the Ashes at home twice. This is obviously completely over the top. I don’t remember Andrew Strauss, who captained England to number one in the world and our first ashes win in Australia since 1986, receiving praise anything like this.

What grinds many people’s gears is these pundits’ failure to mention that Cook’s two ‘historic’ Ashes wins came within the space of just three years, and were separated by a painful 0-5 whitewash. They also ignore the fact that Cook has scored the same amount of half-centuries in the series as Adam Voges. In fact, Cook’s continued poor Ashes record at home (no tons in fourteen tests at an average of about 30) was one of the more disappointing aspects of the series.

Sometimes I think that people give Cook so much praise because he’s a likeable bloke. The media want him to do well because he’s polite and courteous to them. On the other hand, I can understand why some people, ridiculous though it may sound, believe pundits are encouraged to big him up by officials.

When Cook was batting at Trent Bridge, he looked out of sorts. His movements seemed a little jerky again, he edged numerous deliveries through the slips, and he was dropped in his twenties. A few people on Twitter remarked how he was struggling a bit – but not Sky’s commentary team of course. They kept saying how solid and composed he looked.

Sanity was only restored when the brilliant Ricky Ponting (what a pleasant surprise he’s been) came into the commentary box and called a spade a spade: “Cook has been fighting with his game this afternoon”. The difference in the two portrayals, or perhaps I should say perceptions, was marked. It’s something I don’t understand.

Even the article that discussed deer culling on his farm, and how Cook immediately framed the picture of him posing with the luckless dead fawn, presented him as some kind of macho man taming the wilderness. The angle was bizarre to say the least. Perhaps that’s why I didn’t mind Maxie publishing it, even if it seemed like an unnecessary dig.

Anyway, I digress. The point I’m trying to make is that going on about Cook all the time isn’t going to heal any wounds either. It just antagonises the discontented. There is still this ridiculous perception that you’re either a KP fanboy or a Cook groupie. I’m not sure where that leaves people like me who are ambivalent about both.

In years gone by it was possible to love both Gower and Gooch. Making you a fan of one didn’t necessarily mean you hated the other. And what happens if you think they’re both pillocks? Not that I did by the way.

The truth is that England supporters still seem very divided – more than I’d originally hoped for or expected. The emotions are still high, and one wonders whether the cracks will open up again once Australia leave these shores.

In some way, the Aussies were the common enemy that united the majority in a common cause. It will be interested to see if the team is backed so vociferously when we play poor Pakistan, one of the impoverished sides that will suffer most from the Big Three ICC stitch up. A cynic might say this is exactly what India wanted.

Consequently, in the spirt of John Lennon, Gandhi, Buddha and any other pacifist that immediately springs to mind, I’d like to propose a truce between the two warring parties. Just behave, ok people?

At the end of the day, all genuine cricket fans want the same things: a successful England team, affordable ticket prices, the ability to watch the team on TV without paying an arm and a leg, transparent administration, accountable administrators, and a sport that’s growing worldwide. If you don’t want these things you need serious help.

We’ll all have a better chance of getting these things if we stop fighting amongst ourselves, forget all the bollocks, and direct our anger and frustrations at the real villains of the piece.

James Morgan

@DoctorCopy

57 comments

  • It’s a shame that in the space of 6Tests – two heavy defeats included – that Cook and England have suddenly gone from zero to hero! If they fail in the Middle East or S Africa where will the “pundits” go then?
    It’s a time for restraint for me. Great for Cook to have outwardly changed his approach, the real work starts now, just as it does after every Ashes victory.

  • This article is a bit like saying there should be balanced discussion of climate change. Give the looney deniers equal credibility and airtime to the serious scientists.
    Regardless of what you think of Cook and KP, the ECB has performed terribly, this is what grates and neds to be addressed. Cooks worst problems are of the ECBs making, dittto KP issues.
    Don’t focus on those two people, the man behind the curtin is the ECB.

  • KP was basically sacked for making the exact criticisms that have since been adopted and led directly to us winning the Ashes.

    He’s not going to get back into the team now and I don’t think anyone would want that, but it would be good for his critics at least be magnanimous enough to acknowledge that on reflection, he was right about the negative team culture and the deficiencies of the Flower/Moores extreme micromanagement method, after all.

    Moores was always delivering the message of “Flowerism”. Its time to acknowledge that the day Flower’s reign was effectively ended as head coach, was the day our potential as a cricket team suddenly tripled.

    • “KP was basically sacked for making the exact criticisms that have since been adopted and led directly to us winning the Ashes.”

      Really? Can we say that with any real conviction?

      “He’s not going to get back into the team now and I don’t think anyone would want that, but it would be good for his critics at least be magnanimous enough to acknowledge that on reflection, he was right about the negative team culture and the deficiencies of the Flower/Moores extreme micromanagement method, after all.”

      That would be cherry-picking, surely. Equally, you could say the ECB were right to sack him and move on without him. All the critics of the decision to sack him should admit those who made that decision were right after all. Would that be fair?

      “Its time to acknowledge that the day Flower’s reign was effectively ended as head coach, was the day our potential as a cricket team suddenly tripled.”

      Really? Why not quadrupled? Seems like hyperbole.

      • Your some man Tom I’ll give you that! I gave an opinion at KP a few weeks ago and you paraphrased and argued every single point I made for about two days. My points were completely invalid apparently. Sounds a bit like your agreeing with me now. England team haven’t missed him too much,just saying

        • “My points were completely invalid apparently.”

          Indeed.

          “Sounds a bit like your agreeing with me now.”

          Really? I don’t think I’ve said anywhere that the decision to sack KP was justified.

          “England team haven’t missed him too much”

          They won the Ashes without him. But that’s not the same as the decision to sack him being justified at the time. And, for the record, their top order still struggled.

  • Of course,but he was a contributing factor to that team culture, and I feel like people too easily dismiss the success under them.

    • I don’t think anyone should dismiss what Flower and Strauss did. They build one of the best modern England sides and we won down under! Hugely impressive. The regime just went on a little too long. It became stale, and we’ve only just reached the point where change has actually happened.

  • I left a comment or two BTL at the Telegraph regarding an article in which Cook admitted that stubborness can be taken too far. I said this was a good thing and fingers crossed for the future.

    I then received responses along the lines of KP not coming back. Get a life. Get over it etc etc

    I giveup

    • I had exactly the same response on Twitter when I posted this article. Something along the lines of “England won, you lost, get over it, KP isn’t coming back, Strauss is hero”. They have no idea who I am or what my position is. The mind boggles.

      Some people don’t appreciate that certain issues are complex and that feelings can be fixed. I don’t think they quite grasp what a nuanced argument is. It’s all ‘you’re either with us or against us’. Exactly what my article is trying to stop!

  • “The first thing to say – and I’m extremely sad to say it – is that I don’t think the Ashes victory is going to mend fences and rebuild relationships in the way I’d hoped. On reflection, I think my article on Saturday was a tad optimistic.

    This is such a shame. I’ve personally done my best to see different points of view, present a balanced perspective, find a middle ground and move on. But it seems as though other people – which includes a few journalists who should know better – are more interested in settling scores than mending fences.

    We’ve seen a number of childish articles in the mainstream media arguing that England’s win, which was achieved in the positive and free-spirited style that the critics had called for, somehow actually confutes the critics. Hmmm. They’ll have to explain that one to me again.”

    That’s one way of looking at it.

    Another way would be that you adopted a stance of exaggerated negativity but now that England have won, you still want an invitation to the party. You spent 18 months pissing in this team’s pockets, but now they’ve won you want high fives all round.

    You – like many – were adamant that England had gone down the wrong path. And maybe there was some truth in that. The decision to sack KP wasn’t justifiable at the time and you were right to point that out. But the end justifies the means.

    England won the Ashes when plenty – including you – felt they had little chance. If you want to ‘mend fences’, maybe you should start by admitting you got it wrong while your lords and masters knew better.

    You can’t celebrate the outcome while still insisting that all your objections along the way remain entirely valid. You can’t have it both ways.

    • Oh dear Tom. I’ve admitted plenty of times that I predicted Australia would win. Other than Ian Botham I can’t think of a single pundit who said otherwise. Even Mike Selvey predicted a 3-1 win to the Aussies.

      England’s Ashes win has absolutely nothing to do with good planning and it certainly doesn’t justify the events after the last Ashes. How can we tell this? Because they sacked the coach, Peter Moores, and the MD, Paul Downton, and started playing a completely different style of cricket, in the eve of the bloody tournament!

      As for wanting an invite to the party. Do you really think that having predicted Australia would win, all Englishmen then sit there hoping their prophecy comes true? Of course not. I think you underestimate the extent of the rivalry. And why do you think we ‘sniped from the sidelines’ as you so unfairly put it? It’s because we care deeply about the team and want them to win.

      • “Oh dear Tom. I’ve admitted plenty of times that I predicted Australia would win. Other than Ian Botham I can’t think of a single pundit who said otherwise. Even Mike Selvey predicted a 3-1 win to the Aussies.”

        Sure. But there are implications for being wrong i.e. you should admit other people knew better – in this case, the people running the cricket team. Their sense of what was happening and what needed to happen was more accurate than yours and that’s been borne out by events.

        “England’s Ashes win has absolutely nothing to do with good planning and it certainly doesn’t justify the events after the last Ashes. How can we tell this? Because they sacked the coach, Peter Moores, and the MD, Paul Downton, and started playing a completely different style of cricket, in the eve of the bloody tournament!”

        Mistakes were made but ultimately they got the result that mattered.

        It’s like you want to say ‘well, we were wrong about the result but right about everything else’.

        It’s the result that matters.

        “As for wanting an invite to the party. Do you really think that having predicted Australia would win, all Englishmen then sit there hoping their prophecy comes true?”

        Of course not. But now that your ‘prophecy’ has turned out to be false, the onus is on you to make concessions if you want to ‘mend fences’. After all, you were the one who was wrong.

        You can’t sit back and say ‘let’s all get along’ while expecting the people who actually got it right to concede. They’ve been vindicated – to an extent. You haven’t.

        “And why do you think we ‘sniped from the sidelines’ as you so unfairly put it?”

        That doesn’t sound like me.

        • They weren’t vindicated because the team started playing exactly how the critics wanted! The critics were vindicated. England picked exactly the side I wanted in the Ashes, I just felt that Australia would be too good. Nowt wrong with that.

          • “They weren’t vindicated because the team started playing exactly how the critics wanted!”

            That’s a little bit disingenuous. The criticism wasn’t only about ‘playing a certain way’.

            “The critics were vindicated.”

            Really? You spent the last 18 months insisting England were going down the wrong path but you now claim to be vindicated when they beat Australia?

            • Bar including KP this england team did everything else the critics have been harping for long. That too not many were 100% on wanting KP back as a must.

              SO first here is no such thing as vindication on both sides.

  • “If you want to ‘mend fences’, maybe you should start by admitting you got it wrong while your lords and masters knew better.”
    Are you serious with this sentence, or was it tounge in cheek?

  • Interesting article James, and the title of it although fanciful thinking I agree with 100%

    The problem(s) however you go on to describe, and a lot of people (on social media) can’t let go, or even worse revel in carrying on about them.
    You mention some of the cheerleading articles in the press this weekend, but the same goes for some of the anti-England blogs. They are just as bad, some of those popped up before England had sealed the series. Getting in their arguments for how nothing had changed or how it can’t excuse the past 18 months.

    It wasn’t the time for that, neither was it the time for over the top views in favour of England.

    Now I was one who predicted a win for England, so please forgive me if I revel in that for a few days. But the response I got to some of my joyful tweets was immediately trying to pour scorn on the winter ahead. Now I’ve followed cricket for long enough to know that we have 2 of the hardest tours coming up. What this has to do with enjoying a win over the Aussies on a sunny August afternoon I’m not so sure, but did it stop people no. Some of the best responses I had were from Australians, telling us that we shouldn’t focus on Australia, we should enjoy England’s confident, intense cricket over the last 2 weeks. English fans take note.

    If I must mention KP (sorry), then all I will say he has a lot of detractors out there, I remember reading a story (and it being backed up by someone who was there) about a Barmy army get together in Barbados where the decision to bring him back was being discussed. The answer an overwhelming “No Way”
    Many of these fans have had to put up with Piers Morgan, Mike Walters, Talksport and others writing England off, pourning scorn on our chances this summer. Hardly surprising there’s a bit of a reaction as they’ve been proved wrong.

    I actually don’t think England supporters are divided, it certainly didn’t feel that way at Edgbaston. The twitter/blogging community maybe. The wider public – no.

    It’s a shame Cook didn’t get that century at Lords as (TB apart) he has looked in decent nick, it is also a shame that Nasser was on comms for the final wicket. A personal friend of Cook he let his feelings get in the way. I imagine if Cook has heard it he’s rather embarrassed by it. But he’s captained well (even Warne has praised him) , looked fairly solid with the bat and got some big calls right. So he does deserve credit. Yes he’s lucky to have the job (should have been sacked 3 times) but he does have the job and will into the winter.

    The ECB, well I think this is something most fans are united. They aren’t running the game well. Some of the decisions over recent years have baffled everyone. BUT they need to be seperated from the team, I paid my £80 to go to Edgbaston to support the team, my country.. not it’s administrators.
    So yes blogs like this are vital in uncovering the skullduggery, bad decisions and incompetence but far too often it overshadows the cricket. There are plenty of days when there is no cricket for those blogs.

    As the most intense, controversial and downright crazy 2 years comes to a close, I hope we can pull together and back the team. In the Emirates & South Africa they are gonna need us.

    • Thanks for your contribution Neil. Just to clear things up, my article was speaking to all sides – not just those who were critical last year. It’s vitally important that everyone pulls together and targets the people who have caused this mess (both at home and at the ICC).

    • The “twitter/blogging community” are, or rather were, some of the most impassioned England supporters for decades. Me included (40+ years).
      But, alas, no more and never again. I actually wanted England to lose and Cook and Strauss to be humiliated. Just think about that for a second. I, who have intensely followed England since the days of Randall, Knott, Hendrick and Brearley, through Dilley, Willis, Botham, Tavare, R Smith, Gower, Gooch, Embury, Bob Taylor, the 90s the 2000s and into the 2010s.. now I want England to lose. Me of all people! These are the “twitter / blogging” folk that you dismissively and contemptuously refer to.

      • ” Me of all people! These are the “twitter / blogging” folk that you dismissively and contemptuously refer to”

        I’m sorry you took it that way. I’m in both and my observation many more people share your views online than they do at the grounds. In no way was it meant as a slight on you, I was just saying what I’ve experienced.

        • “I’m in both and my observation many more people share your views online than they do at the grounds.”

          Well of course. Why would anyone who shared his view go to the ground?

          It has the value of observing that, whilst it’s rumoured some people don’t like curry, everyone I’ve spoken to in curry houses seems to like curry.

    • We should revel in the win – perhaps even gloat (just as tiny bit). However, at some point we are going to admit that Australia were crap and many questions remain about this England team. At some point. Just not yet.

  • You shouldn’t be that surprised at the reaction to your joyful tweets. Especially considering how you treat people on Twitter who disagree with you.

    • I have no issue with people disagreeing with me, if I couldn’t handle people’s opinions I’d be nowhere near social media.

        • I can understand the gloating towards people who said England had no chance without KP but people saying we won the Ashes because KP was got rid of and because of team spirit are most definitely wrong.

          Let’s face it these Ashes have been won even with some passengers and it probably being a tour too far for this Aussie team.

          • I think those people probably never took to KP, and certainly wanted him gone after 2012. They probably said the same after beating India last summer.

        • I just think it’s rich for someone to have a go at you while using a full stop for a name.

  • Not hacked off but I did find it slightly laughable that you always say you want people to get on but seem to spend so much time arguing with people.

    • Fair enough, sometimes discussions do go on (and on) so I guess they do come across as arguments, especially when its the same conversation repeated as often happens.

  • […] James Morgan, today, tried to tread the middle path. I tried that last year when I was sick of all the rows, and nothing happened. Of course it didn’t. The schism remains, and neither side of it can wish it away. Wounds run too deep. They aren’t petty, they are deep. To see my blog described, and it’s mine and Maxie he’s having a pop at, as “anti-England”, I just get angrier and angrier. I do not see life through your damn prism, so don’t keep telling me you have it right. […]

  • Sadly I think it comes down to pitches. I am surprised that 2 counties so cash-strapped as Notts and Warks have been compliant in preparing pitches for a a result on day 3. Their paymasters must be reeling in shock – the charge-holders must be preparing to send in fore-closure notices on the grounds.. It would be interesting to know how much ECB money will flow their way as a result of these truncated Tests.

    I would regard this as a form of match fixing – if the ground remains solvent simply because of an ECB guarantee.

    • The pitches were fine. I’m sure the respective chairmen will be livid, but the groundsmen couldn’t help Neville shouldering arms to a straight ball, or Clarke being unable to defend a straight half-volley, nor two Australian batsmen edging balls they were trying to leave, nor any of the other utterly crap shots so many batsmen got out to.

      The general standard of batting (not just from Australia) was bloody awful, embarrassing. Test batsmen have been pampered with pancake flat pitches for years and they’re now terrified by the slightest hint of life.

      • The pitches were identical to English pitches throughout the 80s and 90s.

        Unfortunately this trend for “5 day pitches” has been self-defeating. All it has led to is dull games and batsmen with no defensive technique, which means that when you do get a half-decent track, the scores get lower and the games get shorter.

        They should have left things as they were – most tests used to go 4 or 5 days anyway, lively pitch or no lively pitch.

    • Simon Barnes, another excellent piece summing up the situation perfectly. The best writer on sport in my lifetime.

      Of course over at BOC they are ripping this piece to shreds.

FOLLOW US ON TWITTER

copywriter copywriting