Oh dear. Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.
It’s hard to imagine how yesterday could possibly have gone any more badly. Or how it could have been any less enjoyable for the live spectators at the Oval. I really had to feel for them yesterday, as there is no duller or less inspiring prospect in the whole of cricket than spending £75 to watch South Africans grind out an entire day of runs for the loss of just one wicket.
That fate befell me personally once, at the second day of the 2003 Lord’s test, which was remarkably similar to yesterday in both tone and substance. Graeme Smith batted all day, they scored about a million runs, and no wickets fell. Or something like that – it was so boring that I can’t really remember many of the details.
It’s hard enough to concentrate, as a live spectator at the ground, for an entire day’s play, as the beers rack up, let alone when the opposition are piling up a mountain of dreary runs. On that particular occasion I just zoned out, to the point where I left my seat and sought superior amusement in the bars, shops and museum. It must have been like that at the Oval yesterday.
There is no side we less enjoy prospering against us than South Africa. India or Pakistan is one thing. Even with Australia, there’s a hint of mutual respect and an awareness of tradition in the mix. But when it comes to the biltong-munchers, it’s just plain ghastly.
No affection is lost between us and the Saffers. To be frank, we hate each other, and this relationship is epitomised by our feelings towards Graeme Smith. He really is a hard man to feel fond about. When he reached his century, in my house at least, the celebrations were low key.
It’s difficult to imagine any circumstances in which, as England supporters, we’d feel happy for Smith. If he discovered a cure for cancer, we’d mutter a grudging ‘well done’ before trying to change the subject. If he rescued his children from a burning building, even then we’d congratulate him in the most reluctant and desultory way we could.
To the match itself, and we are staring down the barrel of a 200 run deficit, at least, and a grim fifth day fight for survival.
I’m not sure we bowled especially badly yesterday, but it’s clear our bowlers struggle to manufacture something out of nothing on very flat pitches. We have no ultra-pace to turn to, nor a mystery spinner. Our usual tactic, of drying up the runs, letting the pressure build, and waiting for the mistake, is not very effective against batsmen as good as these, who quite simply don’t make mistakes.
We were long overdue a day like yesterday – it’s been many a moon since a batting side have reduced us to hopelessness and helplessness. When was the last side we conceded 450, never mind 500? We can’t expect to control every match – perhaps this was just one of those things.
The pitch is unbelievably slow and lacking in assistance, and the whole match has been dominated by the ball except for the first session on Friday, when overhead conditions were very influential.
The awful situation we now find ourselves in results less from our docility with the ball than our failure to convert Thursday’s overnight position into a match-controlling total. We needed at least 475, and we fell short partly because of several soft dismissals, lapses of concentration, and maybe a touch of complacency.
Before this series, all the talk was of the dangers posed by Steyn and Morkel, forgetting that South Africa have built their recent success on the resolve of their top five batsmen. Amla was always likely to be a thorn in our side.
Yesterday, the Saffers batted flawlessly – perfect test match batting for the situation, displaying impeccable focus, concentration, and patience. As I said, these guys just don’t make mistakes, or at least very few. Can you imagine Jacques Kallis getting out the way Ravi Bopara did?
Maxie Allen
Spot on Maxie. Fitting skirting all day was more interesting.
The bowlers did an ok job on a very flat and slow wicket. Even the Saffers struggled with the ball on day one when england looked so imperious and people were talking about 500. So it is the batters failure to convert day one’s position into a big score that leaves England in this position.
The deficit is likely to be large and despite the docile nature of the pitch I fancy that England will struggle with the pressure of facing Morkle, Steyn and Tahir.
Oh and that last time someone got more than 500 against England? 2009 at Swansea. Or so said Malcolm Ashton on TMS yesterday.
Just my 2p, but this has been coming. Good bowling attacks do not let the likes of Sammy, Samuels, ramdin get tons (and let’s not forget tino best etc). My concern all along is that we would get outgunned by south africas hostile five man attack. We are just too inflexible and intransigent strategically. We got to number one by playing teams with flawed batting lineups with few world class players. Being patient and drying up the runs is all very well, but when we’ve faced truly world class players at the top of their game (hussey, dravid, Chanderpaul) the plan has come undone. South Africa have four such batsmen, and are by far the strongest batting team in the world. Eng refused to see the warning signs that three medium-fast seamers and an orthodox spinner (who is usually ineffective against right handers) isn’t going to hack it, and we’re paying the price.
Historically its mystery spin or genuine pace that wins test matches. We have to assume that Strauss and flower believe they know better. We don’t have an Ambrose or a Warne, so we need to change tact depending on conditions and the opposition. South Africa bowled well on Friday because they had pace and aggression. We just run up, dob it down at 80mph and hope the batsmen make a mistake. We are conservatism personified.
Good morning, great read this blog truly is. I’m personally a bit narked as to why they didn’t choose Steven Finn over Bresnan, Finn is the out and out pace you said the side lacked above, but didn’t question the selection. I’d personally like to see more of Finn in the test match arena, especially considering his ability to push towards the mid 90’s with the ball.
Personally, because eng have no international class batsman available to bat 6 (and we’ve been effectively playing with ten men for the last four series) I would have played 5 bowlers. Swann at 10 is just a little absurd! I rate Finn highly, but I don’t believe he would’ve made too much difference in a four man attack. That’s because history has shown that he bowls fast in his first spell, but soon tires and bowls little more than 80-85mph later in the day. To get the most out of Finn, he needs to be used as a strike bowler in short bursts (which is why he looks so good in ODIs). We shouldn’t rule out panesar either. Spinners have looked more effective on this pitch than englands seamers.
Yawn, back to the five bowler debate Morgs! England aren’t a world class batting outfit simple. It was why we lost to Pak in the winter and struggled against SL. It is also why we are behind here. Amla converted his hundred to three hundred, Cook got out, KP and Trott compare with Smith and Kallis.
Trott, KP and Cook all got themselves out (see criticism of KP in the last few blogs) and failed to convert starts into really big scores. If we’d got 500 first up the game would be in a very different position at the moment.
Of course England batsmen are not under massive pressure with a deficit of 250 and that will change things massively (oops Cook gone) but we might see how slow and flat this pitch is.
Oh teece. Yes, the batsmen are culpable too, but to exempt the bowlers from blame when a team has just scored 650-2 (or whatever) cannot be ignored. Nor can the fact that batsmen with frankly rubbish test records have scored runs against us this summer. Check out George dobell’s article on cricinfo. Medium pacers keeping things tight doesn’t work against top players. Never has, never will. England have done well in the field against teams like pak, India, windies because the advent of t20 cricket means many batsmen no longer have the patience and wherewithal to grind out test inns. We stick in the game, wait for a mistake, and these poor teams duly give their wickets away Willy nilly. You have to earn / create wickets against the best – which is why genuine pace and mystery spin historically wins test matches. England have forgotten this.
I’ve always wanted us to play 5 bowlers because we’ve effectively been playing with ten men for twelve months. We have no quality 6th batsman. Plus its obvious that we need more firepower, and to get Finn in the side. We don’t gave mystery spin, but we do have pace available. A seam attack of Anderson, broad, bresnan would be below average in any other era. The indisputable proof? Our two main seamers, broad and Anderson, have average records. In fact, their test averages (31ish) is worse than gough, caddick, cork and Fraser. Swann is an improvement over Giles / tuffnell, but in terms of our pace attack, the current xi is no better than it was ten years ago. It’s just that the opposition (SA excepted) is much worse. At least gough and caddick had a combination of pace and bounce.
You can’t imagine how Saturday could have been any worse? You don’t need to imagine, just have seen some of today.
Is it just my imagination, or have those posters who normally go on about how great today’s team is compared to others, not least Mike Atherton’s, have gone a touch quiet?
England are cooked. No way out of this one as far as I can see, unless they can manufacture their equivalent of a Kolkata turnaround.
Still early days in this series, but it looks like the #1 ranking is heading out. Sorry to say, English fans.