Although England’s first team haven’t played for a while, and the Test series against Sri Lanka doesn’t start for another three weeks, there’s one tour I’ve been keeping my eye on carefully.
Yesterday the England Lions’ wrapped up a fantastic win against Australia A down under. Historically these tours have never been easy so the Lions’ success – which was very emphatic indeed – warms the cockles quite nicely.
What’s more, it was achieved despite a number of injuries. The captain Lewis Gregory missed the unofficial ‘Test’, as did Saqib Mahmood and Richard Gleeson, both of whom I hoped might play important roles.
The big success stories were Dom Sibley, who seems to be going from strength to strength, and the highly promising Dan Lawrence. Both scored hundreds in England’s first innings of 428, with Gloucestershire keeper James Bracey also making a useful 65. We might not produce too many genuine quicks or specialist spinners these days, but the conveyor belt of top wicket-keeping prospects seems to be ticking over quite nicely.
As for Lawrence, I imagine he’s now England’s primary middle-order reserve if the senior squad picks up an injury in Sri Lanka (or indeed next summer). He’s a very promising 22-year old indeed. As for Sibley, it might now be safe to assume that his success in South Africa wasn’t a flash in the pan.
Although it wasn’t the strongest Aussie bowling attack – it would have been very interesting to see the hugely talented Jhye Richardson play in this game – they still fielded Jackson Bird and the highly rated Mark Steketee and Michael Neser. The latter had a complete nightmare. It was therefore a pretty impressive effort from our lads.
Australia A never got close to England’s first innings total. They made an abysmal 176 and then 271 following on, and ultimately lost by 9 wickets. It must have been rather dispiriting for the Aussie selectors as on paper their batting looked slightly stronger than their bowling imho.
The Australia A side included Marcus Harris, who played in last year’s Ashes, plus the experienced Usman Khawja, Nic Maddison, Kurtis Patterson, and Moises Henriques – all of whom have played Test cricket. To get bowled out by a Lions attack missing several of their big guns was a humbling experience.
So who did the damage? The somewhat maligned Craig Overton and the ever reliable Ollie Robison, that’s who. They might not be the sexiest new ball partnership on the planet but they got the job done. South African born Brydon Carse also did a fine job as 3rd seamer. Dom Bess bowled tidily, as one might expect, as the spin bowler providing support.
Although one might attribute the excellent performance of England’s seamers to the pink ball (and the floodlights) they used in this game, the Australian bowlers weren’t able to make the same kind of inroads when Sibley and Lawrence were going strong on day one.
What’s more, although I’d much prefer England to pick our fastest bowlers on the next Ashes tour, it’s worth remembering that England’s attack in 2010/11 found success through discipline and bowling dry rather than fighting fire with fire. Food for thought perhaps?
Overall this Lions tour has been a massive success. The white ball team went undefeated and this is the first time ever that a Lion’s team has beaten Australia A in a first class game in Australia. There’s one more game to go, against a New South Wales XI, but with Sibley, Crawley and Jennings departing for Sri Lanka there’s less riding on this fixture. What’s more, it will give some of our other young batsmen a chance to impress.
It’s always interesting to keep an eye on emerging Aussie talent – and on this evidence it looks like they’ve got even more problems than England. Hmmmm.
Where have the great Australian batting reserves gone? The cupboard looks extraordinarily bare. Long gone are the days when an Aussie reserve side boasting the likes of Stuart Law, Michael Di Venuto, and Martin Love would’ve beaten most Test teams.
There seems to be very little behind Steve Smith, David Warner, and Marnus Labuschagne these days. Perhaps the white ball revolution is biting down under too? Whilst this is undoubtedly good news for England, it does make me worried about the future of first class cricket in general.
James Morgan
Whilst it is always pleasing to win, the England Lions selection passeth all understanding. There is zero chance of Robinson, Gregory or Overton ever being good enough to open the bowling at test level and Gleeson, whilst impressive, is now 32 – so hardly a prospect for the future. So England select these four as their attack, and leave out the likes of Saqib Mahmood and Henry Brookes – both 90mph plus quickies – who are both young and may be the future of an England attack. Then there is the question of why send Sibley for a meaningless knock in Australia when he has played constantly for 12 months and will be off to Sri Lanka with the main team. A short rest would have been much more sensible (as well as opening up the chance for someone else).
Let’s applaud the result but recognise that, yet again, the England selectors operate on a logic which seems utterly separated from the needs of the England test team.
Not sure I agree entirely this time Andy. Whilst I might have included Brooks in the red ball party, at least he was part of the white ball team. I also think Mahmood would have played the unofficial test if he was fit. I’d read that he was injured and had to pull out.
When you look at who else is available I’m not sure who else could have gone. Jamie Overton ahead of Craig, perhaps. And at least the selection of Robinson shows that county form will be rewarded.
By the way, I’m really glad that Sibley & Crawley went on the tour. We need to find out about these guys, and the experience in Australian conditions will do them good. They’ve only played a couple of games, so I doubt it’s taken much of a toll, and it’s important to have a look at our best younger players against Australia’s to see how they fare imho.
I had missed the Mahmood injury news. Thanks for the update. My view on Sibley (which applies to others) is based on my old athletics days. Everyone in training needs breaks or the workload becomes a negative factor. Today cricketers do so much fitness training (in addition to the cricket) that they need to be viewed as athletes. Admittedly this may not have applied in the past to players like Cowdrey or (more recently) Inzie!
On Sibley/Crawley my feeling is dependent on their personal circumstances – if in a committed relationship it seems ludicrous to go to NZ, SA, Aus & Sri Lanka in the “off season”. However, if young free and single it seems a sensible part of their development.
Dear Andy B, when I was young and fit, given the choice of playing cricket or ANYTHING ELSE, I’d always play cricket; and do you know what? the more I played, the better I played. Except for quick bowlers, cricketers resting is nonsense. Batsman and most bowlers alike (especially spinners) need to play as much as possible.
It is not the cricket which is the issue, it is the fitness training behind the cricket (which is a recent development). Try sitting in the stand to the left of the pavilion at Edgbaston and watch the players in the gym there. These days they train like athletes and need to be managed as such.
Again you have failed to spot the biggest cricket story of the day – the England women winning in Canberra, and Heather Knight becoming the first woman to score international hundreds in all three formats. This is a global tournament, not just a reserve team tour (and the reserve side in question, as highlighted above features several people who are not likely to be big successes at test level). Credit also to Pakistan who in the second half of the double header showed precisely how to handle a run chase, never at any stage looking like doing anything other than knock the runs off against the Windies.
Do centuries against Thailand count? Sorry Thomas but as I explained yesterday I don’t have time write about women’s cricket. I don’t have time to watch it and therefore I’m in no position to comment.
James I think Thomas is pulling your chain. To be honest a sixth form school team would hold more interest for me than this so called International cricket, although the Beeb seen to be obsessed by it.
As for the Lions- yeah well. I tend to agree with Andy B. Surely the Lions should be a stepping stone into tests and not for players who are never going to do that. And this Aussie side was hardly going to test Sibley or even Crawley.
Maybe it’s just me, but I find the fact that there is a winter indoor net at our local club this evening more interesting and newsworthy than I do the fact that England women have been playing Thailand at T20 regardless of who did what. Neither really, in my view, has any place on an otherwise interesting discussion thread about the Lions.
Women’s football is coming on a pace and has an identity of its own. You don’t watch it like you would the Mens professional game but there are definite skill levels that are every bit as good as the men. This is a result of the men’s game taking it seriously and providing the women with the club facilities and coaching. This has resulted, especially since the recent World Cup in decent attendances and a definite rise in profile.
Cricket is another story. Without the investment potential there is no sign to me watching this latest tournament that it is assuming any more credibility than watching decent club cricket. Counties are not adopting women’s teams to play at their grounds in the same way, so the women cannot get the experience necessary to raise standards and those that fall by the wayside have no alternative but to disappear into the nether world of club cricket and look elsewhere for ways to make a living. It’s the same crew playing for us year after year because much of the young talent does not have the support to mature. If they are struggling here what must it be like in most other cricketing countries, where spare cash is in even shorter supply.
Dan Lawrence must have established himself as the dreaded “next cab off the rank”.
Meanwhile it was amusing to see that well-known Welshman YJB being interviewed before the Wales’ rugby as the embodiment of Welsh Fire. Then they make a guy sacked for cheating last time he was captain captain (and he can’t even stay until the end of the competition). The farce goes on and on….
Perhaps a slight concern of mine is that Zak Crawley, after showing some promising signs in South Africa, didn’t make a score of substance in either the previous tour match or in the first innings of this game. I’m pleased enough with what the batsmen have done otherwise. I too am not so sure that the likes of Craig Overton will really prosper in test cricket, but it is fair to say that he’s obviously done very well on this tour and in this match against what seemed like a decent Aussie A batting line up.
I would prefer to see someone else have a go at 3, rather than Keaton Jennings who should simply be an Asia batting specialist at best. I wouldn’t have thought that selectors would be looking to pick him to play Cummins et al.
I’m not a Sussex supporter and I’ve never seen Ollie Robinson bowl but I think England would miss a trick if they just assumed that type of cricketer can’t succeed in tests. Vernon Philander averaged 22 and according to RedBallData was the fourth best test bowler of the last 50 years with another 80 mph maximum in Glenn McGrath in third. Admittedly, the rest of the 50 year top 20 was dominated by pace, so it’s certainly a good thing to have, but not essential. I do wonder, if Big Vern, with his traditional physique and lack of pace, had been English, would he have been written off as a county stalwart who just took loads of wickets and who never got close to playing tests ?
Also the thirst for pace leads to some very odd names being mentioned for England, I’m a Warwickshire supporter and have seen lots of Henry Brookes. He’s got some talent and I know he is very well thought of at the county, but he averaged 42 in first class cricket in 2019. Putting him into a high quality international “A” team game wouldn’t help anybody. JamIe Overton can ball fast for an over or two but is generally 82/84 mph and has no idea where it’s going.
AWTTK
I agree with your point about speed and Philander. I have often made a similar point in saying that Woakes could have been an English Philander as he was a better bowler at 80mph than 85mph. But I must disagree about Robinson and Brookes. I have only seen Robinson live once, but he looked utterly innocuous and Brookes 2019 was undoubtedly a recovery season following his back stress fracture. But he got stronger as the season closed. I would never favour pure speed over the ability to ‘do something’ with the ball – and that is why I prefer Brookes for the future over Stone (or Wood). Stone and Wood are both fast but get little or no movement. Brookes has the rare ability to move the ball at 90mph. But coming back to Philander; if an English version was available the selectors would just tell him to go away and add speed (as they did with Woakes), unless he happens to be a leftie from Surrey with lots of friends in high places.
Whilst ready to applaud the Lions victory, like Andy I can’t see how it leaves the England team any stronger. The fact that players who have not shown for the first team do,it for the reserves is not a reliable indication of improvement and the relative success of Sibley and Bess should be expected at a lower level so soon after their upbeat performances in South Africa. It’s a bit like saying the promising footie youngsters like Abraham and Mount are ready for the Seniors because they do well as under 21’s. I’m not convinced till they start showing consistent ability to,influence county games.
These tours are useful in providing experience of foreign conditions and seeing how players adapt, but I don’t believe they should be used above county form as an indicator of a player’s readiness for test cricket.
Colin Graves’ replacement at the ECB has been chosen according to the Times (leaking to a Murdoch rag being the traditional method of announcing such things). He failed at the FA and wasn’t seen as a strong personality.
The charitable view is this is the sort of guy you want for a period of consolidation after an era of upheaval; the not-so-charitable view is that he’s the guy you want to oversee a period of decline after the real power has moved elsewhere.
The crucial test will be if the 16.66 franchises get together (either with each other or overseas’ franchises) and out-muscle the ECB. I expect that they will before the decade is out.
Call me a traditionalist, but I’d really like to see the chair of the ECB having some background in professional cricket. I wonder if people like Atherton, Hussain and Stewart were sounded out–or even Strauss, although I’m not really a fan. I don’t quite get this “everything’s a business now so we need a businessperson” approach–that’s precisely the attitude which led to the Hundred and to the end of cricket on terrestrial TV.
I wonder how much other organisations do it. Would the Law Society appoint a chair whose contact with the law was limited to being a CAB volunteer over a high-performing solicitor, for example, just because the CAB worker had gone on to become a career diplomat or purveyor of cheapo wine/cheapo everything?