The Abu Dhabi test might have been tediously boring for four and a half days, but it’s set the series up rather nicely. Although we’re frustrated England couldn’t quite force a win, deep down the team will be delighted with a draw. It’s the first time we’ve avoided defeat in the UAE, and one of the rare occasions we’ve avoided defeat in the first test of an overseas tours anywhere (in recent times).
I think Pakistan will also be somewhat pleased. They lost their best bowler, and trump card, on the eve of the match and it didn’t cost them. Misbah was absolutely furious that they didn’t have a like-for-like replacement ready to replace Yasir Shah. Pakistan went into the Abu Dhabi test with an attack the captain didn’t want. Defeat would’ve been a bitter blow and caused a great deal of bitterness inside the dressing room too.
Pakistan will also know they’ve got a contest on their hands now. I wouldn’t be surprised if they thought they’d roll England over. There’s no room for complacency this time. They would’ve learned their lesson and I expect them to bite back hard.
So what can we expect from this next test in oil rich Dubai? I suppose much depends on the pitch. If it’s another featherbed with less bounce than a blob of play doh it will probably be another boring match. If the pitch has a little something for everyone it should be fascinating.
Although England will be feeling confident after Abu Dhabi, I actually make Pakistan favourites for the second test. They might even be strong favourites. I think the last test was a bit of a freak occurrence – mainly because it all but nullified home advantage.
Pakistan’s attack should be a different proposition with Shah in the side and a more helpful pitch -especially as I still have severe doubts about many of our batsmen’s ability to play high class spin. The likes of Bairstow, Buttler, Stokes and Moeen don’t really have the defensive game to survive for long against the turning ball. They might prosper if they attack, and seize some initiative, but I can’t see them occupying the crease for long periods. We’ll see.
What’s more, although Cook is our best player of slow bowling, he’s never really faced quality leg-spin in his career before. Shah isn’t Shane Warne – he’s only played ten tests so far so maybe expectations are too high – but our skipper needs to prove he can anchor the side when the opposition’s ace is playing. Who knows what might have happened last summer if Ryan Harris was fit and available for Australia?
The positive thing, however, is that our attack no longer looks one-dimensional. Turning pitches might favour Pakistan but it could suit England’s spinners too; therefore home advantage will be somewhat mollified. I still think Pakistan’s batsmen will be better equipped to play England’s spinners than vice versa, but maybe Trevor Bayliss has given our inexperienced players a few pointers. Having coached Sri Lanka and travelled the world in his illustrious career, Bayliss is an oasis of knowledge in arid conditions.
I’d be interested to know how optimistic everyone is feeling. Although all things being even I expect Pakistan to win, I’m actually really looking forward to this game. Six months ago I would’ve been dreading it. I guess that’s progress.
I’m just really interested to see how our players perform. England are far from the finished article – you could say we’re in a development stage – so maybe the performance counts for more than the result. I’ll be happy if we merely compete well and show that we’re improving against the turning ball – something we haven’t done well since WG Grace was knee high to a grasshopper.
I’ll be particularly interested in Rashid’s performance. It’s emerged in recent days that Bayliss desperately wanted to get Adil involved in the Ashes. His hopes were dashed by the selectors – those traditional pillars of English conservatism.
England have so many all-rounders these days that there’s no reason why Rashid can’t play in all conditions. He’ll have to keep bowling well though. Everyone who’s followed England in the last decade knows that batsmen usually get a much longer rope than bowlers. And when the batsmen fail, it’s often a bowler that gets dropped.
Let’s hope Bayliss changes this too. Leg spinners need to be nurtured not tossed onto the scrapheap at the first sign of trouble.
James Morgan
NB Maxie and I are unlikely to be around much over the next few days, so please use this thread for discussion during the test too. We changed hosts last week so the site should be running a lot faster. However, if you’re having any problems please let us know by emailing james@thefulltoss.com. Thanks.
I’m excited for both Moeen and Rashid. A spinning pitch should let them show their talents.
However, I do think a spinning pitch will favour Pakistan overall.
Dubai pitches have produced results in 6 of the 8 matches there. The last Test there with NZ was a draw but not an arid one as Pakistan were only about 60 runs short of victory with 5 wickets left. Both SA and SL have thrashed Pakistan in Dubai in the not-too-distant past and Pakistan thumped Australia. The pitch is often quite helpful to all types of bowler on the first day before flattening out for the middle of the match and taking spin (although not usually lavishly) at the end.
Pakistan’s team will be interesting. If Azhar Ali is fit, how do they get him in the team? Someone has to move up to open one would think. A remark about a surprise selection has led to some speculation Aamir or Ajmal could be called up into the bowling attack. Another possibility is the off-spinner Bilal Asif whose action caused some controversy on the tour of Zimbabwe.
I also just wanted to register my extreme frustration at what’s being reported about the Olympic bid. The formats being suggested are ridiculous. T20 is obviously suitable but they seem to be offering anything but. It looks like they are trying to have the bid rejected so they can then blame the IOC. Alternatively, if the IOC accept indoor cricket or six-a-side (or beach cricket, or subbueto table cricket, or whatever) then the ECB and BCCI must be reckoning that the top players won’t be interested and they will retain control over them. Yet again those two boards are putting their narrow self-interest ahead of the health of the game. What a surprise, if you put Giles Clarke in charge….
Nice, generous article by Vic “whatever he read at Oxford, it certainly wasn’t wrist spin” Marks on Rashid:
http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/oct/20/adil-rashids-england-leg-spin-ignites-the-hopes-of-crickets-romantics
As far as holding his place is concerned, it ought to be taken into account that he’s something of an all rounder himself, though his batting can be as idiosyncratic as his bowling.
Looking forward to it. For me, the game rests on the performance of Ali and Rashid (particularly in the first innings). If they are able to get some key breakthroughs I fancy England to win the match.
If not, I think it’s a big ask to expect another 250 odd score from someone to haul us back in.
Taylor in for Bairstow is the only change I’d make; it would be a bit harsh on Bairstow to have a short run but I think the need for Taylor to be playing is greater than the need to ideally give Bairstow a good run. With this bowling-heavy line up I think England would benefit hugely from Taylor’s consistency.
Otherwise will be interesting to see how Cook and Ali do – it was interesting to see Ali play a lot more defensively and Cook come out of his shell to compensate. I think that was quite a smart approach by England and I think Ali on that occasion did his job okay as an opener.
Why not Taylor for Bell? I don’t see how Bell is managing to hold on to his place. He never should have been selected for this tour, as he is preventing “younger” (though not so young any more!) players from developing their Test Match skills. His fielding was abysmal in the last Test, and he looked so out of touch for most of his scratchy innings.
And if you include the dropped catches (not exactly an unusual occurrence for him in the slips), his run total was about minus 150…
Fair shout – I think for Bairstow is more plausible (although neither looks particularly likely).
I still hold out hope that Bell will make the number 3 spot his own for a couple of years before retiring but accept that his dip in form does hint at being terminal (and his fielding is a major concern – why is he at slip anyway?).
Nice piece as ever James, but pray tell: why do you diminish the world’s greatest game by spelling it with a lower-case t? This isn’t ruddy rugby you know!
Hi Rob. Ha! Call it stubbornness. I’ve never seen the need to capitalise it. It’s not really a name or a title as such (not in my book anyway) and I’ve always found it odd that ‘test’ should have a capital letter but not ‘cricket’. It’s got to be both or neither imho. Writing ‘Test cricket’ has always seemed odd to me. By the way, you’re the first person in the 6 year history of this blog to point that out :-)
We’ll agree to fundamentally disagree!
Nowt wrong with that :-)
I too share reservations about much of England’s batting line-up against a likely more proficient Pakistan attack and a pitch that at the very least should be moderately less unhelpful. I would add Bell too, to the list of England batsmen who are likely to not prosper against the turning ball.
That said hopefully England’s bowlers will enjoy a less barren pitch for more of the match and perhaps reap a bit of unncertainty that they sowed in the minds of the Pakistan batting in the second innings. I really was pleased when England decided to declare and have a go on the last day as there was never a better time to perhaps test a weary Pakistan side and also get the spinners to bowl some overs without much pressure on them. If they hadn’t taken any wickets it would have just been considered a ‘flat pitch’ and the game would have sauntered to a draw. However that of course didn’t happen and hopefully the spin duo will really believe in themselves.
Pakistan are strong favourites, our middle order still worries me against genuine mystery spin so you can never rule out the kind of collapse England specialise in.
I think we’ll go with the same team, but I’d consider Taylor for Bairstow as he is a better player of spin.
I’m fairly optimistic although a lot depends on winning the toss, I don’t think we can get away with conceding 500 again.
Taylor for Buttler or Bell would be more sensible.
I thought that the selectors chose the squad and the coach and captain chose the team from the squad. Surely Adil Rashid was in the Ashes squads, so …
A) Bayliss is talking through his hat about not being able to pick Rashid.
B) Cook called the shots and vetoed his selection (though he handled him OK in Abu Dhabi)
C) Somebody has misreported something.
What do we think?
I think the article on Bayliss, in which Rashid was discussed, appeared on cricinfo. It gave the impression that Bayliss was keen to include a leggie in all conditions but just about everyone else was against it. Maybe he didn’t want to start throwing his weight around when he was new in the job. I think Cook would’ve had a voice too, and one suspects he hasn’t really trusted Rashid in the past.