Well I give up. How do you make sense of this test series? Time and again, expectations are confounded.
At Cardiff, England were surprisingly good, and hammered Australia, who were surprisingly dismal. Then at Lord’s the script was torn up. England were dreadful and were pulverised by a brilliant Australia. But the visitors immediately surrendered every ounce of momentum, and then some. It was reasonable to expect the pendulum to swing back slightly, but not this.
When England win tomorrow morning , expect a lot of different people trying to take the credit. The press will likely heap encomia on Andrew Strauss, which would be total cobblers.
England’s sensational performance owes nothing to administrators, selectors, nor the captain. The addition of Bairstow has not proved relevant. The recall of Finn was forced upon them as a rather desperate punt which has paid off in a way no one could have predicted.
Neither did England bat especially well in their first innings. Lyth and Buttler are going nowhere. And of the three batsmen who established themselves, two gave away their wickets.
No, this match has been decided by tentative and often amateurish Australian batting in the face of sustained excellence by England’s pace trio. I’ve always argued that when Anderson is good, England are good, and so it’s proved here, especially in the tone-setting first innings. If the “tightness” in his side is revealed to be a significant injury, Australia will win the series.
The remarkable redemption of Steve Finn is a fantastic story, and on a human level, wonderful. It only goes to show what players can do when freed from the ECB’s Gradgrindian coaching laptop and allowed to be themselves.
This was the fiery, incisive, explosive performance which Finn was invented for but never remotely achieved, even on his better days. He first arrived at the England setup in a box marked ‘great fast bowler’, but the coaches either lost the instruction manual or mis-programmed him. They couldn’t get Finn working for love nor money. In the end he had to restore his own factory settings. But thanks to the reboot, he now does what it says on the tin.
His tame dismissal aside, Root looked a class apart. Pound for pound he is the best batsman on either side. Moeen Ali is a cricketer I’ve found increasingly unconvincing but today he played – after riding some early luck – his first truly redoubtable innings since Headingley last year.
In four Ashes tours Michael Clarke has only made one first-innings century, and never scored a ton in a match Australia went on to win. England has never been his happiest hunting ground, but even by his own standards he’s having a nightmare. Clarke looks shot. Have his eyes gone? The way he’s poking and prodding around suggests he’s struggling to pick up the line.
Elsewhere, Steve Smith is batting too high at number three when the ball is moving. Adam Voges looks out of his depth. Brad Haddin’s rearguards are being missed – as is Ryan Harris.
Finally, in a week when Cecil the Lion has dominated the headlines, I’ll leave you with a photo. Thanks to Emasl for flagging it up. The England players are about to get an extra couple of days off. Here’s how their captain spends his leisure time.
Assuming England win tomorrow, the last seven Tests will be:
WLWLWLW
According to Lawrence Booth on Sunday’s Cricket Writers on TV, that will be the longest such sequence in the history of Test cricket.
While I too have been unconvinced by a few of Moeen’s innings, don’t forget his first innings knock at Cardiff which also helped drag England out from throwing away an advantage. In the two tests England have dominated in, he has been pretty instrumental in those efforts.
A problem I do have however is Buttler – is he truly and honestly a Test player? His keeping has been good yes, not perfect but much better than most expected, but he seems too easy to bowl at and his only real innings of note came against a deflated India when England were 400 odd up. If Bairstow can transfer his county form into the last two tests here, do you think he could take up the gloves in place of Jos? I say this because England’s next tour is to the UAE to face Pakistan, where new revelation Legspinner Yasir Shah will be waiting, and dropping Buttler would allow Rashid to slip in, with Moeen moving to up a little, should two front line spinners (Mo included in that) be needed
So out of touch. I’ve read stacks of press this last month and Strauss has hardly been mentioned, no reason he will be tomorrow either.
But you’ve an agenda so far be it from me to stand in the way of it.
Sad.
So where have you been? Read this for a bit of shameless puffery.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/cricket/international/theashes/11737233/Ashes-2015-Andrew-Strauss-is-the-architect-of-Englands-victory-over-Australia.html
This is what gets our goats up
Never miss a chance to stick a boot into Cook or Strauss.
Do you still think the current Australian batting line-up is materially stronger than in 2009?
I may have to revise my view on that one!
And it was perhaps unwise to abandon all hope at 1-1 in a five-match series?
If only someone had been around to explain this to you at the time.
Disappointed in the picture of Cook. As you’d say, what a cheap shot.
Stick to the cricket. That’s what you are good at..
Is forcing Buttler to compromise his natural game in an attempt to play tests going to have the same long term effect as forcing Ballance to compromise his natural game in an attempt to play ODIs?
Why can’t we just accept that some players are better at some formats that others?
Well…I really don’t know what to say.
Really enjoy your blog – don’t agree with everything but if I did there wouldn’t be much point in reading it.
I detest hunting but honestly the picture of Cook was unnecessary in a cricket blog. Its going to be difficult to claim its not getting personal now.
Maxie,
I understand that you don’t like Cook. That is clear to see. However, the picture at the end was rather petty and doesn’t really have a place in a cricket blog in my opinion.
Rather than focusing on what has been a very positive day for England, you’ve unnecessarily resorted to vindictive comments about the ECB which are futile.
Just as a thought that TFT had turned a corner after a variety of highly analytical blogs by James that were enjoyable reads…
I think some people need to see the actual article from which the deer photo was taken in the first place. It might help explain why some of us are a bit pig-sick of constantly being told what a decent chap he is. It’s ‘Cult of Cook’ Exhibit A.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/cricket/article-1351189/Alastair-Cook-talks-life-outside-cricket-Ashes-heroics.html
That picture & article are from four and a half years ago.
To say that I’m not Cook’s greatest fan would be something of an understatement, but it does come over as a little out of place.
The recall of Finn wasn’t a “desperate punt”. He was in the squad and next in line. And he took his chance really well.
The big difference between Lords and Edgbaston is that at Lords apart from Stuart Broad our bowling was shocking. This time around it is the Aussies who don’t have all their bowlers firing.
The only disappointments for me from the England performance so far has been the soft ways Bell and Root got out when both looking very well set, Buttler not being able to play his natural game (is he scared of making a mistake?) and our lack of a world-class spinner. You have to feel for Bairstow. That bouncer from Johnson, and the subsequent one to Stokes, were absolutely awesome. Any batsman new to the crease would have struggled with them.
Lyth sadly is looking out of his depth.
Cook has done well as captain. I do mostly like this blog, but the chip on your shoulder about Cook and Strauss is starting to get a bit intolerable.
Chuck a few negatives out if you want ’em
Lyth probably isn’t good enough, a failure second time round would confirm it. but to a likely win, England could be stuck with him – don’t change a settled side – for the series…
Bell only got a 50, enough to keep him in for the summer. But really proved nowt.
Buttler can’t keep wicket, and that’s effecting his batting
Moeen’s not brilliant at much but his mediocrity is guaranteed a place.
Judgement reservec on Johnny.
Otherwise, ok
I think England really ought to stick with Lyth for the series, in any event.
He might not have what it takes to step up to test level, but not giving him more time would be to repeat the treatment given to Compton and Carberry.
If there was a replacement opener crying out for the place, then maybe I’d think differently, but there isn’t…. unless Compton or Carberry start hitting big centuries.
Well you might as well print pictures of Glenn McGrath, probably Ian Botham and plenty other cricketers who go hunting or shooting or even fishing if you like.
To single Cook out is unfair.
If the “tightness” in his side is revealed to be a significant injury, Australia will win the series…
While it will have a bearing on the odds, Anderson’s absence far from guarantees an Aussie win, particularly given Finn’s apparent redemption.
Rather more to the point is which Australia turns up in Nottingham. If their middle order continues its dismal showing, and if their seamers again lose their form, then England have a very decent chance.
The batting on both sides has often been so far below what the players are capable of, it makes predictions rather difficult.
“While it will have a bearing on the odds, Anderson’s absence far from guarantees an Aussie win, particularly given Finn’s apparent redemption.”
It’s been one match.
The recent proliferation of ads on this blog indicates it’s less about cricket now than about the ££££ from page hits by use of ‘shock tactics’. Hence, no doubt, the totally gratuitous use of the Cook picture. But do give Elaine Simpson-Long, @Brooksideelaine, full credit rather than just ‘Emasl’. Or is she ashamed? Probably not….
Pam. You have no idea. This blog takes absolutely ages to run. I am a freelancer and I’m trying to recoup our costs. I have a kid on the way (due in 2 weeks) and my wife, who until recently was the main breadwinner, has had to give up work.
This blog has run for 6 years or so, and the ads have been up for a single month. Thus far they have earned nothing. Zero. It’s all arranged on an affiliate basis, like the ads on a lot of blogs, and we get a small cut from any sales they make. Thus far, not a single sale; therefore it’s an experiment that may not last. Oh, and just for the record, they had nothing to do with Maxie. It was all my idea.
If you knew anything about online marketing you’d know that ads like ours are not lucrative in the slightest. We’re talking peanuts. And they’re all weighted in the advertisers’ favour and give publishers a terrible deal. That’s why sites like the Telegraph have all those links to random ’10 most embarrassing haircuts’ articles. They have to.
This is a cricket forum, Maxie and I have very different views, and we publish all kinds of viewpoints. If you don’t like what Maxie says that’s tough. It’s his view and he’s entitled to it. If you read my posts you’d know there is no agenda. I’ve been very supportive of the team.
I hadn’t even noticed the ads.
Why don’t you have a “donate button”? I suspect many of your readers would be happy to contribute to your costs.
That’s a kind thought, DLP, and in fact we do have one, which we put up years ago and then forgot about.
But I don’t want to go down that road. There are an infinite number of worthier causes for donations than a cricket blog.
Thanks mate :-)
Whatever James. You’ve just got dollar signs in your eyes. Everyone knows that posting photos of Cook with dead animals is where the big bucks are at when it comes to cricket blogging.
I assume you’ll be selling out to Viacom in a matter of days now.
I must confess. I love money more than the ECB. In fact, my long term goal is to hide TFT behind a paywall like Sky and The Times. I’ll share the spoils with George W. Bush and Rupert Murdoch :-) my best mates!
I have never made a single penny from The Full Toss, nor have even tried to.
However, we have to pay for a domain name, a host, WordPress fees, and graphic design.
On the deer front, as Arron points out, if it was a legitimate for sports writer in a national newspaper to use the photo in a piece, on the sports pages, about Cook the man outside cricket, why is not legitimate to reference it here?
Cook posed for the photo and put it into the public domain.
What I strive to do here is hold cricketing authority to account, and that includes the captain. Much of Cook’s legitimacy is built around his supposed character – his virtue, and goodness. So his character and lifestyle *is* an issue, because the ECB and supportive journalists – not me – have made it so.
Botham is irrelevant because the TCCB never testified to his wholesome character – which even with their powers of double-speak would have been tricky.
Cook has done nothing illegal and many people have no problem with deer culling. But in a week when the killing of an animal for sport has made international headlines, I believe this image of Cook is striking and thought-provoking.
Surely that’s the problem though Maxie? The fact that this is supposedly a day 2 review, in which Cook barely featured, and the administration even less so, but both have still played a major part in the article?
Sure the picture is relevant in a ‘this is kind of similar to something that happened in the public domain this week’ way, but is absolutely irrelevant in the context of the article.
There’s a time and a place to question the authorities, the administration, and indeed the captain. This was not it.
I hear what you’re saying. But I stand by it. The Cecil story has currency right now, hence the relevance. My match-day reports have always been loosely defined and often refer to off-field or previous events. But in this instance every other word of the copy was squarely about yesterday’s play.
Why would you come to someone else’s blog and complain about the content?
Fair enough, you’re paying for it so maybe ask for your money back. Oh, wait…
If these guys want to include photos of their knobs in the articles and write it all in Comic Sans, that’s up to them.
Don’t like it? Don’t read it.
And there I was thinking the comments section were for exactly that. Maybe not.
I never said I didn’t like it, I commented my opinion, as I’m entitled to.
My word…
Educate yourself, Maxie – here’s the Goverment advice for farmers with a specific section on deer culling:
http://www.forestry.gov.uk/PDF/fcpn6.pdf/$FILE/fcpn6.pdf
Those who don’t farm really are clueless.
Do they all smile after the kill? I think that’s the issue here. As for educating oneself, I think that’s a bit rich after your insulting and ignorant comments about money.
Ask yourself this Pam. What have we ever done to you? We leave you alone but you insist on spying on the blog and trolling us. People who hold a different view to you are not idiots. I’ve tried being courteous but you crossed a line yesterday.
If there’s a moral issue here it’s whether it’s right to cull animals and then smile about it, not whether it’s right to republish a photo that was published on the subject’s own Twitter feed anyway.
‘Spying on the blog’? I thought it was open to all & all views welcomed? Or is that only when the views are congratulatory?
Yes. Views on cricket Pam. You never offer any insight about the cricket, you just come on here and slag us off. It’s personal with you. Always has been.
The picture was on the tweet, by TFT, that came through my Twitter timeline – hence me commenting. I do absolutely agree that the picture is nothing to do with cricket. It was meant, I have no doubt, to be inflammatory – when you throw petrol on a fire you really shouldn’t be surprised when the flames burn you.
Did you read the article the picture came from? Cook was extremely proud of his handywork, got the picture framed the day after it was taken, and put it up on his wall. He’s the England captain. It’s perfectly legitimate for someone who is against shooting deer to talk about whether such a person is suitable for his role. Not that Maxie went that far.
How you can think that the moral issue here is Maxie having a dig, rather than the killing of the baby deer (and smiling about it) is beyond me.
By the way, Maxie would have absolutely no problem with the so called fire coming his way. I’m the one annoyed. Annoyed by your constant condemnation of this entire blog, regardless of how few articles of mine (and our numerous other guest writers) you’ve read, and your absurd suggestion that we run the blog for money.
I refuse to engage you any further. You’re simply not worth it. And you’re out of your depth.
Well said.
I actually think Anderson’s injury could be England’s McGrath moment from 2005. We don’t have the depth in strength go replace him.
LOL since you have predicted australia will win the series They sure aren’t!
You have become our weather man buddy, mostly will read up here and will know the opposite is gonna happen!
Maxie, please try and regain some objectivity. Using a four year old picture of Cook, just to jump on the bandwagon of the ‘Cecil’ story to score some cheap points just makes this blog look foolish. Adding this to your analogy of the amputee ex-serviceman really shows a lot of bitterness. James, please talk to him for the sake of what should be a really good blog…….
Thank you for your comment, Peter.
The main reason I keep the spotlight on Cook is not so much Cook himself as the super-structure around him. He is an establishment prop, but built on porous ground.
Giles Clarke said of Cook, justifying his position:
“He is a very determined guy, a very good role model and he and his family are very much the sort of people we want the England captain and his family to be”.
Is a man who publicly poses smiling with a gun and the corpse of an animal he’s just killed exactly the sort of person we want the England captain to be? Is it in keeping with his status as a role model?
Maybe, maybe not. But I think it’s a legitimate question to ask.
I don’t want to keep banging the same drum, however…
Even if it is a legitimate question to ask, the simple fact that you included it in this blog, slapped on the end of a day 2 review, means that whether or not you intended it to come across as objective, it doesn’t. It simply comes across as you continuing an agenda against Cook.
If you’d have written a separate article about Cook’s morals and compared them to this week’s news, and included the picture there, then fine, but you didn’t.
You have to see why the inclusion here doesn’t make sense, surely?! I’ve no doubt you’ll maintain your position on this, which you’re entitled to. But look at the vast majority of the comments…
Unfortunately you’ve just got this one wrong.
“It simply comes across as you continuing an agenda against Cook.”
Of course he’s got an ‘agenda’ against Cook, although I’d substitute the phrase ‘point-of-view’ for agenda. Either way, it’s not a secret. Rather, it’s openly declared.
These guys have an ongoing agenda against the ECB bullshit – and Cook is a front man for that. That’s their point-of-view and people read their stuff because it’s at odds with the various ECB lapdogs and water-carriers.
Again, if you don’t like it, go and read Paul Newman.
Again thanks for the advice Tom.
You’re a shining light in the world of “how to read and comment on blogs”.
For the record, i have no problem with the animal death picture being included, and believe the term you’re looking for is “topical”.
I also believe some commenters do not know what a blog is, and is not.
‘the main reason I keep the spotlight on Cook is not so much Cook himself…’
If you were in Cook’s shoes you might not see it that way. I find your sustained personal attack on Cook as uncomfortable as the picture you published.
It might be your intention to provoke which is fair enough but you run the risk of alienating as many people as you might bring to the blog. The more differing standpoints we have on here the better.
You are a brilliant writer with piercing insights and I respect you for that but I could never support what you did here. I initially found it very difficult to respond.
Maxie and I have only ever intended this blog to be a platform for fans to express their views. We don’t really care what these views are. It’s just all about discussion, and creating something different from the mainstream press.
We don’t have an editorial line, although we did agree that the KP sacking was wrong and badly handled, and I have no issue with Maxie publishing that photo. It’s just his opinion and his soapbox. He can do what he likes, just as everyone here can write what they like.
We’ve published lots of pro Cook stuff too over the years, included a tribute I wrote when he broke Gooch’s record, which was a fine achievement. I can understand why some people think the reference / photo was irrelevant, but I think I know why he did it. We don’t always have time to write as much as we like, so maybe he just wanted to shoehorn it in at the end as an aside (knowing another opportunity to mention it wouldn’t be forthcoming).
By the way, although I can understand why the picture annoyed people, the moral issue for me is surely whether shooting/culling deer is right, not whether a blog publishing a photo of the guy who did the shooting (with a big smile on his face) is right? Or is that a bit too logical for these crazy times?
I think you’re more good-natured than you need to be James.
If I were you, I’d be completely upfront about offering an alternative to the bullshit peddled by the ECB-friendly media. And I’d be completely unapolagetic about it.
There’s clearly an appetite for that. It is, after all, why people came to your blog in the first place.
If people don’t like it, tough shit. If you try to appeal to everyone, you end up appealing to no one.
As Churchill said: “You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.”
To be honest we’re just ourselves Tom. I’d like to think that Maxie appeals to some readers, and me to others. We just say what we think. I like the Churchill quote!
I do try, however, to separate the team from the administrators. I understand why some find that hard, but I’m used to it. I’ve spent years supporting Aston Villa despite the numerous egos (well, one I can think of in particular) irritating me with the way they run the club.
I wasn’t criticising you, James.
I’m just saying that if you wanted to tell dissenters where to go, I think you’ve got more than enough licence to do so.
But, as we know, the English are unfailingly polite.
Thanks Tom. I appreciate your support on this. I really can understand why people are upset, but I just happen to disagree. Had Selvey/Newman posted a picture of KP standing over the body of a dead animal with a big smile, I can imagine a very different reaction from some quarters. Of course, that works both ways I suppose.
James and Maxie have always written that everyone is welcome on their blog whether they agree with what they write or not. There are times when I don’t agree with either one of them and the reason I follow them is to see and understand a viewpoint that might be contrary to my own. I have no hesitation in stating a different view or taking either of them to task for something they might have written that I can’t agree with, or that I simply might not like. I have never felt unwelcome on the blog and have always been responded to with courtesy. I do not appreciate your attitude in the sense that if I don’t like what is posted I should go and read Paul Newman instead. I find it both patronising and insulting and not in the spirit of what I understand this blog to be about.
A load of you, many of them the usual suspects, don’t have a bloody scooby about the sheer bloody effort it takes to run a blog. If you think it’s about money, you must be totally, seriously deluded. I’ve been accused of all sorts over the last 18 months, including, hilariously, wanting to be a journalist!!!!
It’s something I do because I love the sport, believe it or not, and feel passionately about it. I know from speaking to Maxie in person, and James tons of times on Twitter DMs that they are exactly the same. It’s not to get everyone to agree with us, nor is it to write what the public want, although if people like it, that’s fantastic. But it’s meant to be thought provoking as well as heartfelt.
I’ve not put that picture up on my blog over the years, but was tempted to. I didn’t because I can’t abide those sorts of shots being inflicted on my timelines, so thought it wasn’t for me. But I won’t criticise someone, on their own blog, who does it. As Tom says above, don’t like it, go read Paul Newman.
The time you start writing a blog for someone else, is the day you lose your passion for the game that it is. I’m aware that I have a small, very small, dedicated bunch who comment on Being Outside Cricket, but it’s a great community, I love their comments, I enjoy the to and fro, and they do nothing but encourage me, and The Leg Glance, to be ourselves. No “agenda” other than my own.
Money? That’s even funnier than calling us the Moonies.
Thanks mate. To be honest, I feel uncomfortable that some people don’t like what they read in certain threads, but you really can’t please all the people all the time – and I agree it would be counterproductive to try to do so.
Cricket and cricket politics can be seriously polarising at times, but sitting on the fence in the name of objectivity, when you actually hold a passionate position on an issue, would be somewhat dishonest and against the spirit of the blog (and, as you say, why people came here in the first place).
Hopefully there’s enough of everything – serious analysis, passionate opinion and fun – to keep people reading over time. It’s probably naive to think that everyone is going to be happy with every article.
James,
I know the feeling when you press “publish” after a post that you know might cause some issues, and then you get the blowback. Should you stop writing those posts? No. Never. You write what you feel on a blog (I tone it down a little, as you don’t want to read effing and blinding, and my late mum wouldn’t have approved) but the subject matter is for you, and you alone.
My big problem with the picture is the “trophy” pose with a gun and a juvenile deer. I couldn’t give a flying one if there’s a cull or not. That’s not a good look. I’m not going to go into some hippy “all God’s creatures” diatribe because I’m having meat for dinner, but this maiden aunt reaction to some to it is hilarious. Yes, I’ll bring him into it… KP’s been over Twitter for a while now about conservation, and here’s our captain looking pleased as punch at shooting a juvenile deer. An interesting juxtaposition!
I wouldn’t worry about some of our usual suspects. They jumped the shark ages ago. Some keep their echo chamber from prying eyes, while we put it out there to be shot at (if you pardon the pun). Them’s the breaks. There is a reason we do, in our own small way, resonate……
Keep rolling!
This is precisely why I posted the original article, the first few paragraphs of which should provide all the context anyone needs to understand people’s revulsion. You really have to try very hard, or be spectacularly biased in the first place, to present that as a responsible individual carrying out a rural necessity. Sorry, but it’s there in black and white, and it isn’t good. At all.
Cook ”proud to be a member of the hunting community” was mainly about sponsorship, I think – he seems to have got involved as the face of a shooting agency. http://www.sporting-rifle.com/news/alastair-cook-pro-stalker/
So basically an ill-advised commercial venture.