It just wouldn’t be England without some pre-World Cup drama. In previous years we made last minute changes to personnel because, well, the team was a bit crap and the selectors desperately hoped some new faces would turn the tide. This time, however, we’re facing a mini crisis because our governing body is a bit crap.
It’s typical isn’t it. Just as England get their on-field product sorted – we’re 5/2 favourites for the World Cup with most cricket betting sites – things off the field start to go belly-up. It’s not easy being an England cricket supporter sometimes.
It’s hard to see how the ECB could’ve handled this Hales controversy any worse. At one point I praised them on social media for playing things by the book and not letting outside pressure’s cloud their judgement. They banned Hales for 21 days – which is the standard protocol for a second drugs violation – and they seemed to be taking his delicate state of mind into account by keeping his problems private.
But I should’ve known this prudent and principled approach wouldn’t last.
Once the story got out the ECB panicked, wrongly assuming that England’s cricketers (in general) have a discipline problem, and wrongly assumed that the only way to avoid media criticism was to come down on Hales like a ton of bricks. So they immediately dropped him from the squad – which was something they promised the player they would not do – and then spouted some rubbish about Hales risking team harmony and becoming a potential distraction.
The reasons given for Hales’s axing were cynical and disingenuous even by the ECB’s standards. If they thought his presence in the squad was likely to cause a problem then they would have dropped him straight away as soon as he failed the test. Instead they only decided he was a problem once the story was all over the newspapers.
One can only conclude, therefore, that the real reason was their determination to look tough on drugs and portray the England brand (and cricket in general) as whiter-than-white. It hardly seems fair. Justice should be consistent whether matters are private or public.
The ECB decided to purge Hales because they want to use the World Cup as an opportunity to increase the game’s popularity, improve its image, and reverse falling participations levels – something the ECB themselves caused when they foolishly decided to take live cricket off free-to-air television over a decade ago. They’ve been playing catch-up since.
The ECB want nothing, absolutely nothing, to stain what they hope will be a glorious year for English cricket. And it appears they’re quite prepared to break their word and sacrifice their duty of care to the troubled Hales to achieve this end. After all, if England win the World Cup and the subsequent Ashes series they can pose as progressive and successful administrators of our wonderful sport. The truth whatever the outcome, of course, is that the very opposite is true.
But I don’t want to cry over spilt milk today. Hales has been dropped (something that wouldn’t have happened if he’d kept his nose squeaky clean) and thoughts must now turn to his potential replacements – one of whom, rather ironically, is Ben Duckett. Interesting isn’t it? If squad harmony is so important then why have they replaced one potential distraction with a player who was sent home from an Ashes tour for being a distraction less than 18 months ago? Hmmmm.
Anyway, today I’d like to discuss who you would like to see as Hales’s replacement – in other words, the first batsman off the bench in the event of injury. Is Duckett the right man? Or would you prefer James Vince? Or even someone else not currently in the squad?
It’s a tricky decision this. Duckett has opened regularly in white ball cricket in the past but he’s currently batting 3 for Notts in the Royal London One Day Cup. He’s a very talented shot-maker but hasn’t been in the best of form so far this year. He’s made one half century for Notts in five white ball outings. And he’s only made one 50 in the championship too, although he did make some notable contributions for the Lions in India this winter.
Perhaps a better like-for-like replacement would be James Vince, an elegant player who has immense talent but a somewhat flakey temperament. If it comes down to form then Vince is surely a shoo-in. He has been in sparkling form in recent weeks with scores of 56, 95, 14, 190, and 47. Those are pretty big numbers. Perhaps he’s finally putting it all together? English batsmen often mature later than some of their international contemporaries so it wouldn’t be a complete surprise if Vince finally figured out his game at the age of 28.
The other batsman who’s been named in the squad to play Ireland is Dawid Malan. I like this selection a lot. Malan didn’t quite have what it takes at test level but he’s always been a better white ball player than a red ball one. His career stats back this up. He averages an underwhelming 37 in first class cricket but a petty perky 42 in the 50-over stuff.
Although Malan has yet to play an ODI for England, he’s made 4 half-centuries in 5 international T20s at an astonishing average of 50 with a strike-rate of 150. That’s quality by any standard. He’s certainly got the shots. And we also know he’s got the temperament to play longer innings and adapt too.
If England were to pick up an injury in the middle-order (say Eoin Morgan gets a knock) then Malan would be my first choice to replace him. He’s a very mature cricketer and he possesses a calm demeanour at the crease. The problem, of course, is that England might be looking for a top order batsman if they want a like-for-like Hales replacement.
As a result, Vince is probably my preferred option. The Hampshire captain can basically slot into any of the top 5 positions in the batting order and not look out of place. The only problem is his modest record in international cricket (in all formats). Can he finally crack it? He’ll have to score runs against Pakistan to convince me. If he struggles then I’d move on to either Duckett, who is high risk – high reward pick, or someone else capable of opening.
With Joe Clarke currently on the naughty step and about as likely to play in this World Cup as Alex Hales – if the ECB want whiter than white then young Joe has a Dothraki’s chance in Winterfell of being selected – there aren’t too many options to choose from. One name we should put out there, however, is Sam Hain from Warwickshire.
After his huge ton against Worcestershire at the weekend, Hain’s career List A average rose to the dizzy heights of 59. Apparently that’s the highest domestic white ball average in history for a batsman who’s played over fifty innings. Virat Kohli eat your heart out! The Indian skipper averages a modest (ahem) 58 in comparison.
Would you take a gamble on someone like Hain or have the selectors already identified the best candidate?
James Morgan
Written in collaboration with Best Betting Sites Online
And Stokes / Hales could be reintegrated after bringing the ECB / cricket in a fair bit more disrepute in Bristol? Or is punching / kicking not a discipline issue? And if discipline is an issue why is anyone who pissed on the pitch in 2013 still in the team?
As for who England should pick. I don’t know. I would however pick several candidates, and let the incumbent sit out for a bit (with the assurance that they will be picked, of course), so that you can try several candidates, rather than just one.
We shouldn’t forget that Stokes was acquitted. He was also dropped for the Ashes and served his ban. But I get your point.
Was the urinating on the pitch thing in 2013? I thought it was 2009. Time goes so fast now that I’m losing track :-)
I don’t get your point as Hales allegedly kicked him after Stokes knocked him down. If true Hales was therefore lucky not to be charged as well imho. This only came out during the court case and examination of video.
There was pissing on the pitch after securing the 2013 Ashes – and several offenders are still representing England. No discipline issues there.
Then there was looking out of a window during a meeting. Major discipline issues there. In fact it made the offender unselectable.
Punches lost a bout against a locker. No discipline issues there.
Panesar pissed on a bouncer. Discipline issues there.
Then there was calling an opposing captain a fat prick, and whatnot. The ECB rallied to the defense of the offender. No discipline issues there. But if Australians do the same thing, it is inhumane sledging or something of the sort. Right.
I’ll skip all the drinking bouts, since half of England U-21 / exciting prospects seem to be having such issues. Major issues there then, becoming unselectable in the process. Unless you go and knock someone senseless. Which then means the ECB are itching to keep picking the serial offenders, instead of declaring such numbskulls unselectable. But clearly looking out of a window is a far worse offense.
James, my question is: Stokes was acquitted. Fair enough. But, pray tell me, what will the sentencing be for the crime of looking out of a window? Surely it does not take 6 years or more for such a massive criminal case to start?
Looking out of the window is a life ban. Everyone knows that ;-)
NB I’ve edited the comments above ever so slightly so we don’t incur the wrath of any lawyers. I didn’t follow every detail of the trial closely so I don’t know exactly what did / didn’t happen. All I know is that Stokes was acquitted and Hales never charged.
Well the ECB are complete numskulls as James has said. Appalling behaviour. Blimey there have been plenty of naughty players through the decades and you don’t drop the best England opener in one day cricket even if he is a prat. You mange the situation, something the ECB don’t know the meaning of. Vince and Malan are ok but not in the same class as Hales. Duckett? No thanks. You know Roy has a worrying back problem that could keep him out. Looks like the World Cup campaign is getting the wobbles doesn’t it.
“Roy has a worrying back problem that could keep him out”.
The mentions of Roy suffering leg troubles is also worrying because lower back problems often manifest themselves as pain in the legs.
(Sorry, I clicked ‘Report comment’ by mistake – there’s obviously nothing reportable about Doug’s comment)
Have to select an opener as, Doug M stated, Roy is also a doubt. So basically leaves you with straight choice between Vince and Duckett – unless goes for somebody from total left field. Both have their attractions, Vince is in great form but Duckett is (I believe) more explosive and likely to score at a quicker rate.
I think if |Roy is out there would be a strong argument for opening with Butler.
There’s also Joe Root to consider. He could open. Although personally I’d prefer to leave him where he is.
I personally wouldn’t like to see Duckett in the team because I’m a Northants fan and if he got an England berth within a month of making his Notts debut, … well, it would hurt.
Another name from the ranks of the forgotten: Daryl Mitchell was having a great match against Glamorgan, last time I saw a feed
Mitchell is a strange one. I’m a Worcs fan and I’ve long admired the guy. I’ve always thought he was a little short of international class but he just keeps churning out the runs. Lesser players have represented England imho. However, he’s getting a little long in the tooth now (35 years old) so I expect his time has come and gone.
On the other hand, if Hales hadn’t taken drugs he wouldn’t be in the position he is now in. Actions have consequences.
As Vince is clearly being earmarked for a potential international recall, Hants having promoted him to opener, presumably at the ECB’s suggestion, I would assume he is the natural replacement. He’s just as capable as Hales of hitting big hundreds or getting himself out for next to nothing. To me Hales has flattered to deceive recently and Vince does that for a living at internationnal level, so there’s no contest.
I’d open with Bairstow and Butler (if Roy is also out). Good performance in the IPL and have both opened for England and some point. Then have Vince down the order.
*Buttler
Neither Duckett or Vince has impressed in international colours. Their names keep coming up because they are in favour. It’s like a revolving platform with only certain players aboard. I think there are others out there who score well in the 50 over game year in year out including Sam Hain. Vince should do better but he hasn’t yet crossed that line on international duty. Your point about England batsmen maturing later than the rest seems a bit like wishful thinking James. Also the crap team in the previous World Cup was mainly the first choice team we have now which points to crap management rather than players. By the way Morgan played atrociously in that World Cup due probably to some embarrassing revelations about his sex videos to a girlfriend. Which distraction may have helped the ECB want to avoid the distraction of Hales. Not that Morgan did anything wrong but he was the victim of unkind targeting on the eve of the tournament. The opposition wouldn’t let anything lie that could undermine concentration. Sledging material on and off the field. That’s what they might want to avoid. But frankly Hales has put himself beyond trust. He has to earn it. There isn’t a like for like Hales at his best but he was becoming more uneven hence not first choice for the team.
The point that should be made, however, is why the ECB didn’t ban him immediately? They were quite happy to keep him in the squad (and reassure him that he wouldn’t be dropped) until the press found out. It was only then that they dropped him. This means all the stuff about squad harmony etc was post-rationalised rubbish. It was just an excuse.
I’m not sure that I care. He’s been a prat, end of.
I seem to have reported a comment by accident. I tried to click on the authors name to see if it shows any other comments by him and my finger slipped.
I may have undone it by pressing again, not sure.
Apologies.
While the ECB is run by a bunch of morons, Hales himself seems to be in the league of those morons. He only has himself to blame for all of this, if he had put his head down like Stokes and instead done what was required, he would still be in the WC squad. He also didn’t take the opportunity to apologize to his temamtes after the revelations, which means sympathy in the dressing is also in short supply.
Morgan confirming that Stokes was one of the group of senior players who couldn’t trust Hales is through the looking glass stuff. It seems nobody took the trouble to talk to the player much at this meet-up because they were all too busy with their bleep tests.
What a way to run a railroad.
(BTW if Hales took a Class A drug recently then they were right to ditch him IMO – but we’re a long way from knowing that).