Skip to main content

Of backward selections and England's future

A couple of interesting selectorial decisions recently by England and India (and actually as its turning out Australia as well!). For once I think the England selectors didn't panic and showed the right thinking by not picking either Key or Ramprakash for the Oval Test. And luckily for them, both Bell and Trott have performed well enough to vindicate the decision. India on the other hand have actually gone the other way bringing Dravid back to the one-day squad. I'm a bit ambivalent on that one. While the decision to leave out Rohit Sharma and retain Raina was certainly the right one, bringing back Dravid is questionable. It would have been a bolder decision to pick someone like Kohli or Rahane who both played really well in the Emerging Players Trophy recently, mainly because Dravid is quite unlikely to feature in the 2011 World Cup so why bring him back now?

As for the Aussies, they will certainly be regretting not picking Nathan Hauritz for the Oval. A defensive decision if you ask me (probably made on the basis that Clark would concede fewer runs) and they paid for it. Overall, I think that's what stood out for me during this series. The fact that Australia were always very quick to go on the defensive each time there was even a hint of things going wrong. Guess that's what happens to teams when they lose the winning habit and the confidence. Still, they can take a few positives from the series in Hilfenhaus, Siddle, North and Watson all showing that they have what it takes to become long-term fixtures in the Test team. Hussey and Johnson were probably a bit of a disappointment but Clarke is well on the way to becoming a near future 'best-batsman-in-the-world' tag holder (with Sangakkara and AB deVilliers probably being his main rivals).

England also I think have found the nucleus of what can be a very good team with the emergence of Swann, Broad, Prior, Bell and Trott as cricketers with steel. And if Anderson, Cook and Collingwood can be a bit more (ok a lot more) consistent, that's a world beating XI when you add in Strauss and Pietersen who are already world class of course. I've been particularly impressed by Broad and Prior and they will be the key since all-round balance is really what makes great Test teams. There's been some talk of Broad being the new Flintoff and its instructive to look at their stats at the same relative point in their careers. After 22 Test matches, Flintoff had scored 683 runs at 20.83 (with one 100 and two 50s) and taken 33 wickets at 50.57 (with no five-fors). Broad on the other hand has scored 767 runs at 30.68 (with five 50s) and taken 64 wickets at 35.78 (with 3 five-fors). Of course, Broad has a long way to go but he's made what I think is a solid start for an all-rounder and if he keeps going from strength to strength (as he's certainly shown himself capable of in this Ashes) he'll be one to watch for. As will this England team, hopefully. The tour of South Africa can't come too soon!

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

When reactions lack proportion

There's been much brouhaha over India's rapid descent into one-sided football scorelines and becoming what some would term "the world's worst overseas team". And while there's some logic to the cries for wholesale changes ,  revamping the team , and attitude problems , much of it is over the top. About the only two sensible pieces I have read recently are by Ganguly and Siddhartha Vaidyanathan questioning the lack of spirit and fight shown by the team. What's most surprising to me is that some people seem to think that the team (which was ranked #1 till recently and won the World Cup less than a year back) is suddenly a pile of dung. This when there are still several pieces of information (numbers of course) that have either been ignored or not analysed clearly at all. So here's an attempt to balance the books a little. Consider the following - 1) India's overseas record in 5 year segments roughly over the last two decades is as below: 199

Kohli's team on the way to greatness?

Growing up (from a cricket watching perspective) in the 1990s, I am terribly unused to Test cricket being the format in which the Indian team is most successful and looking like potential world-beaters. Still early days, but this is exactly the way things seem headed currently for Kohli and his men. Since Jan 2015 (when Kohli took over as full time captain), India's record reads: P 21, W 14, L 1, D 6. The absurd W/L ratio will of course not last and many critics will point to the fact that most of the victories have come at home. Teams can however only overcome the opposition they are faced with and so far India have ticked off the overseas boxes they have been faced with (in Sri Lanka and the West Indies). And at home they have been utterly dominant, destroying everyone they've met. But most hearteningly, it's the way they have battled back from adversity that builds the most promise for the future. Too often in even the recent past (let alone the 1990s), Indian teams

Old dog, new tricks?

After Virat Kohli's stupendously successful start as India captain (admittedly in a different format), the cries for Dhoni to be replaced as captain for the shorter formats will undoubtedly renew again. And while Kohli might be ready to take over, I think India still have a lot to gain from Dhoni the batsman and captain at the Champions Trophy in England next year. Aside from the fact that we are not exactly rolling in good new limited overs keeper-batsmen and couldn't therefore find an adequate replacement at short notice, Dhoni has looked fitter and fresher since he gave up Test cricket. He has also, in a distinct departure from the recent past, looked keen to get stuck into situations tactically and work out ways to win with newer players. The Zimbabwe tour was a pretty light weight test but it definitely started there and its carried on into the current series against New Zealand. Most hearteningly, he has not been stubborn about his own waning skills as a batsman and