Skip to main content

Captains, centuries, and comebacks

July 21st feels like a different age now but in actual fact it was less than half a year back. For Cook and Clarke it must seem like an eon and more given how their respective positions as captains has reversed. One thing that has not changed though is their batting form. Clarke had a blip in those first two games in England but came roaring back to form in the third Test of the summer and has continued the good work with two more hundreds since. Cook's scores on the other hand (since the third Test of the summer) read 62, 0, 51, 22, 25, 34, 13, 65, 3, and 1. Hardly what you'd expect from a man who averages 47.2 and scores a hundred every seven innings. Its hard enough to be out of form as captain (and the team's main batsman) when your team is winning. But when you're down 0-2 and on the brink of losing the Ashes, and your senior players are not performing, the weight of personal failure must seem crushing. Cook though has always come across as someone who could bear that weight. And if he needs inspiration, he only need look at his opposite number. Ever since he took over from Ricky Ponting, Clarke has only gotten flak (despite his own good form) driven by results that were decent to begin with but descended into the abysmal earlier this year in India and England. He's stayed strong though and things have turned around (and how).

No one exemplifies the turnaround better than Mitchell Johnson who's (deservingly) the story of the series so far. In his last 17 matches (before this series), Johnson claimed less than three scalps a match at an average just below 40 and a strike rate of every 11 overs. In two games this series, he already has 17 wickets at an average less than 13, striking every six overs or less. He's been solidly supported by his fellow attack members as they have all conceded runs at less than three an over and resemble Flower's chosen form of attack more than the Zimbabwean's own charges do. Bowling dry, the mantra that's served England so well in the last few years has escaped them and despite all the talk of batting failures, this is what has really put them on the back foot. Tim Bresnan's return to the side will be very welcome and much as I would like to see him replace Swann and not Panesar, I don't see that happening. Anderson also looks tired (and who wouldn't be after running in to bowl nearly 8000 times in the last three years). Swann and Broad are also in the top five on that list whereas Lyon and Siddle (the only Aussies in the top 10) have bowled almost 2000 deliveries less than Anderson and Swann. And its showing.

Cook and his men though will have to believe that a comeback of some sort is possible against a good but still mercurial Australian line-up. Clarke on the other hand will want the mercury to stay away for some more time, especially when it comes to his left-handed duo of Johnson and Warner. Given that England have won just once in a dozen attempts at Perth and a similar looking line-up was ripped up by Johnson the last time they were here, Clarke will be the more confident captain moving into his century of caps.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Et tu?

As a single sport website, I think Cricinfo has brought about a revolution and the fact that they were bought by ESPN is testament to how highly valued they've become. Their editing and approach to articles/opinion has been refreshing to say the least and even though they seem to have had a lot of editorial staff movement they've usually maintained very high standards. Off late though, both in their headline styles as well as in actual content, there seems to be an occasional slippage of standards and an inching towards the modern media sensationalism which is a bit of a pity. This piece  by Siddharth Monga is a classic example. Granted that the last two press conferences by Dhoni and Sehwag  indicated clearly that the captain and his deputy did not agree on this aspect of selection but "discord", "dissent", "public sniping" feels rather presumptuous and heavy handed. Yes, it is a team sport but there is no reason why everyone on the team needs ...

Quick singles: Why the double standards?

I'm no fan of David Warner's but for once, I'm firmly and squarely on his side . Sportspersons are probably treated the most unfairly by public opinion (and often the media) whenever they are involved in pay disputes. "Oh, look these millionaires are complaining about not getting paid enough" seems to be the gist of the general reactions. I find this attitude inexplicable at best and grossly hypocritical if I'm feeling less charitable. Like the rest of us, all athletes have the right to fight for what they think they should be paid. That is the fundamental part. In addition (and unlike many of the rest of us), most sportspersons operate in the knowledge that they only have a short period available as a performer, and therefore only a short period to maximise earnings. Most people that I know would behave exactly the same as Warner and his colleagues are doing. So why all the hue and cry?

Much ado about a run-out

Judging by the amount that's been said and written about Ian Bell's run-out-that-wasn't at Trent Bridge, you would think that it has been the most significant occurrence of the series so far when nothing could be further from the truth. Andrew Miller  and Samir Chopra seem to be of the opinion that it was the crucial turning point in the match, which I completely disagree with (the post-tea sessions on days one and two were far more critical and momentum shifting). Andy Flower says that if Tendulkar had been run-out similarly in Bombay, it would have caused an international incident. He's clearly feeling the effects of having been in the England cricket set-up for too long given that a) its very improbable that Tendulkar would do something as daft as Bell did, and b) when a controversial run-out (but within the laws) did happen to him (against Pakistan at Eden Gardens no less), Tendulkar went out to the crowd and appealed to them to calm down and let the game proceed...