2 hit wickets in an over?

 

I've never hit wicket before Sunday but there's a first time for everything I guess!   But even more unusually there was a second hit wicket in the over!   Can't say that's something I've ever witnessed or know of....can anyone match or raise 2 hit wickets in an over?

 

The scorecard's here for proof!

 

For anyone that was watching, I was in text contact with Jawwad yesterday - who dislocated his shoulder while bowling which meant waiting for an ambulance to come and treat him on the wicket - and he'll be alright....just sore now it's back in the socket.

 

No middle wicket?

Watching Jacques bat against Kent yesterday at Canterbury I saw a selection of dilscoops and similar shots which all whizzed over Geraint Jones to the boundary. 'You can't set a field to that' they said. What about the old fashioned long stop - euphemistically called middle wicket in The Art of Coarse Cricket ( definitely a suggestion for Ed's growing cricket library). Is it too schoolboy?

Asad Rauf away from cricket

 

Strange goings on in the world of Asad Rauf....so far unproven so it could all be nonsense.   Judging by my feeds with cricket news from around the world, it seems to be big news outside of England....

Sun out, England concerns

Can't say I'm feeling confident about England's prospects today with the sun out and AB de Villers to come in who still has to get a score in this series.   England's catching seems to have deteriorated this summer, but Prior is normally pretty reliable so it was gutting from an England point of view to see him drop Amla down the legside yesterday.
So fingers crossed for a top bowling and catching performance, but I can't say I'm feeling confident!

Fair play to the selectors by the way for picking Bairstow.   From the squad picked, I would have gone with Prior at 6 and Bresnan 7 - you can never work out how things might have been with a different team, but fair to say Bairstow came off nicely.

A few headaches for the Andys

 

Moving away from KP, messrs Strauss and Flower have bit of a conundrum - how do you beat South Africa?

Do you play a spinner (Swann)?
Do you play 5 bowlers?

Do you bowl to Smith on his legs with 5 fielders on the leg side?

Will the batsmen be patient and build slow 50s and 100s like the South Africans?
Will the batsmen keep the sweep shot in the locker and wait for the inevitable full toss/long hop from Tahir?

These questions are a bit loaded as my answers in order are: Yes (all the time), Yes (Swann in for KP), No, I hope so, I bloody hope so!

Like children in the playground

 

You'll have noticed my lack of comment on the whole Kevin Pietersen debacle.   That's partly because of work/childcare etc, but partly because I don't know what to make of it.   KP is clearly like an only child who needs constant care and attention or otherwise he throws a tantrum.   Some of the players (e.g. Broad, Swann and Anderson) show so much petulance at times that you wonder if they're really past adolescence too so I assume they dig at him relentlessly.   All in all it amounts to a skirmish that resembles children bickering in the playground.

It's easy to give an opinion and without all the facts it's likely to be wrong.   But from what's in the public domain it's clear that Pietersen wanted to play the whole IPL and there will be others hoping that he'll pave the way for them, such as Morgan who apparently came to KP's defence on Twitter.   In that respect, Pietersen is playing the role of the elder child testing the parents' patience - he may not be successful, but I suspect the ECB will be a little more understanding with Morgan requests the same at some point.

I imagine most readers of Cricket Burble will be extremely anti-Pietersen.   I've not got a strong opinion.   Knowing the detail that Strauss and Flower plan with though, I think they'll be cursing themselves for not treating Pietersen with all the care and attention he feels he needs.   It's easy to say that he needs to fall in with the team ethic, but some players need love and adoration more than others, and all need bespoke handling to get the best out of them.   It would be interesting to know if Strauss and Flower have spent time thinking in detail about what could motivate Pietersen to new heights and ensure that he and his team mates gel....and then put in place that individual plan.

When West Indies toured here, much was made by the commentators about the fact that their most talented players weren't playing such as Gayle, Sarwan and Jerome Taylor.   It was said then that it was the job of the management to ensure that these characters were integrated and moulded into the best possible team for the West Indies.  

I don't hear anyone saying the same about England's management of Pietersen.   Being hard on Pietersen is acceptable (under the assumption that it leads to mid and long-term benefit for the England team), but only if at the same time they're reiterating to the rest of the team that all characters need to be integrated into the team.   It's not a popularity contest....it's about getting the best XI on the pitch to win for England, and Pietersen is undoubtedly in England's best XI.   It's both Pietersen and the ECB's responsibility to find a compromise, and the rest of the player's responsibilities to reintegrate him.

England had better go for this!

 

Great declaration by South Africa....gives the impression they think that they think they can still win (which I don't think is really the case but great move).   It's highly likely to be a draw given that you're allowed to bowl huge wides down the leg side in Test matches, but England need to open with Cook and Pietersen and look to move Prior up the order.   They can shut up shop from 3 down if necessary, but they have to start with intent surely?

Fingers crossed.

Taylor's time?

 

I'm glad that James Taylor got the nod ahead of Eoin Morgan (and Bairstow) to replace Bopara - it'll be great to see how he does.   He hasn't set the world alight over the last couple of years but with a great century to his name this weekend, it'll be interesting to see Taylor can emulate the likes of Gower and Vaughan who were not much more than mediocre in County cricket but who proved very successful in Test cricket.

It'll  be good to see him face Morne Morkel just for the comedy height difference!

As for Bopara, I hope that the cricket lifestyle hasn't caused relationship issues for him (which reading between the lines of various press reports I fear it may have done).   He had a child last year I believe too....fingers crossed all's ok for him.

Personally I'd play Taylor and put Finn in instead of Broad.   So hopefully that tees it up nicely for England to pick Broad and for him to take 10 wickets!

Great morning for the pedant

Excellent evening at The Oval watching one of our own see us home against the southerners but confusing if you read the report in The Times this morning. The trick is read Surrey for Middlesex and Middlesex for Surrey and you just have to imagine that they've introduced a very wise new law where run outs get credited to the bowler.

Then we had to listen to a clear non-cricketer talking about getting swing out of a  pitch and then we saw the famous Kasprowicz catch - yes his hand was off the bat but I think that it was his right hand off the bat but that the ball hit his left hand. So justice was done, wasn't it ?

Michael Vaughan

I have recently read Michael Vaughan's autobiography and it is a very interesting read. However, I get the feeling from his book that he thinks he was a better player than he actually was. Additionally, I always thought the media overrated him too.

So how good was the former England captain? His international career lasted from 1999 - 2008, where he scored 16 centuries (which is excellent), but his average was a mere 41. In the modern era that is not good enough. If you look closer, he averaged 31 between 1999 and the start 2002 English summer. He then has a golden 6 months, against India, and then in Australia where he averaged a mammoth 76, scoring 7 centuries. However, from January 2003 until his last Test in 2008, he averaged just 36 over 54 matches!

When we think of Vaughan we think of the Ashes 2005, but he only averaged 32! And that was thanks to one major score at Old Trafford where he scored 166. He was extremely lucky in that innings too, as he was dropped on 41, and bowled off a no-ball the very next delivery (so his average could easily have been 20 in that series).

And his presence in the ODI side was an embarrassment. He held back England's progress in this form of the game, and he does not admit to this in his book. He still maintained he was good enough, even after 2007 World Cup debacle. In 86 matches, he averaged 27, with a strike rate of 68, where he batted in the top 3 for most of the time. How was he allowed to do this?

Owais Shah and Robert Key were never given these kind of extended opportunities!
In summary, Vaughan had 6 good months in Test Cricket, and he lived off that run for the rest of his career. He fails to acknowledge this in his autobiography. He talks about how important "character" is to play for England; whilst this is true, you still need the stats to back it up, which Vaughan did not seem too concerned about, which was lucky for him considering how poor his figures were for most of the time he was in an England shirt.

Cheers Ramps

25 years in FC cricket! What an achievement! If he played in today's era he certainly would have fared better in England colours.

India v Sri Lanka...once again

 

Since 1979 India have competed with Sri Lanka in a 140 ODIs. Apart from the famous semi-final of the 1996 World Cup and the 2011 World Cup Final, I cannot remember any of the other 138 games. I am sure I am not alone in this regard.

Since 2005, India have played Sri Lanka 60 times! 60! In 7 1/2 years that gives an average of 8 matches a year. In 2008 and 2009 the teams met 12 times each year!

Thus it makes perfect sense that the respective cricket boards have now arranged a further 5 fixtures between the teams this July. Another meaningless event!

The ICC, for once, needs to show some kind of authority here, so maybe one day the cricket world will respect them.

Marvan Attapatu's comment "a bunch of muppets run by a set of jokers" springs to mind. However, I am more tempted to say "retards who just want money, and could not care less about the game".

Strange weekend

A complete TFC on Saturday in a 220+ run win following a decent contribution to a ten wicket win on Thursday but the best bits were on Saturday which started late because an official of our league chose to interview the already late oppo skipper before the game.

It was one of those noisy fielding sides full of inane football type statement of the bleeding obvious teams ( one of the opening batsmen admitted to me that he'd expected it so had taken a nurofen before he went in to bat). I'm umpiring - big appeal for LBW from the whole team ( including deep square and extra cover - I hate that but it may be an age thing). 'Not out'. Team instantly and politely silent but at the end of the over the bowler, again politely, queries it ' because it pitched outside leg and wasn't going to hit'. Accepted perfectly.

Next over he decides to go round the wicket and ' Umpire, would you mind moving please..............................to your left ? ! '

England Women's team in match loss shocker!

The England Women's team rarely lose, so it was a complete shock that they lost yesterday to India, thanks to a masterful knock by Indian captain Mithali Raj.   I'm sure they'll bounce back and it's no bad thing that they're getting pushed.   Charlotte Edwards, recently made a life member of the MCC, will no doubt be desperate to get back in the runs having missed out in her last few innings.

Where are the best New Zealand players?

 

There's been a couple of Twenty20s going on in the States in the last 48 hours as West Indies took on New Zealand.   Not everyone was bothered - Michael Holding was asked if he'd watched his country playing cricket yesterday replied "Is that cricket?" reiterating his distaste for the shortest form of the game.

Surely though someone in New Zealand was bothered, or otherwise what's the point of agreeing to play the match?   The World Twenty20 is less than three months away and presumably all Twenty20 matches between now and then are practice for that tournament.   So why New Zealand are playing without Brendon McCullum, Daniel Vettori (who has said he'll be coming out of retirement for the World Twenty20) and James Franklin is a question I can't answer.

The two huge losses suffered by New Zealand won't have helped them - perhaps they might play their proper side next time?

Watson at sixes and sevens

Lots of coverage of the fact that Shane Watson thought Australia had an advantage from Wade batting 7 v Bresnan before the first ODI.   I thought it was strange as Bresnan has a better average than Wade in Tests and just 3 less than Wade on ODIs, but Wade has mostly batted 1-3 so has had far more opportunity.

My guess is that the England stats team have looked at how long there is to bat when number 7 gets in and assessed the importance of having a batsman in that position.   They've concluded that there's little point playing a batting all-rounder at 7.   I'm happy to support their analysis, particularly in the UK.
Irrespective of who bats 7, Watson seemed to be missing the fact that Australia have Steve Smith batting at 6.   So far he's flattered to deceive in international cricket....he may come good but at the moment Smith makes England's number 6, Kieswetter - someone who himself has hardly been an unquestionable success - look like a master.

Australia may win the series because they have the better team, but it certainly won't be because their 6 and 7 are stronger than England's.   The Aussies have made it harder for themselves - is there anyone in the world that really thinks that Ricky Ponting would not be superior to either Bailey or Smith?   He's a better fielder than Bailey and at a minumum a comparable batsman, and Smith - well he's not a batsman at all really....

Keep talking the talk Twatto.   How someone with so little brain can be vice-captain is beyond me!

Freddie, Freddie, Freddie!

There's some of what Flintoff said that I agree with - Atherton did only average in the late 30s in Tests for example, so when he's held up as an example of a great batsman I do sometimes wonder just how great he was.   But similarly Flintoff's stats don't make him look quite as good as his reputation would make you assume - Bresnan's short career has seen him perform infinitely better than Flintoff with both bat and ball.

Atherton was right Flintoff was a terrible captain - truly one of the worst in my lifetime in international cricket.   I watched in Melbourne in 2006 as he single-handedly got Australia back into the game with some terrible defensive field placings off Panesar that allowed the struggling Symonds to play himself in and get his confidence up (he got a hundred).   And in Sydney he played a terribly irresponsible shot (running down the track and having an enormous slog) when well on the way to a century....mindless.

Atherton has also publicly admitted he was wrong about Cook, so unlike many commentators he can clearly own up to his mistakes.   No need to have a go then Freddie - or atleast it might be better to be a little more objective if you're going to.   Back to your D list celeb circuit and TV shows.   Talking of D list celebs and TV shows, have you seen Michael Vaughan is the latest to take the Strictly pay cheque at the cost of his reputation?

Manjrekar questions ODIs

You probably know that I think ODIs need to go to as 3 formats of international cricket is too many and the importance of Tests should be maintained.   Sanjay Manjrekar appears to agree, although I can't say I agree with all the points he makes.   One format for experimentation and the other for the very best of the best would be ideal....it'll take many years, players retiring or striking though.   But most of all it will take the sponsors walking away from meaningless ODIs which is gradually happening.

We can review if ODIs are still around in...somewhat spookilly....2020!

Bell was out

I'll never feel comfortable with batsmen that don't walk.   Bell admits he was out on 23 yesterday....surely he'll be thinking about that whenever he remembers that innings and it must mean less than a "proper" century.   I wonder how many of the other England batsmen would have gone on to a hundred if they'd been allowed to bat twice?

Wind, wind, more wind

 

The windiest conditions that I can remember playing in yesterday - a proper gale force wind to bowl into and when facing their spinner the ball was moving around in the air based on the gusts of wind rather than his flight.

Sad to hear that the wind led to 3 children getting injured.   Hopefully they'll make a full recovery....

All out for 6!

 

Had to post this piece about a Somerset team all out for 6 - I don't think 6 is that bad!

So far this season we've been 15-4, 7-3 and 20-4 (same match) and 22-3 at Steyning.   I'm worried that 6 all out isn't that far away!

England's ODI side

Watching Cricket Writers on TV with gritted teeth given that Michael Henderson's on it.   Not someone who's views I agree with or who's consiliatory enough to share a pint with.   He seems to think there is only his view!

They've been discussing England's ODI line up in the absence of their most talented batsman.   Personally I'd go for:

Cook

Bopara

Trott

Bell

Morgan

Bairstow (wk)

Patel

Bresnan

Broad

Swann

Anderson

Also in the squad: Finn, Stokes, Buttler, Briggs.

I feel a bit sorry for Bopara getting shunted around the order again, but I think it's needed and he can be told he has until the next world cup there to make his mark.   I did consider Carberry opening and Bopara remaining at 4, but England will feel Carberry is a little old.   I'd have no problem if he played though and Bopara batted 4 rather than Bell - I'm not sure if England will feel that Bell has had enough chances and he'll get omitted, but they need a bit of experience in there.

Your thoughts?

Colin Povey - mixed thoughts

 

Mixed views about seeing Warwickshire CCC chief executive interviewed this morning. Sad because it was about the financial implications for the fans , The ECB, the insurers and his county of yesterday's washout ( and possibly another one today). Encouraging, on the other hand for those that argue that sport keeps you young - he doesn't seem to have aged since  25+ years ago when he was a run-machine at our old tour friends Whitchurch CC.

Ed Smith's new book and article on Cricinfo

 

Interesting piece by Ed Smith about the value of certain players over and above their stats, in relation to Tim Bresnan.   He makes the point that Bresnan isn't an ideal subject for that though as his stats are excellent!

I'm going to have a read of his new book referenced at the end of the article, "Luck - What It Means and Why It Matters".   So far I've been impressed by everything I've read from Ed Smith....hopefully that will continue.   I'll give you a summary when I'm done...

The latest ECB deal

Slight concern that these deals get done so far in advance that they get in the way of sensible changes to strategy - i.e. this deal with ESPN Sports will net the ECB $240m apparently but it runs until the 2019.   I really hope that the ICC use the 2015 World Cup as a cut off for 50 over cricket and revert to two formats of the game, but I said that about 2011 so I'm not very hopeful.   Perhaps if the ICC is on the ball they can ask the Boards to all work to the same time periods when negotiating these kind of extensions so they can all aim for deals up to 2019.....I can't see it happening though.

Fault on both sides in KP limited overs retirement

I've been agreeing with those that say that 3 formats of cricket is too much for a while now and for me it's 50 over cricket that has to go.   So does Kevin Pietersen by the sounds of it.  

Where the ECB have gone wrong is stipulating that you have to play ODIs and Twenty20 or neither.   Clearly there's no reason for that because the formats are very different and the squads change between the two - e.g. Cook, Trott, Bell and Prior who all play ODIs (most of the time), but not Twenty20.  

An easy compromise was available - Pietersen to play on in ODIs and Twenty20s until the end of this contract and then all England contracts to change to split the formats when they were next agreed.   That would have left England with one of the best Twenty20 batsman in the world available for the World T20 later in the year.   As an aside, it would have meant he was available for the ODIs this summer, but they're of zero importance so England could have "rested" him if necessary to ensure he was available for Twenty20.

The problem with how things have turned out is that the ECB had the wrong contracts in place and would now be forced into something of a climb down to get their best Twenty20 batsman to come out of retirement for that format only.   How do you resolve that?   Ask all pro cricketers in this country for their opinion and then take their opinion on board wahtever the result - it would certainly mean that contracts would not group together ODIs and Twenty20 and the ECB could claim to be a forward thinking organisation listening to employees.

End result, England get their best team on the pitch for the world T20 and a happier more likely to succeed Pietersen for Test cricket.   Chances - slim to zero!