England Fail To Deceive: Time For a Change

I started to conceive this article shortly after England's dismal afternoon at Edgbaston in the recently concluded match against South Africa.  However, today's resignation of England's captain, Michael Vaughan, has led to a rethink on the shape of this piece.

First and foremost, I'd like to say that Vaughan has been an outstanding captain for England - statistically, he has been our best, winning more Tests than any other English captain.  For a while, everything he touched turned to gold.  During an impressive first two years at the helm, he lead England to 5 successive test series wins against the West Indies in the West Indies, New Zealand and the West Indies at home (in the process winning all 7 Tests that summer), South Africa in south Africa and finally, beating Australia in (probably) the greatest Ashes series of all time in England.  The memories of that delirious summer in 2005 will live long in the memory of a nation which was gripped by the twists and turns of one the most dramatic and nerve-jangling test series to have ever been played on English soil.

So on behalf of a nation, Michael, thank you for the memories and taking us on an epic journey.

However, since that summer in '05, the Test side has been in terminal decline.  Partly due to injuries to key players and partly due to administrative and selectorial reasons.  Perhaps the more important injuries were to Michael Vaughan himself - whose dodgy knees finally gave way at the start of the Pakistan tour in 2005/2006 - Simon Jones who reverse swung England to victory in the Ashes and to Andrew Flintoff, whose troublesome ankle kept him out of cricket for a year.  This decline culminated in the 5-0 Ashes drubbing in Australia and the recent series loss to South Africa at home.  It is clear to all but the selectors that a change was desperately needed earlier on in the summer.  Thankfully, Vaughan's gracious resignation has forced the selectors' hand, who now have the perfect opportunity at the Oval to inject some new life and breath fresh air into a Test side that has lacked a certain spark over the past 12 months.  But who makes way for whom?

As the recently concluded Edgbaston Test ably demonstrates, England do not have the quality of bowlers to play just 4.  Monty Panesar is a fine young spinner, but unless the wicket is conducive to spin he is largely ineffective.  His principle failing is his lack of variation and nous.  Andrew Flintoff is a fiery bowler with a certain "X-factor" but he has never been the most penetrative of bowlers.  James  Anderson is a mercurial beast, capable of decimating batting line-ups or being picked apart as he sprays the ball around.  Ryan Sidebottom has been a revelation for England in the last 14 months, but so far this summer he's looked tired and appears to be struggling with niggles.  Unless we can summon up some new firepower for the Oval Test, we will probably lose this South African series 3-0.

On the basis that the Oval pitch is responsive to spin bowling, I would keep Panesar and pray that he has a good day.  Sidebottom would make way for Steve Harmison who, despite being dumped in New Zealand last winter for being ineffective and, quite frankly, a waste of space, has put together a magnificent case for selection with a stack of wickets in the county championship so far this season.  Observers have claimed he's been bowling with real pace, venom and consistency.  The prospect of seeing both a fired up Flintoff and Harmison sticking it to the Saffers on a bouncy Oval pitch makes me salivate.  But it is well known that Harmison doesn't travel especially well, suffering from home sickness on away tours.  With a grueling trip to India lined up for this winter, one has to ask if Harmison has got over his homesickness problem.

Other bowlers in contention for a call up at the Oval are Simon Jones, Kabir Ali and Tim Murtagh.  Jones has been a phenomenon at Worcestershire this season, having swung his was to 37 wickets at 17.8 runs per wicket.  His ability to conventionally and reverse swing the ball at pace is a rare gift and one England have really lacked since '05.  Tim Murtagh, a right-arm fast-medium bowler for Middlesex, has taken 46 wickets at a little under 23.5.  Kabir Ali is the first bowler in the championship to take more than 50 wickets this season - he currently has 52 at under 19.

With this in mind, my line-up for the Oval would be as follows:

Cook
Strauss (capt.)
Pietersen
Bopara
Collingwood
Prior (wkt)
Flintoff
Jones
Ali
Harmison
Panesar

Ali and Harmison can share the new ball duties with Jones and Flintoff as the 2nd and 3rd change seamers.  Pietersen can bowl a few overs of offspin if the wicket turns.

The rationale for choosing Prior over Tim Ambrose to fullfil the wicketkeeping position is simply for team balance.  I can't recall what shots Prior has, but he must surely have more than the two Ambrose has (which are the cut and the pull).  Prior is averaging over 50 with the bat so far this season and his keeping has been tidy.  If we're to play 4 specialist bowlers, we will need a wicket keeper who can bat - Prior fits that bill better than any one else.

A particularly pertinent question is where is Stuart Broad in the team?  For me, Broad is a massive all-round prospect for England, but his bowling at the moment isn't up to standard.  His batting this summer has been hugely impressive, but there are better batsmen and better bowlers out there available to England.  Moreover, as we must take 20 wickets in a match to set up the possibility of a win, you must play a bowling attack that is capable of taking 20 wickets.  Broad is definitely capable of taking a couple, but Jones, Ali, Panesar, Harmison and Flintoff are capable of taking 5 or more in an innings.  That is, as they say, the clincher.

Going back to the subject of county batting form, Bopara comes in for Ian Bell at 4.  Whilst Bell scored that wonderful 199 at Lord's, it is fair to say it came on a flat pitch against an attack that was struggling to get going.  Since then he's been found wanting.  Far too often he scores majestic looking 30s, 40s and 50s before finding ways of getting himself out. He needs to be cast into the wilderness for a little while and told to improve his temperament and shot selection.

Finally, on the thorny issue of the captaincy.  My gut instinct tells me not to pick Pietersen.  His rash shot on Friday afternoon - trying to satisfy his ego by bringing up his hundred with a 6 off the spinner but ending up holing out to mid on - was nothing short of utterly selfish.  Cricket is a team game.  The game situation at the time he threw his wicket away demanded careful accumulation of runs.  Plenty of time was left in the game and a 150 was there for the taking.  South Africa's bowlers had no idea how to bowl to him, nor did their captain know what fields to set.  Instead of setting a very formidable target of 350, England ended up setting a gettable 280, and get them South Africa most definitely did.  Strauss, conversely, did nothing wrong when he captained England for a summer when Vaughan was out with his knee problems, he is a team player and has a good cricketing brain.  His batting form has slumped but his class is permanent.  I trust him to come good.

In conclusion, the England selectors have a fantastic opportunity to trial young players in a match that is effectively meaningless in the context of the Test series.  I sincerely hope that they do make some big changes, if for no other reason than to send a clear signal to everyone in the closed shop that is Team England, that no one's place is guaranteed and that everyone needs to perform or face the axe.  Unfortunately, however, a nagging part of me knows that the selectors are unlikely to make any meaningful changes, citing trite reasons such as continuity of selection and backing the incumbents to come good.  Unfortunately, it is precisely that policy that has lead to England losing all the series they have played against meaningful opposition in the last 18 months.  The time is most definitely ripe for changes in the team and changes in policy.