Bleacher Report - Articles by Steven White

NFL High Five: The People Smiling Most After Week Two

Steven White — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 19:10:00 -0400

With all of the NFL’s Week Two games completed, it’s time to reflect on which players, coaches, and teams are going back to practice this week with the biggest smiles on their faces.

5. Kurt Warner, Anquan Boldin, and Larry Fitzgerald (Arizona Cardinals)

It’s the greatest show on sand, down in Arizona nowadays.

Having held off competition for the starting roll from Matt Leinart, Kurt Warner is now rolling back the years.

The first drive of the game for Arizona saw Kurt Warner linking up with Boldin for a 79-yard score.

They didn’t stop there though; Warner racked up 361 yards total passing, with three touchdowns. Boldin collected all three of those touchdowns, but his 140 receiving yards were bettered by the 153 yards put up by his teammate Larry Fitzgerald.

Yes, it was only Miami, but it was an excellent day at the office for these three, and with Seattle dropping to 0-2, they know that if they keep playing like this, the Cards will finally be playoff bound.

4. Jonathan Stewart (Carolina Panthers)

Carolina’s offence had been completely stifled by Chicago’s powerful defence all day; the first half saw the ball moved just 47 yards by the Panthers.

With just two John Kasay field goals on the scoreboard, nearing the end of the third quarter, Carolina needed someone to step up and put points on the board to mount a comeback.

Enter rookie Jonathan Stewart.

Handed the ball on the Chicago four-yard line, he punched the ball into the end zone to reduce the deficit to four points. It was his first ever NFL touchdown.

With less than four minutes to go in the game, Carolina had the ball on the opposition's one-yard line. The ball was again given to Stewart, who duly doubled his total career touchdowns.

He rushed for 77 yards overall, at 5.5 yards a carry, but it was the 12 points he put on the scoreboard that changed the outcome of this game. It was a huge result for Carolina, as they move now to 2-0.

He has wasted little time settling into the National Football League, and it’s this kind of gritty, game-winning performance needed if they are going to be Super Bowl contenders this year.

3. Jim Zorn (Washington Redskins)

Jim Zorn picked up his first ever win as a head coach when his Redskins came from behind to beat the much-fancied New Orleans Saints.

Zorn will have a lot to be happy about. His side produced much more offensively than the Saints' very powerful Drew Brees-led attack, which is a good sign for both his offence and his defence.

He will also be very happy with the character his side showed in not only bouncing back from going behind early on, but from a disappointing performance in Week One against the Giants.

With Dallas and the Giants finishing the week both at 2-0, it was vital that the 'Skins won this game, otherwise they'd have a lot of catching up to do already in their division.

Much for the rookie head coach to be pleased with this week.

2. Mike Shanahan (Denver Broncos)

Having dominated for much of the first half against San Diego, Denver let the Bolts come back into a game, when it had looked like the Broncos would run away with.

Late in the fourth quarter, the Chargers moved out to a 38-31 lead, and it looked as if Shanahan's side had lost the game when Jay Cutler fumbled in the red zone.

But an officiating mistake from referee Ed Hochuli saw the fumble given as an incomplete pass and the ball given back to Denver.

Shortly afterwards, Jay Cutler found Eddie King in the end zone on fourth down, bringing the Broncos to within one point.

The logical course of action was then to kick the extra point and take it to overtime.

But Shanahan boldly told his team to go for two points. Had they failed, and lost by a point, there’s a very good chance a riot would have broken out there and then at Mile High.

As it was, the attempt was successful. Shanahan was a genius and had shown that his team had no fear and were going to be aggressive and win games this year.

Not only this, but he saw the young quarterback, who he has pretty much staked his Denver career on, put up big numbers and keep his head to lead his team to those game-winning eight points.

And that's not to mention the impressive performances from his young stars in the making Tony Sheffler and Brandon Marshall.

An excellent week for the Denver coach.

1. The Dallas Cowboys

In the last ever, opening home-tie at Texas Stadium, in front of an electric crowd, Philadelphia and Dallas put on a hell of a show.

Seven lead changes, 717 combined yards of offence, 78 combined points, big plays, stupid plays...This game had everything.

It could have gone either way, but at the end of the game, it was the Dallas Cowboys who were smiling.

Despite a couple of horrible blunders from Tony Romo, which resulted in Philadelphia being allowed to take control of the game for a while, it was ultimately a Donovan McNabb fumble which proved to be the game's turning point.

A confused handoff to Brian Westbrook went disastrously wrong, was recovered by Dallas, and led to a Marion Barber score, which proved decisive.

A victory over a fierce rival who, in recent times, has had the measure over them at home was always going to be sweet—but as it was in such an epic match, in the last home opener at Texas Stadium, on the last Monday Night Football there, too, this one will be extra special for everyone associated with the Cowboys.

Who Will Win The County Championship?

Steven White — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 21:17:40 -0400

England's summer of international cricket is now long finished; Sussex have won the pro-40, Essex have taken the Friends Provident Trophy and the Twenty20 cup happened.

Now, before the ludicrous shambles that will be the Stanford Super Series kicks off, we have the much more important (and more exciting) climax to the LV County Championship.

This article intends to determine exactly who will win the prestigous county title by running through all of the contenders.

So who are the contenders?

1. Hampshire

Dimitri Mascaenhas' Hants side have snuck into poll position in the league almost unnoticed it seems.

A crushing victory over bottom club Surrey saw them pick up the maximum 22 points and shoot to the top of the league.

Hants have done little to catch the imagination with the bat this year: Michael Brown has top scored with 818 runs at an acceptable average of 38.

They're success has been based on a formidable bowling attack, of Tahir, Tomlinson, Tremlett and the captain himself.

44 of their 160 total points have come from bowling bonus points - the most in the league by a distance.

The biggest problem they face in their quest to win the league is that they have played a game more than the other contenders, but only lead by a single point.

The second biggest problem is that they're not as good as any of the other contenders.

Furthermore, their final tie is away to what is, in my opinion, a stronger Notts side. I see them having little joy there and can't see them having enough to hold on to top spot.

Prediction: fifth

2. Somerset

Somerset were my tip from the start of the season, and have impressed following promotion last year.

With two of the best opening batsmen of our generation opening in Justin Langer and Marcus Trescothick they were guaranteed to be in the reckoning.

Trescothick's 1238 runs leads the league, Langer has 1013, and the likes of Trego, de Bruyn and Ian Blackwell have all added runs over the course of the season.

The problem has been that as Taunton is such a batting paradise, it has been hard to notch up wins - they have only lost once, a league low, but drawn 10 times.

However, as their two remaining fixtures are against Yorkshire and Lancashire, two of the leagues weaker performers this year, I feel they have every chance of picking up enough points to claim the first title in their history.

Prediction: first

3. Durham

I was at Taunton to watch Durham play Somerset last week. I expected to see a batting masterclass from Trescothick and co.

Instead I saw a destructive bowling display from Stephen Harmison and the Durham attack.

Harmison has been key to Durham's success this season - his 50 wickets is the most in the team, and was good enough even to earn him a recall to all of the England sides.

However, Mark Davies and Callum Thorpe have taken their fair share, and Liam Plunkett, Graham Onions and Ben Harmison have contributed on the rare occassions they have been asked to.

I would say they have the best pace attack in the league.

Their batting line up isn't shy of top performers either, Dale Benkenstein and di Venuto are proven class acts, and they also boast the prescense of world player of the year, Shiv Chanderpaul.

Whilst Shiv has delivered little this year so far, his season best score of 93 against Somerset last week showed his class, and shows that he could be a factor in the run in.

They certainly have enough talent to give themselves a good shot at winning the title.

Durham's final game of the season is a tough tie at Canterbury, and before that they take on a buoyant Sussex. I don't expect them to pick up as many points as Somerset.

Prediction: third

4. Nottinghamshire

Workman like is how I'd describe Nottinghamshire.

Their biggest stars, Stuart Broad and Ryan Sidebottom don't play because of England commitments.

Instead a group of very good professionals, led by Chris Read, quietly go about their business.

Mark Wagh's 836 at 45 leads the team with the bat, but Read, Bilal Shafayat and Samit Patel also average over 40.

It's consistancy over explosiveness.

Despite being derailed somewhat by his shock England call up, Darren Pattinson has, by and large, bowled excellently this year, taking 41 wickets at 23. The excellent Charlie Shreck leads the team however with 52 at 27.

Their remaining ties see them take on Surrey at the Oval, and Hampshire at home, two games they could get a lot of points from.

I can see them winning the league this year, BUT I want Somerset to win it so I'm going to say...

Prediction: second

5. Kent

An excellent team. Martin van Jaarsevld has been the stand out performer this year, with an impressive 1110 runs at 55.

The bowling has also been excellent, Robbie Joseph leading the team with 50 wickets at 25, but good support too from Ryan McLaren, Azhar Mahmood and Yasir Arafat.

However, they seem to have struggled for consistency. They've been liable to collapsing in the batting at times and the averages reflect this - quality players like Denly and Key average just 35 and 33 respectively.

They still have a chance of winning the league, but, though I'd like to see them do it, I can't see them picking up enough points against Lancashire and Durham to finish above Notts, Somerset, or Durham.

Prediction: fourth

Michael Vaughan No Longer the Right Man to Captain England?

Steven White — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 23:08:42 -0400

Michael Vaughan will go down in history as one of England's greatest batsman and their greatest captain. Vaughan has notched up 26 wins since he was appointed captain in 2004, the most ever for an England skipper.

Of those 26 wins, none will be better remembered in years to come than the two which ensured England regained the Ashes for the first time in nearly 20 years, back in the memorable summer of 2005.

His reign will be looked upon in the future as a golden age.

At the moment, however, there is a lot of discontent from the England fans, and there have been a lot of calls for his head following his poor batting displays against New Zealand and South Africa so far this summer.

Indeed, nobody can argue Vaughan is not out of form—so far in 2008 he is averaging just 28 with the bat, nearly half the 47 he was averaging in 2007.

There is also no doubt England are not as good as they were previously under Vaughan.

The last time England took on South Africa in 2004-05, they looked the better side, and came away with a 2-1 series victory.

Whilst this is still achievable for Vaughan's men this summer, most will admit it is unlikely, and, regardless, South Africa this time around look the far stronger side.

Couple this with how much trouble it was for England to beat a decidedly mediocre New Zealand team in the previous months and it is apparent England, in their current state, will struggle against Australia next year.

England's main problem in recent times has been scoring runs, which is odd when you see the abundance of batting talent the side has.

The one man who consistently turns in lowest score however, sadly, is Vaughan.

When he gets going there is no stopping him, but the problem is that it's getting rarer and rarer that he does get going.

A captain should lead from the front—it sounds cliched, I know—but he should.

Look at Graeme Smith: he opens the batting and very rarely is he dismissed without making a good contribution. The same goes for Ricky Ponting.This can only have a good effect on the team, it can only encourage them to go out and play. England need someone like this.

So who would I like this inspirational captain to be?

Well, I'd like it to be Michael Vaughan.

Having said all I have about him, you wont find a bigger Michael Vaughan fan than me anywhere. I still believe he has a lot to offer England as a captain and as a batsman and should be given more time to re-establish his form.

It's the old adage—form is temporary, class is permanent, and anyone that argues Vaughan is not a class batsman simply doesn't understand cricket. However, if he is still failing with the bat at the end of the tour of the West Indies this winter, it may be time for him to consider calling it a day and letting someone else take the reigns.

Matthew Hoggard Disrespected by England Selectors

Steven White — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 09:03:15 -0400

For the second test between England and South Africa at Headingley, the England selectors (in their wisdom) called up Nottinghamshire seam bowler Darren Pattinson to replace the injured Ryan Sidebottom.

Unlike most people in the country, I had seen Darren Pattinson play before. I was at St. Lawrence's in Kent to watch a championship match between Kent and Nottinghamshire back in May, and I was impressed.

He took eight wickets in the match, blowing away the top order in both innings and leading Nottinghamshire to a 10 wicket victory.

He continued to bowl with success, and has so far taken 29 wickets at an average of just 20 this season from his six games. A very impressive record.

But that's all he has, an impressive six-game record.

In his native Australia, he failed to break into the Victoria first XI until he was 28 years old, and even then he was considered nothing more than a middle of the road bowler.

He has no history to go along with this good form in the English game, no proof he can cope under pressure or perform consistently.

He has not earnt a place in the England team. Six games is simply not enough to justify his selection, and this is what annoys me the most.

Matthew Hoggard has played for England for many years, and every single time he has gone out to play he has given everything he has for his country.

Last winter, he was impressive against Sri Lanka until injury forced him out of the team. After returning from his injury to face New Zealand, he did not bowl as well as he normally does.

He had his first bad game for as long as I can remember, but was dropped immediately, replaced by James Anderson, a man who's had more bad games than I've had hot dinners...and cold dinners for that matter.

But he took this disappointment in stride, went back to Yorkshire and has performed well this year, taking 22 wickets at an average of 25.

Injury to Ryan Sidebottom meant a spot was available in the side for the game at Headingley, Hoggard's home ground, but he was ignored.

After so many years of excellent service, and with a lot to offer the team still, I feel he has been treated very unfairly. Of all the bowlers who have disappointed England in recent years he has been the best, but has been given the least number of lives, so to speak

Now, to top it all, it seems the selectors rate a man with 11 games to his name as a better bowler than Hoggard.

Personally, I think it's a disgrace that the selectors have treated him as they have. I am honestly embarrassed to support a team that can treat a player as unjustly as they have Matthew Hoggard.

Is Lord's England's Worst Test Cricket Venue?

Steven White — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 03:18:41 -0400

Lord's is perhaps the most famous cricket stadium in the entire world.

Everybody knows Lord's. They know the grand old pavilion, the space age media centre, the slope, the MCC members sporting their yellow and red stripes. They know it as the self-proclaimed "home of cricket."

This reputation, the impressive nature of the stadium, and the influence of the MCC, ensure that two of England's seven home test matches are staged there every summer.

Who could argue with that? Is there anything better than a test match at Lord's?

The answer is yes: a test match anywhere else.

The problem is that despite the reputation and the look of the place, it's very rare that Lord's produces a good wicket or a good game.

The first test against South Africa was a perfect example of a game at Lord's. Rather than being a contest between bat and ball, it was merely an exhibition of batting.

England posted nearly 600 runs against the best pace attack in the world in the first innings. I don't want to belittle this feat. The English top order, in particular Bell and Pietersen, batted superbly. But the pitch was so dead that even the world's best attack could get nothing out of it.

England bowled superbly in both their innings, but the pitch offered them nothing. It was only South Africa's horrendous batting in the first innings that allowed them to take 10 wickets.

With clearer heads and a greater application, South Africa proved in the second innings that wickets were impossible to come by on such a wicket. Neil McKenzie amassed 144 runs from a day and a half at the crease, never really being threatened in that period.

Maybe this was just a one off?

Well, no it wasn't. In fact, exactly the same set of events occurred two years ago against Sri Lanka. England posted an imperious score, Sri Lanka were bowled out cheaply, followed on, and batted forever to get a draw.

In fact, since Australia beat England at Lord's in 2005, every game there has been drawn.

The fact is the pitch is always dead and so are the games.

Compare this to Old Trafford. There will be no test matches there for the foreseeable future, yet Old Trafford always provides a good game of cricket and normally a result.

Trent Bridge is a fabulous stadium, and again often provides a good game and a result, yet it has been overlooked for the Ashes next year.

I will be at Headingley on Friday for the second test against South Africa. Why did I choose to go to Leeds and not Lords' to watch test cricket? Because unlike Lord's, there is always something for both the batsmen and the bowlers at Leeds, and a good game is guaranteed.

Furthermore, it costs twice as much to watch a match at Lord's than Headingley or Trent Bridge. What are the fans paying that extra money for? Certainly not for quality entertainment.

In an age in which test cricket finds itself under threat, the ECB need to start doing their utmost to ensure every match is a fantastic contest. And as long as there are two games at Lord's every year you can be sure there will be at least two lifeless draws.

England Cricket: What Have They Learnt So Far This Summer?

Steven White — Sun, 29 Jun 2008 18:26:50 -0400

With the first half of England's summer of cricket now complete, it's time to reflect on exactly what England have learnt in the games against New Zealand:

1. Ian Bell Can't Win Games

There are some players who have all the talent in the world, but no matter how many chances they are given they just don't deliver on the international stage.

Take, for example, Graeme Hick and Mark Ramprakash. They have bundles of runs at county level, but averages of 31 and 27 respectively in over 50 test matches apiece.

Ian Bell has talent, but he just doesn't score the runs. 30-40 is not a good enough score for a top order batsman.

For whatever reason he cannot make big scores under pressure and win games, and England cannot continue to carry him in either form of the game.

2. Owais Shah Can Bat

Owais Shah was the only England batsman to come away with an enhanced reputation following England's 3-1 ODI series defeat to New Zealand.

His series highlighted why he deserves to bat higher up the order in ODIs and replace Ian Bell in the test arena.

At Chester-le-street he proved he could hit a ball cleanly, score quickly, and completely take the game away from the opposition. His 49 from 25 balls put the game completely beyond New Zealand.

At the Oval and Lords, with the wickets tumbling all around him, he kept his head and scored a sensible yet brisk 63 and 69 respectively.

To me, Shah looks more mature and more composed with a bat in his hand than any of the current test players, and has more than warranted his inclusion in the squad for the test series against South Africa.

Doubtless, Ian Bell will still keep his place.

3. Tim Ambrose Is the Most Limited Batsman in History

Matthew Hoggard is no longer part of the England set up, but he must be happy England have found a batsman with even less shots than he possesses.

Tim Ambrose has one shot in his arsenal: the cut away to the off side. I don't think I'd be too far off the mark if I said ALL of his 274 test runs have come off this one stroke.

I didn't expect him to perform in the one-day games, and he didn't. He averaged a terribly bad 2.5. Ambrose just isn't a one-day international player.

Furthermore, he's dropped a couple of chances he should have taken in this series.

The facts are these: Chris Read is a better keeper, and Matt Prior and Phil Mustard are better batsmen.

So why is Ambrose in the squad ahead of these players? I hate to be cynical, but it's because he's mates with the coach.

4. Paul Collingwood Is a Scoundrel

Did you see that arrogant smile on his face when Mark Benson asked him if he'd like to call Grant Elliott back?

It was clear the run out was not sporting. He claims it was a split second decision, but it wasn't at all. He could have taken as long as he wanted. And regardless, it was obvious what the correct decision was from the second it happened.

He's not an international cricketer. He's far from being a good captain and he's patently not a sportsman either. I cannot stomach the man.

5. Graeme Swann Can Play

Graeme Swann has proved in the one-day series that he's a threat with the ball, he's a good fielder, and he's handy with the bat.

He took a decent haul of seven wickets in the series, and showed he was capable of turning the ball and posing a genuine threat to the batsmen.

At Bristol on a low-scoring track, he embarrassed the top order batsmen by producing the second highest score of the innings (29). It doesn't sound like much, but it showed he had decent temperament for batting—something the other England batsmen didn't show that day.

Furthermore his fielding was largely excellent. A series of assured catches and a superb (and fair) run out highlighted this.

He was the biggest positive down the order for me. Hopefully this has secured his one-day place ahead of the turban of turn, Monty Panesar, whose inept fielding and batting mean he should stick to test cricket alone.

Cricket News: Simon Jones and His Bowling Crusade

Steven White — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 19:04:11 -0400

In 2005, England won the Ashes for the first time in twenty years, not because of an indestructible batting lineup, but because of the best pace bowling attack in the world.

Opening the bowling were Stephen Harmison, a constant threat with pace and bounce, and Matthew Hoggard, a dependable swinger of the ball. Coming in after them were the irreplaceable Andrew Flintoff, arguably the deadliest fast bowler on the planet.

But also bowling was Welsh born Simon Jones. A true exponent of reverse swing and in possession of great, raw pace.

Despite only playing four of the five games af that Ashes series due to an ankle injury, Jones took the second highest total of wickets for an English player in the series, taking 18 at an average of 21.

But, the fourth game of that Ashes series looked to be his last for England, as the said ankle injury ruled him out for over a year, and when he returned for his county Glamorgan, his pace was down, and his effectiveness limited. It looked as if he was doomed to play out the rest of his career on the county scene.

But Jones this year left his native Wales to ply his trade for Vikram Solanki's Worcestershire side, and the move seems to have paid dividends.

Jones has played in four county championship matches this season and has already notched 19 wickets, including two five wicket hauls, at a league leading average of 11.

Furthermore, he is not only taking regular wickets, but his pace is back up at 90mph and he is once again getting the ball to reverse swing.

It appears he has overcome his injuries and is once again a lethal fast bowler.

The question is, if his form should continue, should he be recalled to the England side for the series against South Africa?

Whilst England in this New Zealand series have been more effective with ball than bat, is this bowling line up really one which will trouble South Africa?

Will it win us the Ashes back next year?

For me the problem with the bowling lineup is that, much like New Zealand's, it perhaps lacks penetration. Stuart Broad is a good line and length bowler, but he just doesn't threaten enough. In the first two matches of the series against a poor New Zealand, he took just three wickets at 72.

If a bowler is that ineffective against one of the worst batting lineups I have ever seen, I dread to think how he will perform when confronted with a world class batsman like Jaques Kallis or Graeme Smith.

Ryan Sidebotton has solidified his position in the England side with 66 wickets in just 16 matches. However, it is worth pointing out that 53 of his wickets have come against the West Indies and New Zealand, two of the weaker test nations.

He has bowled well against Sri Lanka and India without the wickets to go with it. The series against South Africa will be his biggest test, and he has to prove in it that he is capable of taking wickets against the better teams.

James Anderson is the most threatening bowler in the side. He can swing the ball and is capable of bowling majestically. Sadly, he is extremely inconsistent and often very expensive. If he plays badly against the South Africans, they will punish him, he will need to be on top of his game. But, if he performs, a definite threat, the only out and out threat in the lineup.

With Andrew Flintoff set for a possible return also, playing as one of the four man bowling attack, would it be worth axing two of them in favour of the more dangerous Flintoff and Jones?

I would personally drop Broad in favour of Jones for the upcoming South African series. Jones is much more of a threat, and Broad is still young, his time will definitely come. I would play Flintoff over Collingwood as I have never understood what Collingwood offers as an international cricketer.

If England are going to beat South Africa they will need to take 20 wickets a match, and to do this they will need an attack that is capable of striking regularly, not merely containing.

The current attack will not have enough to beat South Africa. An attack with Flintoff and Jones may just though.

Cricket: England's Ian Bell - For Whom Does the Bell Toll?

Steven White — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 13:08:17 -0400

For a number of years now, Ian Bell has been an untouchable member of England's batting lineup.

Praised for his wonderful technique and classical style at the crease, he backs this up with a solid average of 41.79 and a decent tally of eight centuries. Stylistically and statistically very, very sound.

But there is more to the game of cricket than style and statistics—the best players are ones that can change a game; can win a game by doing something special.

Today at Trent Bridge, following another failure from Ian Bell and the rest of the top order, England found themselves at 85 for 5. What was needed was a batsman to dig in, frustrate the bowlers, and put some runs on the board.

Kevin Pietersen obliged with a match-saving 115, helped by Tim Ambrose's 67, to leave them 273 for 7 at the close of play. Respectable.

Kevin Pietersen has not been in the best of form in recent months, but the fact remains—he has proven he is capable of changing a game, and often changing it quickly.

Ian Bell by contrast has never once delivered a match by saving/changing innings.

It is interesting to note that none of his eight centuries came in matches where the top order struggled. Only two of his centuries have even been the top score of the innings.

The two centuries he did top score with, against Bangladesh in 2005 and Pakistan in 2006, were accompanied by centuries from Marcus Trescothick and Kevin Pietersen respectively.

Not once has he stood up on his own and produced top quality innings when his team needed it most.

He has produced two good scores recently—the first, a half century in a lost cause in Hamilton, and a century in Napier where England already had a very comfortable lead when he came to the crease.

Pundits say he should be given time to recover his form, much like Andrew Strauss has been given time. But for me, the difference is that Strauss had shown in his career the ability to change matches and deserved his chances to get back in form.

Bell has still not proven to me that he warrants a place on the team. Gifted as he is, to me he is little more than a luxury player.