-
2012 MLB preview
It’s almost Opening Day! Well technically it already happened, in Japan, but that is one of the stupidest things MLB have done recently and that’s saying a lot. The real, proper, season starts this week when the Cardinals visit the
FloridaMiami Marlins on the fourth (as part of a one game ‘series’, further evidence that the schedule setters were high as a kite this off-season) and by the time the Royals play the Angels on Friday evening the season will be under way for everyone. I’m not going to do a team-by-team preview for all thirty clubs the way I did for the LV=CC, but instead go over each division and give my predictions:
AL West
The division boils down to Rangers, Angels = good; Mariners, A’s = poor. At the bottom of the division will be the Mariners and A’s. They split the pretend opening series in Japan, but it looks on paper that the Mariners are the better team. Their offence doesn’t look much better than last year, though Ichiro could reasonably be expected to improve and their pitching should still be passable. The A’s have brought in Manny Ramirez, which reeks of desperation. At the top, the Rangers lost CJ Wilson, but gained Yu Darvish. The Angels very publicly gained Albert Pujols and… CJ Wilson. That might hurt Texas. The notion for them is that Darvish will be enough to both fill in for CJ Wilson and negate the fact that the Angels acquired him. We don’t know if the very large sum the Rangers paid out to Darvish will be worth it, but the Rangers have to worry that he will be to them what Fenando Torres is for Chelsea and there seems little chance that he will fully justify the nine digit figure that the Rangers had to pay out. Ultimately if the Rangers win some sort of title it will, rather frustratingly, be deemed enough. My prediction for the final standings:
Angels
Rangers (wc2)
Mariners
A’s
AL Central
The Tigers are favourites to win by a distance; they have Justin Verlander and have acquired Prince Fielder in the off-season. There really is no team in the division that look like they can challenge them. The Indians have a good looking lineup, but the pitching looks dodgy and they never made their success last year look like anything but a fluke. The Twins were desperately unlucky to finish as low as they did last year, but they have lost a few players in the off-season. It’s hard to ever write them off, but they seem less likely than usual to make the division close. The White Sox have lost their manager and best pitcher in the off-season. Last year was not good for them, they finished below .500, and I expect this one will be worse. I will go into more detail on the Royals later, but I think we will play well without pushing for the division title. Standings (and note that the Tigers will have a large lead):
Tigers
Twins
Royals
Indians
White Sox
AL East
A division that contains one sixth of the teams in the major leagues and yet gets at least half of the media attention. The Yankees and Red Sox will play each other 19 times again this year and every one of them will be treated as the most important game of the year. They will all be impossibly dull five hour affairs. As part of my effort to offset this, I will simply skip straight to my prediction:
Yankees
Rays (wc1)
Red Sox
Blue Jays
Orioles
NL West
Of the five teams in the NL West, the Padres are the only ones who have not made the playoffs at least once in the past five years and they were a hairsbreadth from doing so in 2007 and only a game away in 2010. A different team has won the division in each of the last three years and last year Arizona went from being terrible in 2010 to winning outright. This is all a roundabout way of saying that it’s hard to predict what will happen. Arizona look like they can carry last year’s form into this one though, and the Giants always look pretty good. The Rockies would need some luck, but they could compete too. The only teams that really look out are the Dodgers and Padres. Prediction:
Giants
Diamondbacks (wc2)
Rockies
Dodgers
Padres
NL Central
Last year the Cardinals won the wild card on the last day of the season, partially by winning their last game against the 56-106 Astros. They, and the other teams in the NL Central, will have one more year in which to make the most of that advantage before the Astros leave for the AL West. The composition of the teams is rather different from last year, but a lot of the dynamics seem the same. The Brewers should be good with the Cardinals and Reds both competing. The Pirates will hope to continue toward a winning season whilst the Cubs would be last in any other division, but this time are saved by the Astros, who look like they’ll do well to avoid another hundred loss season. More specifically:
Brewers
Cardinals
Reds
Pirates
Cubs
Astros
(In other words, exactly the same as last year.)
NL East
The Florida Marlins are no more. Now they’re the Miami Marlins with a new stadium a new (terrible) logo and new (terrible) uniforms. They’ve also spent some money to bring in some big name free agents and look like they will be competitive. The Phillies still have the best rotation in baseball, but now their best hitters are all injured and they look unlikely to recreate their 102 win season from last year. The Braves finished last year by choking hilariously and missing the playoffs by a game to St Louis. They seem to have written it off as a fluke and made very few changes in the offseason. I think that will backfire, however, and that they’ll be a lot more than a game off the mark. The Nats probably will not compete for the top spot, but they are well placed to reap the rewards of their young talent and should be above .500. The Mets look like a team in disarray and will be hoping everything goes disastrously wrong for one of their opponents. Prediction:
Marlins
Phillies (wc1)
Nationals
Braves
MetsThe playoffs now have the one game ‘play-in’ for the wild card. Even if I could be really confident of the teams even contesting the match, there is no way to accurately predict the results of those matches this far in advance. But it’s pretty unlikely that any of the other predictions will be accurate either so I’ll go ahead and have the Rangers beat the Rays and the Diamondbacks beat the Phillies. Division series: Tigers v Rangers, Yankees v Angels, Brewers v Diamondbacks, Giants v Marlins. Championship series: Tigers v Angels, Brewers v Giants. World Series Tigers v Giants, Tigers to win in five games.
My specific prediction for the Royals is an 85-77 finish. It won’t be near enough to compete and as mentioned above I think it will only be enough for third, though some fortune might see us in second. The offence still looks good. Even if Hosmer falls off a bit there is a lot of talent there as evidenced by the fact that the .250 hitting Alcides Escobar is amongst the worst hitters in the lineup. The question is still the starting pitching. Chen will take Opening Day, with Hochevar going on the seventh. That was a surprise when announced, but regardless of the order in which they pitch a rotation of Chen, Hochevar, Sanchez, Mendoza and Duffy does not look all that intimidating. The hope will be that Mendoza and Duffy have breakout seasons and Lancashire have shown that young talent can come through quickly. There’s a reason it was so surprising when Lancs won the title last year though. Off the field, Rex Hudler promises to reach Tony Greig levels of annoyance in the commentary box. I don’t think he’s quite at the level of Ravi Shastri, but he has 140 games in which to try. I’m sure I’ll have more to say on him later in the year.
This post also appears on The Armchair Selector.
-
Colombo, day one
This was England’s day. It did not get off to a good start, Strauss lost the toss for the fourth consecutive time and Sri Lanka went in to bat. Strauss’ inability to correctly predict the path of a coin remains the number one reason why he should be sacked.
After that, however, it was eerily similar to the Galle Test, but a bit better for England this time. Once again the first three wickets fell cheaply, this time all to Jimmy Anderson. And once again Jayawardene scored an excellent century as he and Samaraweera consolidated, but this time England managed to get Jayawardene out. Swann trapped him lbw in the 80th over, plus Finn got Prasana Jayawardene before stumps and England restricted Sri Lanka’s scoring rate all day. England might have had loftier hopes after reducing Sri Lanka to 30-3, but 238-6 at stumps is still a good position after losing the toss. With Prasana out, Angelo Mathews is the last recognised batsman and England will be able to target him with a newish ball tomorrow morning.
Credit must go to James Anderson again. He bowled a fantastic spell with the new ball yet again and once again dismissed Kumar Sangakkara first ball. He did not get the hat trick, but he did get Thirimanne not long after. Those three wickets were not just reward for his efforts though. He also bowled one of the best spells one will ever see with a 60 over old ball, getting it to reverse both ways and comfortably beating the batsman time and time again. How he did not get a wicket is beyond me, he appeared to have it on a string. The consistency with which Jimmy has bowled over the past two years is incredible and he seems to be getting better. I don’t think there is any bowler in the world right now, Steyn included, who could have bowled the way Jimmy did today and he has performing at that level on very unhelpful pitches all winter. In the past two years now he has taken 101 wickets in 22 Tests (4.6 wk/Test) at an average of 22.83 and ten of those have been in unhelpful conditions. It’s an incredible return and I think Jimmy deserves at least equal mention with Steyn right now.
There was also some controversy when Samaraweera appeared to glove a ball from Finn to short leg on 36. England were convinced that it was out, but the umpire did not give it and it stayed with his call on review. There were two clear noises on the replay, however, and there was just as much evidence that he had hit it as the incident with Cook in the last Test. This time it was not overturned, however and I think England can justifiably feel hard done by. It was a poor decision on-field and brutally inconsistent by the third umpire. I will also bring up the point I did with Cook’s dismissal: the batsman should have walked. He clearly hit it and standing his ground was an act of deliberate dishonesty. For me it is in the same league as claiming a low catch and it should come under similar criticism. For Samaraweera and Cook to stay at the crease was disgraceful. Cook at least was given out but the only bit of justice given to Samaraweera was a nasty blow to the head two overs later. If he’d walked he would have avoided that.
The match is well set up for tomorrow’s play, England took a pair of important late wickets and need to make the new ball count again tomorrow morning. The big wicket is now that of Mathews, he has not played cricket for a while due to injury and it will be interesting to see how he starts tomorrow. If Jimmy and Finn can be as on-the-money as they were today, they have an opportunity to put England in a great position. After that, it will all be down to the batsmen again.
-
Colombo preview
England go into the final Test of the winter with everything to play for. Four losses from four Tests and now they must win to maintain the number one Test spot and save even the smallest amount of face. The key for England is very, very simple: the batting, so good from their second innings at Brisbane through their only innings at the Oval, must rediscover something approximating their form from that period. Despite slipping a bit near the end of the last Test, the fact is that the bowling unit have had as much or more success this winter as at any time in the past six years. They are not the problem and in fact their success in all conditions must be the envy of all other nations. The level of success they have had with the ball means that the batsmen need to perform only a little bit better and England will have a great chance of levelling the series.
Sri Lanka have a lot for which to play as well though. They have not won a series since beating New Zealand at home in 2009 and this would be a major scalp for them. They will be a motivated side and I expect that their middle order will be desperate to cling on to their wickets in the way that only Jayawardene did in the first Test. If they can thwart England’s bowlers and get just one properly big total in the match, England will have very little chance of getting the victory that we need. That will not be an easy feat for Sri Lanka though, even if the pitch is flat. Even without Stuart Broad, England’s attack have proved that they can take wickets in all conditions against all opponents.
The toss will be important again. Given England’s habit of collapsing at the merest hint of turn, batting last could be disastrous, even on a road. Similarly, we have already seen how much Sri Lanka benefited in the first Test from even a fairly modest first innings total. If Strauss can finally find the luck with the coin that has eluded him for the last three Tests, it should be game on. England’s batsmen did not look in bad touch in the last Test; nearly all of them made at least a start with the bat. If, on the first day on a flat pitch, they can finally be persuaded to dig in like Trott, the runs are there. A big score in the first innings and England can boss the game like they did so often last year. Sri Lanka will be praying that England are still a Test away from returning to form.
-
Sri Lanka win by 75 runs
The month and scenery changed, but this Test was a familiar tale for England: A frustrating and avoidable defeat. This time was all the more galling (no pun intended) for coming against a demonstrably weaker side. When England collapsed against Pakistan they had the excuse that they were up against a very good bowling unit, not so in Galle. Herath took what may have been the luckiest Test 12-fer in history (though the last one was taken by Jason Krejza, so maybe not) as the batsmen repeatedly gifted him their wickets. Of the seven recognised batsmen (ie, Strauss – Patel), nine of the 14 wickets to fall in both innings were needless. Even granting Patel leniency on debut and accepting the inevitability of the occasional batsman error, one would still call six of the 12 wickets inexcusable. Of those, two were to misplayed sweeps shots and three were to needless charges down the wicket (and remember, I am not including Broad through Monty in that). It is fair to say that without those errors, England would have won. Herath is not a 12-fer bowler without a lot of help, and in this match he picked up three wickets from stupid shots, three tail-end wickets and the debutant twice. The other four were at least reasonable, but four wickets for a subcontinent spinner is nothing special. But that’s about right, because it wasn’t a special performance. He was not only outbowled bowled by Swann, but even Randiv was getting more bounce and turn. It’s fair to say that Herath was the third best spinner in the match, but England made him look like Shane Bloody Warne. It’s frustrating, annoying and the same thing they did in the UAE. They should have learnt and they did not.
The bowlers were once again very good, but they did not cover themselves in glory the way they did in the UAE. Jimmy Anderson’s five wicket haul in the first innings was excellent, starting as it did by reducing Sri Lanka to 11-2 and removing the very dangerous Sangakkara first ball. He also produced a pair of fantastic deliveries to finish the innings on the second day, though by then it was later than England would have liked. Graeme Swann certainly deserved more for his efforts. Six wickets in the second innings, including Jayawardene, Sangakkara and Samaraweera (cumulative average: 159.12) for only 55 between them. He had Sri Lanka 127-8 in the second innings and gave England a chance to win. He also batted in a cap in both innings. It’s a small thing, but it does not happen nearly often enough and it is very, very cool when it does. Between all that, I think it would have been fair to have given Swann MotM.
The bowling unit as a whole, however, was not quite incisive enough and Strauss had a bit of a shocker with the captaincy. The biggest problem for England was probably the selection, we played two seamers and three spinners. The notion was presumably that the seamers would not be effective on the slow surface, but Anderson and Broad put the lie to that in the first innings. Neither Monty nor Patel looked incisive, meantime, and all of their wickets were those of tail-enders. This lack of firepower cost England badly as the Sri Lankan tail added valuable, and ultimately match winning, runs in both innings. The second innings was the more frustrating. This time, Sri Lanka did not have an established batsman to guide the tail and yet the last two wickets put on 87 runs. England only lost by 75, so it is no exaggeration to say that those cost England the match. Strauss did not captain well in that time. To be fair to him, he was handicapped by only having two wicket taking options: Patel and Panesar looked unlikely to bowl anyone out and Broad was half fit. Strauss could not keep Swann and Jimmy on for the entire session and Sri Lanka profited. At the same time, however, he did not attack enough. England needed to wickets to have a great chance of winning, but he put men back and allowed easy singles. The notion was to get the ‘rabbit’ on strike, but this seldom seems to work and it did not come close to doing so here. This is not the first time England have changed tactics to tail-enders and I find it baffling every time. The original tactics had reduced the Sri Lanka to 127-8 and got some of the best batsmen in the world out cheaply. Why alter that to a number ten? In the first innings, Jimmy bowled Welegedara with an unplayable offcutter. The batsman had no chance. Why this was not the plan in the second innings is beyond me.
England could have, and should have, won this match. There is still some hope, but they must cut out the errors before the next Test. Having watched this side at their best we know this is possible, but one would think it would have already happened. I have already written about how England can improve their player selection, but the biggest problem is shot selection. As long as they are playing rash shots, like sweeps, they will struggle.
-
Number one?
England have lost by 75 runs to Sri Lanka and thus need to win the next Test to stay number one in the world. I’ll mention what I think they need to do later/tomorrow, but right now I think there is a good question about whether England ‘should’ be number one or not. It’s something that has come up a few times on Twitter, albeit usually in the form of a snide remark by a South African/Australian/Indian. (Who, strangely, have not usually shown an actual desire to discuss the topic.) The obvious point is that England have lost four Tests in a row since officially becoming number one last August and in any sport it is very hard to do that and still justify being considered the best in the world. Even if England win the last Test, the question will remain after what has been a very poor winter and unless/until England convincingly win a series in the subcontinent there will certainly still be suggestions that England are not the true ‘number one’ side.
Cricket is already unique amongst international sport with its wide range of conditions and possible results, but it is also in a unique situation where the ‘number one’ question is more than usually pertinent. Cricket has had two dynasties that have stretched most of the past 30+ years: the West Indies and then Australia. I had already noticed (even last summer) that there were those who said that England could not be number one until they matched those two teams. That is patently absurd, of course. The fact that almost no team in any sport ever achieved that kind of domination is what made the West Indies and Australia so special. I don’t think most people would claim that modern teams have to match those two greats, but I do think their legacy runs deeper than is obvious. Most do not say that England have to establish worldwide dominance to be number one, but there are still suggestions that a number one side ‘should’ do certain things. (Win in all conditions being the usual one.) But that is rubbish too. The number one side, by definition, is simply the side that is better than all the other sides. Right now, no side (apparently) can win in all conditions, but we cannot simply have no number one side just as a domestic league cannot be without a table topper.
The question then is whether England are better than all other sides. There is not an obvious answer to that. The nearest, and probably only, competitor is South Africa and they have had problems too. South Africa have not won a series on the subcontinent since beating Pakistan in 2007. They have won only one series at home since the start of 2008, against Sri Lanka this year. England beat Sri Lanka at home too, plus India; Pakistan and Australia. On results one could not say that South Africa are better than England, but the recent ones make it very hard to say that South Africa are worse too. Officially, if England do not win the next Test our run of poor form will have been bad enough to go below South Africa. That’s fair enough, but I don’t think South Africans can feel hard done by if England win and stay at the top. (Just as they could not, or at least should not have, when they failed to beat New Zealand.) England don’t look like the best side in the world right now, but South Africa have hardly pushed for the title.
Luckily, the fixture list has been kind and the issue can be settled head-to-head this summer. Though the series is still too short.
-
Galle, day three
On the one hand, trailing by 125 after the first innings I think one would take bowling the opposition out for 214. England, however, have to massively disappointed with their display in the field today. Graeme Swann was excellent again, and his six wicket haul reduced Sri Lanka to 127-8 at one point. If England had got the last two quickly they probably would have been favourites to win. Instead Strauss insisted on giving Other Jayawardene singles to try to bowl at the tail-enders. Jayawardene milked runs and with Panesar and Patel looking very flat the score climbed and climbed. Broad almost finished the innings with the deficit still under 300, but it was a no-ball and from then on England got very sloppy. Another 47 runs were conceded and the match appeared to slip away in that afternoon session. The last wicket rather appropriately fell off a run out: it was the only way England looked like taking it.
To say that it was very frustrating would be an understatement. It is not the first time England have done this, against MS Dhoni and India last summer would be the best example. For some reason, when tail-enders are at the crease all of England’s brilliant plans seem to go out the window. The seamers resort to short bowling and Strauss tries to give the batsman with the higher score a single to bowl at the other one. Today England had taken eight wickets for under 130 runs with orthodox bowling plans, surely if we had persisted with that the last two would have come. But we didn’t. Easy singles kept the pressure off, as Sri Lanka knew that every one was worth far more than England were making it look. It was some of the worst tail-end bowling one will see and it ultimately cost us 87 runs. Given the state of the match, there is every chance that those runs will prove the difference.
England were slightly unfortunate with respect to technology today though. Randiv appeared to have edged a sweep behind early on, but the umpire gave it not out. There was a clear noise as the ball passed the bat, but the bat was also close to the ground. England opted not to review with no HotSpot and it certainly would not have been overturned. However, the sound looked to be as the ball passed the bat, not as the bat passed the ground and in any case was a clear ‘click’. It was the same sound as a regulation outside edge, not the sound of bat on ground. Much later, Cook was batting against Dilshan and tried to work one away to leg. The ball passed the bat, went onto the ‘keepers gloves and the Sri Lankans celebrated. The on field umpire inexplicably gave it not out, however and it looked like the same situation may arise. Sri Lanka did review though, and the third umpire gave it out. It was slightly controversial, as there was nothing specific to say Cook hit it, but the right decision was made. There is no doubt at all that Cook hit the ball, there seemed to be a noise and the reactions both of Cook and the fielders spoke volumes. Everything about it screamed out, and I cannot believe the umpire did not give it on the field. There will be complaints about it, but justice was done. Certainly it serves Cook for not walking straightaway (look at his reaction and it is clear that he knows he hit it). I’ve no sympathy for him at all. The only thing about which England can be upset is not getting the decision in the morning (and that one was a lot closer).
England finish the day needing another 229 runs with eight wickets in hand. It’s fairly interestingly poised. I said yesterday that if one ignores form, England could chase 350 and that’s still true. If England bat sensibly there are no demons in either the pitch or the attack and if we had conceded fifty fewer runs I’d say we were well on top. 340 would be a record breaking chase though, and Strauss did his best to help Sri Lanka’s cause by skipping down the wicket and hitting a ball straight to mid-on. It was an irresponsible shot from any batsman, but especially from the captain. It was downright irresponsible and much as I like Strauss, I hope he gets a dressing down from Flower and Gooch. Despite that though, 111-2 is not a bad position. The last four batsmen put on almost 100 in the first innings, so England will think that if Trott, KP, Bell, Patel and Prior can combine for a very feasible 150 more runs they are in with a very good shout. A collapse always looks a ball away when England are batting though, and I think it will all fall apart tomorrow morning. One foolish shot from KP may be enough for us to end up 200 all out.
-
Galle, day two
There are some positives to take from today. Most notably, two players who were out of form recently had a very good day. Ian Bell showed why he is still one of our best batsmen and was actually the only one to look at all like he knew what he was doing. I was quite glad to see this (tempered by the horror of what was going on around him, of course) as I have said before that Bell is a good player who should be backed to score runs and he did just that. He was finally undone only by a very good ball from Herath (the only one he bowled). Still, it was a steady innings and in addition to his own runs (of which he scored more today than in all three Tests in the UAE) he gave Broad and Swann a chance to get some much needed runs at the other end with more expansive shots.
The other somewhat out of form player was Graeme Swann. There were some questions asked about his place in the side coming into the match and even more after Panesar finished the first innings with better figures. I will add, I think these questions were foolish: Panesar was in better form, but Swann is still the better bowler and he showed that clearly today. Broad gave him the chance to bowl at two left handers (as Swann likes to do) when he clean bowled Dilshan and Swann took the opportunity well. He not only got Thirimanne with a lovely ball, but he also got the vital wickets of Jayawardene and Sangakkara. Those were the batsmen most likely to defy England enough to get Sri Lanka to an unbeatable position. Sri Lanka may still do that, of course, but it won’t be any of the obvious candidates to see them there and it vastly improves England’s chances of making an interesting finish to this match. Swann also got Samaraweera stumped late in the day. Samaraweera is not as renown as his middle order colleagues, but he still averages better than fifty and to get him before stumps for only 36 (half of Sri Lanka’s runs at that point) was a huge boost. Swann ended the day with four top/middle order wickets for 28 runs I have suddenly stopped hearing anything about Monty being the new number one spinner.
Those were the high points of the day, but mostly it was one to forget. Sri Lanka edged their way (literally) to 318 all out with Jimmy getting a well deserved five-fer but it was far more than we should have conceded. After which came the great batting collapse of the style I thought we had left in the UAE. This time it was even less excusable. There is really nothing in the pitch, it’s only the second day, and Herath is not a special bowler. Bell aside, England played him like he was Shane Warne, however. Although there was some nice attacking intent, the batsmen seemed to not know how much turn he was getting (very little) and resorted to pre-meditated shots. These worked about as well as they did in the UAE. Bell showed how to play the spinners: he moved his feet and happily hit Herath back down the ground, or stayed back and cut behind square. He was the only one. After a decent start, Strauss and Trott spectacularly threw their wickets away: Strauss sweeping (*facepalm*) and Trott being stumped off a full toss in a manner which no text description can fully do justice. Prior and Patel, meantime, just went with the standard failure to get forward and were out lbw. Only Cook (to the seamer) and Bell (much later) were out to properly good deliveries. After the innings was all but over, Broad (28), Swann (24) and even Jimmy (23*) and Monty (13) hit the ball around brilliantly to give the scorecard some respectability. The fact that Monty hit a four back over the bowler’s head and Jimmy reverse swept a ball for four shows just how good the wicket was and just how poorly the top order played, however.
Today was the UAE all over again and England really have no excuse. The bowlers have single-handedly kept us in the match again, but we are going to need runs from our top order. We have a skilled lineup and the pitch should still be flat for the chase (it’s unlikely to occur on day four, let alone five), so if the batsmen come to the party we can chase 350. One would have to say, however, that Sri Lanka’s lead of 200 is probably already enough.
-
Galle, day one
It should have been England’s day. Any time one loses the toss and promptly reduces one’s opponent to 15-3 should be a good day. And England did just that. Despite announcing that Samit Patel would play, but at number seven (I expected either Patel at six or Bresnan at seven, but not this) and then losing the toss and having to bowl, they took three quick wickets and put Sri Lanka under pressure. England let it slip badly at the end though. They seemed to just tire out. It was very hot in Galle, so there’s every chance that they did just that, but it was still disappointing and I don’t think it is unreasonable to expect better. England had a great opportunity to put their foot on the throat of Sri Lanka, but instead the home side finished on 289-8 and if England are in front at all, it is only just barely.
Sri Lanka actually provided most of the action today. England bowled pretty much as they always do at the start of the day: pretty tight, mostly outside off, full and swinging a bit. And this got wickets in the way it often does: the batsmen were impatient and played at balls they ought to have left. Sangakkara played a particularly unexpected flash outside off to his first ball, and Dilshan’s innings was Sehwag-esque in it’s horror. It was good bowling by England, but the fact that Sri Lanka had mostly thrown their wickets away was evident and Mahela Jayawardene and Thilan Samaraweera knuckled down. They played sensibly and Broad and Anderson could not bowl long spells in the heat.
This was where I think the flaws of England’s selection started to show. There’s a long way to go in the match, of course, and we have not seen Patel’s batting yet, but I do not think we needed three spinners. We started the match with the new ball swinging a bit and troubling the batsmen, but we had to bring the seamers off quickly in the heat and bring on spin. Panesar was good, but he rarely looked incisive, merely containing. Swann was the opposite: he bowled some magic balls and was unlucky not to get a wicket, but he also went at a considerable rate. Neither were what we needed with Sri Lanka at 30-3, we needed someone like Tim Bresnan or Steven Finn. I would have picked Bresnan to play and we know that he can pitch the ball up and nip it about. That is what was causing the batsmen problems, but instead we had to waste some of the new ball by bowling spin. Of course, Patel did take two wickets. The first one was a rank gift (most of the Sri Lankan wickets were), but the second one was a better bit of bowling. It was later in the day, after Herath had played very defensively against Swann and Panesar he tried to get some runs off Patel and was lbw missing a sweep. The fact that neither Monty or Swann got a wicket will make it look like a very good selection, but at least so far I think that is deceiving.
Still, things went well for England for most of the day. After that early burst, Sri Lanka needed a giant partnership to re-establish control of the match and there did not seem to be one forthcoming. All of their batsmen after Sangakkara made starts if not more, but Chandimal’s 27 was the highest. England never had a stranglehold on the match like they briefly did at the beginning, but they were comfortably on top and with Sri Lanka on 191-7 it looked like it would be a very good day. This was roughly when everything started to fall apart. Jimmy Anderson missed what should have been a comfortable caught and bowled when Jayawardene was on 90 and the Sri Lankan captain hit the next ball for six. Later Monty dropped him twice in successive overs. The first drop was pardonable, the ball clearly went right into the sun and Monty never really saw it. The second was horrendous though. It went straight up and despite having ample time to prepare he tried to change his catching position (from the so-called ‘English’ stance with the fingers pointed away from the body to the so-called ‘Australian’ style of fingers pointed back)* at the last second and shelled it.
Jayawardene played very, very well of course. After getting to his century he seemed determined to blast Sri Lanka to the highest score he could. He rotated the strike brilliantly to protect Herath and picked the gaps with an ease that seemed almost unfair. He did offer those two chances to the second new ball, but even by then England were already reeling a bit. He did fantastically well all afternoon to steady the ship and at the end he came very close to getting Sri Lanka back on level terms. It was a true captain’s innings and he deserves a massive amount of praise.
Anderson’s third wicket, a lovely inswinger to trap Other Jayawardene lbw, was the 252nd of his career. Which may seem like an odd one to mark (250 being the logical choice) but this was significant as it brings him level with the great Brian Statham for career wickets. Often I brush this off as a result of the large number of Tests played in this era, but Anderson has actually achieved this in three fewer Tests than Statham. (Though Statham does have the better average.) This is even more noteworthy considering the long lean patch Jimmy had earlier in his career. It was already clear that Jimmy was one of the best bowlers in the world right now, but given the fact that he has plenty of time left in his career he may be remembered as one of the best English bowlers of all time.
It’s always a bit hard to know where a match stands after the first day of the series (unless the batting side is skittled for 100, which is usually pretty clear) and with England batting second this is not an exception. If one offered England 289-8 immediately after losing the toss they would have accepted. If one made the same offer after Sri Lanka were reduced to 15-3, I expect they would have declined. Tomorrow will mostly be a day for England’s batting. The pith is flat and Sri Lanka’s attack is not particularly threatening and a big score should be on the cards. There is turn, however, and if their mental daemons resurface Sri Lanka could find themselves very well placed. England have lost the chance to bat with the pressure off, however, and Strauss and Cook must get the innings off to a good start. I expect they will still be batting at stumps, whether both on 150* or following-on I’m not sure, however.
*This is actually one of the few technical aspects of cricket of which I actually have some knowledge and I have always preferred having the fingers point backward. By getting one’s head under the ball, it’s apparent motion becomes almost non-existent and it is much easier to track the ball into the hands. The alternative method – fingers out, catching near the stomach – means that one has to follow the ball and make any last minute corrections as it passes in front of one’s face at upwards of 30m/s. That is rather harder, at least for a very high catch.
-
2012 LV= County Championship preview
The County Championship is almost here. The traditional curtain raiser (in the decidedly non-traditional venue of Abu Dhabi) between the MCC and county champions Lancashire starts Monday morning at a convenient 08.30 CDT. That handily places it an hour or two after the close of play in Sri Lanka, so I’ll get to watch both. (Though unfortunately it also means that I apparently won’t be sleeping at all next week.) The season proper starts the week after, on 5 April, with three matches in Division One and four in Division Two. Before I get to my team-by-team breakdown, here’s a review of last year’s tables/shameless reminder that Lancs won and Yorkshire were relegated:
Lancashire 246
Warwickshire 235
Durham 232
Somerset 189
Sussex 182
Nottinghamshire 173
Worcestershire 142
Yorkshire 138
Hampshire 127
————–
Middlesex 240
Surrey 227
Northamptonshire 226
Gloucestershire 198
Derbyshire 181
Glamorgan 178
Essex 159
Kent 149
Leicestershire 88I have written brief previews for each team, but if you prefer you can also skip to the end where I have my predictions for the final table:
Derbyshire‘s biggest change from last year is the loss of their ‘keeper and captain, Luke Sutton, to an early retirement. This is a major blow for them as he had done an excellent job last year in leading a young side and I expect they will miss him greatly. They have the same overseas players as last year, Martin Guptill until the middle of June and Usman Khawaja from then on, and both are good, but not spectacular and I doubt that will be enough to keep them from slipping a bit from last year.
I think Durham will actually be a bit disappointed with last year’s result. They finished third and competed for the title until the last round of matches, but they did not get the performances from their bowlers that they might have expected. On paper they have possibly the best bowling attack in the country and one which is not disrupted for international duty, but only Graham Onions had a really good season last year. Steven Harmison only bowled 117.4 overs (but took 17 wickets in them) and Liam Plunkett, for the second year in a row, was very poor. They have made very few changes in the off-season and I expect them to be near the top half of the table again, but they will need their big name bowlers to step up if they want a third Championship banner.
Essex have already made headlines this off-season by controversially signing Alviro Petersen for the first part of this season. I don’t have any problem with it (playing in England didn’t help Phil Hughes) and I think Petersen will be a good addition to what is already a reasonably strong batting order. They also acquired Charl Willoughby from Somerset. Willoughby did not have his best season for Somerset last year, but he is a skilled bowler and alongside Ryan ten Doeschate gives Essex a pretty strong attack. I expect them to climb up the table and possibly challenge for promotion this year.
Glamorgan will be boosted this year by the return of former England paceman Simon Jones. Otherwise, however, it’s not great news for the Welsh side: Their top batsman last year was Alviro Petersen and as mentioned above, he is now with Essex. Their primary overseas player this year will instead be Marcus North. The same Marcus North who can’t even get into the Australian side anymore. Glamorgan finished sixth in Division Two last year and will do well to get that high this year.
Gloucestershire are another second division side who may be in for a long season this year. Both their lead run scorer, Chris Taylor, and their lead wicket-taker, Jon Lewis, have left the county. Without those two players they are going to be heavily reliant on the all-round talent of Will Gidman. Gidman had a fantastic season last year, taking 51 wickets and scoring 1006 runs, but it was his first full year at the county level and he may find it hard to maintain that form this year. If he does, Gloucestershire may still finish mid-table. Otherwise, however, I expect them to be very close to the bottom.
Hampshire finished at the bottom of the first division last year, but ended the season in the best way possible (for me). By clinging on for a draw against Warwickshire they sent the title to Old Trafford and have my thanks. They will be without Imran Tahir for this year’s campaign, but Danny Briggs was actually their lead wicket taker last year and barring the possibility of international duty there is a good chance that he can cover for the gaps. The biggest blow for them is that Neil McKenzie, who scored 1120 runs at 43.07 last year, will only be available for the T20 this year. That leaves a hole in their batting, but they have signed Simon Katich as their overseas player. Katich would probably be in the West Indies right now were it not for the very public falling-out with Cricket Australia, so that is probably a good signing. If Michael Carberry and new captain Jimmy Adams can build on good seasons last year then Hampshire should be fighting for promotion come September.
Kent have had a very busy off-season. They are another second division county who lost their lead run scorer to the top-tier, in this case Joe Denly to Middlesex. They’ve brought in a handful of players, however: Charlie Shreck has come in from Notts, Ben Harmison from Durham and Mike Powell from Glamorgan, plus a few from their youth team. Most importantly though, they have signed Brendan Nash as an overseas player. Despite the relatively poor statistics, he does bring some stability to the batting and it is always nice to have someone with Test experience. I think it is a good move. I don’t know that Kent have done enough to make a move up the table this year (though Lancs demonstrated last year that it is not impossible to do so with young players), however they look like they are in a good position to potentially profit from other counties slipping.
Lancashire won the title last year on the back of an unbelievable bowling unit. Gary Keedy took the most wickets with 61 at an average of 23.63, but Glen Chapple took 55 at 19.81 and Kyle Hogg took 50 at 18.80. Chapple and Hogg were the only two bowlers in the first division to bowl at least 200 overs and still have an average under 20. Simon Kerrigan only played four matches and still took 24 wickets at 18.20. Somewhat incredibly, our worst regular bowler last year still took 35 wickets at an average under 30. The questions for this year are a) can we at least come close to repeating that performance and b) can we improve on last year’s pretty dismal batting? The first one is the harder one to answer. We were helped last year by playing home matches at the bowler friendly Aigburth Cricket Club, but we will return to Old Trafford in the second half of this year and we really don’t know how the rotated surface will play. The bowling attack has not been depleted over the winter, however, so there is every chance of another good performance. The second question is more clear cut and we have signed what should be a solid batsman in Ashwell Prince. All told, Lancashire look like a better team than we were last year and are well placed to compete for the title again.
For Leicestershire, the only way to go is up. Only 88 points in the Championship last year left them a distant last in the second division. To make matters worse, James Taylor left in the off-season for the greener pastures of Trent Bridge. On the one hand, it’s hard to see Leicestershire perform as badly this year as they did last year. On the other, they have lost Taylor and made no measurable improvements. I think they will do better this year then they did last year, if for no other reason than the law of averages. Unless they make some sort of change, however, they will not rise up the table.
Middlesex find themselves in the first division this year after a very strong all-round season last year. They were supported then by 1286 runs from their overseas player, Chris Rogers, and an incredible eighty wickets from Tim Murtagh. Both will certainly find it harder in the first division, as will Joe Denly arriving from Kent, however. A player who will be unfazed by the first division is Steven Finn, who should have the first part of the season in which to push for a place against the West Indies. The more he plays for Middlesex, the better they will do. It’s hard to say how they will fare in the top flight, but I would be surprised if they went back down this season.
Northamptonshire can probably consider themselves desperately unlucky to still be in the second division after missing out on promotion by a single point at the end of last season. Their batting will be slightly improved this year with the addition of Kyle Coetzer and Chaminda Vaas returns as their overseas player after taking 70 wickets last season. Most of the team is the same as last year, however, and can challenge for promotion again with another good performance.
On paper, Nottinghamshire look like the team to beat in the Championship this year. After winning the title in 2010, they were not really in the race last year, but have made improvements in the off-season. The biggest was the acquisition of James Taylor from Leicestershire, but they have also brought in Michael Lumb from Hampshire. Their biggest loss is probably Charlie Shreck who has gone to Kent. Overall they look a very strong side, but ironically might be a bit too strong. Taylor will certainly have commitments with the Lions and there is still a reasonable chance that he will bat at six against the West Indies. They face a similar problem with Alex Hales, their lead run scorer last year, and even Samit Patel. They will be a good side no matter what, but how much of a title challenge they can make will depend a lot on how many of their players they lose to England/Lions duty.
Somerset will, of course, be finishing second in some competition this year, probably losing a limited overs final. This is a preview of the Championship, however, and in that they have far and away the best batsman in either division in Marcus Trescothick. He scored a mind-boggling 1673 runs last year at an average of almost eighty. Eighty! He is not the only batsmen at Taunton either: Nick Compton averaged 56 last year. The problem for Somerset has been their bowling, however, and that has got worse with the departure of Charl Willoughby. Last year only Alfonso Thomas averaged under 30 with the ball and only Willoughby and Steven Kirby took more than 40 wickets. They will be better for the first half of this season, having signed Vernon Philander through May, but I don’t think it will be enough. I think they will play well this year without really challenging for the title.
Surrey are the other team newly promoted to the first division this year. Jade Dernbach will reportedly be using the first part of the season to try to establish his Test credentials. (He’s going to fail, but the fact that he will be trying will be a good thing for Surrey certainly.) If fit, Chris Tremlett will be trying to do the same thing as he competes with Tim Bresnan and Steven Finn for the role of England’s third seamer. Jon Lewis also joins from Gloucestershire, making for a very strong looking attack. Jacques Rudolph will be the overseas player for the first part of the year and should provide good support in a batting order short on Division One experience. Like their neighbours, they should avoid going back down.
Sussex have had a very quiet off-season. They have made no really big moves and at least so far signed no overseas players. To an extent they don’t need to. They have a pretty good side already, finishing solidly in the middle of the table last year. Murray Goodwin and Ed Joyce are both skilled batsmen who had good seasons last year and Monty Panesar and James Anyon have had consistently bowled well. With most of the other first division sides having improved, however, I think Sussex will be moving the wrong direction on the table and likely face a battle to avoid relegation.
The biggest thing on which Warwickshire need to work this year is the breaking of stubborn middle order partnerships on the last day of the season. Apart from that little hiccup, they have a very good bowling attack: Chris Woakes and Boyd Rankin both represent their countries in some form and both took more than fifty wickets last year with averages in the low and mid-twenties. In an ideal scenario, there would be no reason why both should not do the same this year as well. Unfortunately for Warwickshire, Woakes injured his ankle in the pre-season and will miss the first six weeks. That will be at least a quarter of the season and that will hurt. On the bright side, they will have Jeetan Patel all season this year. Their batting is rather weaker; Varun Chopra was their standout performer last year with an average in the forties. That was comfortably the best year of Chopra’s career, however, and there is no guarantee that he can replicate that form next year. Warwickshire might finish near the top of the table again, but I don’t see them winning.
Worcestershire are probably a bit lucky to still be in the top flight. They had a poor season last year and were really only saved by that memorable two-day win against Lancashire. (I can laugh about it now.) They have a pair of good bowlers in Alan Richardson and Gareth Andrew, but not a lot of support for them. Their batting begins and ends with Vikram Solanki. They are trying to shore it up this year with the addition of Phil Hughes (from late May) as an overseas player but if one is desperate enough to sign Phil Hughes, well… I would expect them to be relegated this year.
Yorkshire are in the second division this year. I like to repeat that as often as possible and almost as often as I like to repeat that Lancashire are County Champions: Yorkshire are in the second division. Unfortunately (but not too unfortunately since I do like having Roses matches) I think it will only be for this one season. Whilst they played hilariously badly last year it was very much a surprise. They still can’t afford an overseas player, but Phil Jaques will play with a UK passport and there is plenty of talent in the side regardless. Only Ryan Sidebottom really stood out last year, but Joe Root and Jonny Bairstow are both very good and if they are not playing for England they should fill their boots in the second division.
Given all of the above, this is my prediction for the table come September:
Lancashire
Nottinghamshire
Durham
Somerset
Warwickshire
Middlesex
Surrey
Sussex
Worcestershire
——–
Yorkshire
Northamptonshire
Hampshire
Essex
Kent
Derbyshire
Glamorgan
Gloucestershire
LeicestershireI think the title race will be very close again. Notts are the stronger team on paper, but they have some pretty big vulnerabilities if they lose players to international duty. Lancashire, meanwhile, are almost certainly a better team than the one which won ten matches and the title last season, but the players all turned in unusually good performances last year, and it’s hard to think they can fully replicate them this year. There is also the uncertainty of the new surface at Old Trafford. Ultimately, I’m a bit of an optimist (especially at the start of the season) and I’ve tipped Lancs to repeat.
-
Sri Lanka v England preview
Two Tests. England have flown 8700 kilometres (roughly) for just two Tests. Admittedly, I’m kind of glad there aren’t any ODIs or T20s on the tour, but two Tests is really not ever enough. Especially given that the Sri Lanka Cricket Board are still in some financial difficulty, one would think that they would be very keen to have as many Tests as possible against England. I concede that it isn’t very feasible, however. It’s hard to fit two tours in after Christmas; there isn’t time for a third Test as it would be clashing badly with the County Championship (the second Test already overlaps slightly with the first round of matches) and England could not really have come much earlier, the Pakistan tour had barely ended anyway. So two Tests it is.
Despite the poor showing in Pakistan, and a poor recent record in Sri Lanka, I think England are still favourites. Sri Lanka don’t have the same quality of bowling that Pakistan have (they still badly miss Murali and Malinga) and our batsmen appear to be in much better form than they were in January. I think the best battles will be when Sri Lanka are batting. We still have one of, if not the, best bowling attacks in the world and one which has shown the ability to take wickets even in unhelpful conditions. At the same time, however, Sri Lanka have the world’s best batsman in Kumar Sangakkara and two very good ones in Thilan Samaraweera and Mahela Jayawardene, though the latter is starting to show his age. England’s bowlers had a brilliant match in the first warmup, but struggled in the second so it’s hard to say how they’ll go in the Tests. Neither match was played at one of this series’ Test grounds so we can’t assume much about the wickets that we didn’t already know. I’m slightly more inclined to think that the bowlers will go well though. England were without Jimmy Anderson in the match where they struggled and as good as Broad is, it is important to have an attack leader. Furthermore, England played two spinners in the first match, as they are likely to do in the Tests, but only one in the second. There will be tough battles against the Test quality opposition, but we know that Sri Lanka are prone to collapse (see the 2011 Cardiff Test) and I think England have the skill to trigger a couple.
Sri Lanka will have seen England in Pakistan though and must be thinking that England are just as if not more vulnerable to collapse as they are. I’m not sure that’s accurate, however. Sri Lanka simply do not have the same bowling strength as Pakistan. Rangana Herath is probably their biggest threat, given England’s problems against spin, and he’s not a bad bowler. He still averages 35 in Test cricket though. The rest of their attack are even worse. Angelo Mathews is out with an injury and will probably never bowl again regardless. The second spinner in the squad, Suraj Randiv, averages over 42 and the two pacemen, Suranga Lakmal and Chanaka Welegedara average 55 and just under 40 respectively. Averages aren’t everything, of course, and England will have to play a lot better against spin than they did in Pakistan, but it does go to show that the Sri Lankan attack is not one that would be feared under normal circumstances. Fortunately for England, the batsmen have got off to a much better start this tour than last time. Cook has scored 163* in his only innings and Strauss and Trott both have unbeaten centuries (both retired). KP, Patel and Prior all have fifties. The only worry is Bell, who has still not found his form. There is still the question of who will bat at six, but Patel seems to be firmly in the lead (thank god) as Bopara will not be able to bowl if picked. (Not that he should do anyway. Jonathan Trott actually has better career figures.)
The matches are not played on paper, as we found out with a bump in the UAE, but England will wish that they were. Even taking into account the struggles into the UAE, England are clearly the much better side. They have far, far better bowlers and at least comparable batsmen. They will have to find a way cope with the very harsh conditions though. Apparently it got up to 46 degrees during the recent warmup match and even if the pitches are not outright hostile for our bowlers, they will not be helpful. I don’t think Sri Lanka have the bowling to force a victory, but they do have the batting to possibly force a draw. I think England will win the series 1-0, though if we play well a 2-0 margin is definitely possible.
Defensive Indifference 