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 88

I 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
Leicestershire

I 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.

There’s still football?

Liverpool played QPR yesterday. Perhaps you heard about the match, we had a 2-0 lead in the 76th minute and blew it, losing 2-3. It was pretty galling, and at the time I was very cross. And I stayed very cross for about ten minutes. In that time I stepped outside. It’s been raining, but it was still quite warm and the flowers are blooming. I then went over to the Lancashire website and read about Luke Procter’s century in the pre-season match in the UAE. And then the football result didn’t really matter. This sort of thing happens every year. It’s usually a few weeks later, but I cannot remember a year in which I’ve really still cared about football after mid-April at the latest.

There are many reasons for this. One of them is because Liverpool don’t have a lot for which to play right now, at least not in the league. (I expect I’ll still care about the FA Cup matches.) It’s no coincidence that I never care after the baseball season and County Championship start though. For me football is a winter sport. Football is great when it’s dark and cold, it is something about which I can care and follow in the middle of winter. But it isn’t the same as cricket. Football is a very divisive, vitriolic sport and although it is so much fun to watch it can be very painful to follow between matches. It interests me, and I can’t really disengage from it, but I don’t enjoy it. But now there is something else. The weather has got warm unusually early and happily the County Championship is starting unusually early too. It is time, or nearly so, to leave the dark and cold of football in favour of the warmth and light of cricket. England’s match against Sri Lanka starts on Monday (late Sunday night here) and Lancashire start the County Championship curtain raiser the day after that. Football has been a lovely diversion since October, but it is no longer needed.

Of course, the season isn’t actually over. No, that will drag on for another two months almost. I’ll still watch. I’ll still enjoy the matches as they take place and I’ll still cheer on Liverpool with all my heart. But any joy or pain from the match will likely end with the broadcast. It just doesn’t matter anymore. The season should be ending. Football is so lucrative that it’s probably lucky that there’s an offseason at all (and even so there only barely is one) but the season is really at least two months too long. It should start a month later than it does and it should end no later than the second week of April. For those who love that sport above all others, some more time off should make the season all the sweeter. For the rest of us, a few months in which to enjoy summer and cricket without the interruption of winter’s sport should not be too much to ask.

Walk when out

This is a few days old, but I missed it at the time: Graeme Swann said that Sri Lankan batsman Dilruwan Perera was a ‘cheat’ for not walking after edging a delivery from Jimmy Anderson to slip and not walking. With the umpires unsighted and no cameras at the warmup match Perera was allowed to continue his innings, to the fury of the England players. I would not call it cheating, as he has not contravened any laws, but it certainly is unsporting and especially in a warmup match I think it is despicable behaviour. I understand that a batsman has a duty to try and see his team win the match, but in a warmup match the result is largely irrelevant, so why try to gain an unfair advantage?

It does raise (again) the question of walking in a Test match though. It is a little bit more complicated; the result does matter, so should a batsman do whatever he has to do to stay at the crease? In a word: no. Any sport, not just cricket, is reliant on fair play by all the participants. One does not make an umpire adjudicate if one’s of stump goes cart-wheeling and an edge to slip, even taken near the ground, is usually just as clear cut. The ball has been hit and caught cleanly, so get back to the pavilion. To do otherwise may not be cheating, but it is gaining an unfair advantage by exploiting the limitations of the umpires and of technology. It is dishonest and regardless of how much it helps the team it should not be allowed. The point of any sport is fair competition and resorting to dishonest methods, whether merely unsporting or outright cheating, devalues any subsequent victory.

It is impossible to police, of course, but I do wish that team management, fans and media would come down much more harshly on players who try to con umpires. (Though cricket is much better than most sports.) Players who ‘compete’ like that damage their own and the team’s image and it should not be tolerated. I know it will probably never happen, and that it is probably overly idealistic to even suggest it, but that does not make it wrong.

Amir’s interview

Unfortunately I was not able to watch the full interview that Mohammed Amir gave to Michael Atherton, but I found a transcript and it makes for very interesting reading. Amir is very contrite, saying ‘I told myself that I’d definitely done wrong and would accept the truth, whatever the consequences’ and ‘What I can say is that I think I deserved to be punished’. At the same time, however, he says that he was ‘tricked’ into the fixing by Salman Butt, at whose feet he lays the blame.

Amir says that he panicked and made an error of judgement. That is a plausible and far-reaching defence, but also one for which it is hard to provide evidence. It is worth mentioning that as intelligent and well-spoken as Atherton is, he is not a QC and thus not trained in cross examination. There is a particular portion of Amir’s testimony which struck me as suspicious: he gave his bank details to an unknown third party ‘Ali’ before the Oval Test, apropos of nothing according to Amir. Supposedly he did so because the man was a friend of Butt’s. This is not something I could even imagine anyone doing. I know that Amir’s circumstances are very different from those with which I am familiar, but even so I cannot think of a compelling reason to give one’s bank details to a complete stranger. At the same time, he was given the money for his no-balls in cash, which would be very odd if he had already given his bank details to the fixers. Amir also never answered why he texted ‘so in the first 3 bowl whatever you like and in the last 2 do 8 runs’ before he had been supposedly pressured into bowling the no-balls at Lord’s. It these points on which I think a skilled QC would have pressed and perhaps got a clearer picture than Atherton did.

I am by no means convinced of the veracity of Amir’s story, though the rest of his story is very believable. He claims that Butt and Mazheer told him that the ICC knew of his original phone calls and the only way to stay out of trouble was to follow along with Butt’s fixing. Whilst this is, on the face of it, a rather outlandish claim, the notion that he panicked and accepted is not. If it is true he would be far from the first one to do so. From there he is mostly very contrite, whilst also speaking of his anger with Butt, who Amir considered his ‘older brother’. In general it is a very good interview and it is nice to see him (mostly) take responsibility.

It will inevitably bring up the subject of whether Amir’s ban was too heavy. If one accepts his story as true, then it is easy to paint a picture with it of a young man who had few other options. That would, I think, be ill-advised. Even if one overlooks the illogic of Amir giving away his phone details, the fact that he was pressured into it would only be a reason for some leniency, certainly not any sort of pardon. It must be remembered that the ban is not merely a punishment for Amir, but a shot across the bows of other would-be fixers. The ICC, or any governing body, can never rigourously police and investigate every delivery of every match, they are reliant on informants. As preferable as it would be to use the ‘carrot’ and offer rewards to them, it carries the risk of false claims and is anyway unlikely to match the rewards of fixing. The only direct incentive to report fixing then is the threat of a lengthy ban for all those involved. For Amir, I think five years is about right. He will almost certainly play again, he will still be younger than some debutants when he his ban expires, but his career will have been curtailed and his reputation will probably never fully recover.

The fact that Butt and Asif also only got, in effect, five years is inexcusable, however. Again, I do not fully accept the claim that Butt tricked Amir into fixing, but he was still clearly heavily involved. He had to be, he was the captain and made for a natural organiser. There is no doubt in my mind that he should have been given a life ban and the fact that he wasn’t displayed the spinelessness of the ICC.

Hamilton preview

The second New Zealand v South Africa Test starts in a few hours. I’ll actually miss the first part of it, I’m going out of town for a couple of days, but I’ll be sorry to do so. South Africa were frustrated by the rain at Dunedin, but they did themselves no favours and ought to be kicking themselves about that. Ideally for South Africa that would translate into coming out all guns blazing in the next Test, but I’m not sure it will. They looked very flat before the close on day four and with the added disappointment of the rain their heads may go down. This is, bear in mind, almost the exact same team who responded to a disappointing draw against England by losing by an innings, then responded to another one by winning by an innings. It’s pretty hard to say how they’ll respond here, but I’m leaning towards a positive reaction.

New Zealand should be positive too. Taylor and McCullum batted reasonably well in a high pressure situation on the fourth day, although very little of that pressure was being actively applied by the South African bowlers. Still, they got to stumps in a good enough position that some were suggesting that the rain may have robbed them of a chance of victory. I don’t think that’s true, Taylor and McCullum would have had to get at least another 100 or so of the remaining runs, but they did at least go out of the match on a positive note and can have cause for optimism. Tim Southee has also been dropped which looks like an excellent decision. He has not really performed since very early in his career and would be a fairly unremarkable county bowler in England. New Zealand had trouble turning pressure into wickets in the second innings of the first Test and a large partnership ensued. If they can avoid that in the second Test, they do look like they have the ability to bowl South Africa out cheaply.

I’ve also seen a lot of rubbish about who has the ‘momentum’. It doesn’t matter. Look at the last two Ashes series: in 2009 Australia had the momentum after Headingley and proceeded to lose badly at the Oval. In 2010/11 it was even worse, England had the momentum after Adelaide, but then lost at Perth giving Australia the momentum. Australia were then promptly bowled out for 98 at the MCG and went on to lose by an innings. Sometimes teams will string wins together (usually when they are simply better than the opposition) and sometimes series will go back and forth. Forget ‘momentum’.

Ultimately, I think Steyn, Philander and Morkel will be keen to atone for their performance in the final session at Dunedin and will go after the batsmen much like they did in their first spell of that innings. New Zealand batted reasonably well in Dunedin, but I expect South Africa to step up a bit more and make life very difficult for them. The Kiwis are an improving side and should do enough to keep the match interesting, but I think South Africa will take a 1-0 lead.

DRS in Sri Lanka

According to Cricinfo, the DRS in use for the Sri Lanka v England series will not have HotSpot (which the SLCB cannot afford), but will have Hawk-Eye instead of the much more random looking Virtual Eye. The article also says that Snickometer will be ‘the only tool to aid decisions on catches’ which is odd as it was previously decided that Snicko took too long to be used for the DRS. I don’t know if that has changed or if the article was simply inaccurate, but going off of some other information I’d guess the latter.

Even without HotSpot it is good to have the DRS and even better to have Hawk-Eye over Virtual Eye. I have already made my views on technology clear and I am glad that some form will be in use. The series will be the better for it and maybe now England’s batsmen will learn to actually use their bats on a slow pitch.