The DRS must be mandatory

I have not always been a supporter of technology in cricket. I’m a traditionalist at heart and love the old fashion notion of walking off stoically even when you’ve had a howler. I was very happy in 2009 that the system was not trialled in a series as important as the Ashes. Subsequent debacles in South Africa and the West Indies ought to have deepened my distrust, but the more I saw it used the happier I became with it. Part of it was just a matter of getting used to it, but also there was the added comfort of knowing that our batsman weren’t going to be given out to a howler at a crucial moment. The poor showing in the 06/07 Ashes was not entirely, or even mostly, down to umpiring decisions, but they played a part. They also started a slide that could have ended Strauss’ career, and England would probably not be as good now without him. It is frustrating for one’s side to get a wicket and have it not be given, but it is more frustrating I think to have a batsman unfairly given out. Even in its early teething problems the DRS leaned more toward keeping batsmen in than giving them out.

The DRS today still isn’t perfect. It never will be, of course, nothing is. HotSpot has trouble detecting faint edges, especially in warmer climates. Sometimes Hawk-Eye gives very odd looking results, and the display could be altered to more adequately reflect the margin of uncertainty. (It is certainly more variable than just ‘half a ball width’.) The manufacturers of HotSpot have already worked to improve their system and Hawk-Eye will improve as cameras get better and better as well. Even if the current technology were as good as it would ever get, however, I would support making it mandatory. Even now it is better than the human umpires. As much as I like Jonathan Agnew, his suggestion that technology not be adopted until it is 100% is silly. Any improvement is a good thing, any time a poor decision is overturned the game is better off for it.

It is also not true to suggest that having the DRS encourages players to disrespect or undermine umpires. In the time when the quality of an umpires decision could not be immediately and independently inspected it was true that players could undermine the umpires by questioning the decision, but that is not the case anymore. Now the umpire is going to be undermined if he makes a poor decision with or without the help of the players. If an umpire gets one wrong everyone in the ground or watching on telly will see the mistake immediately and it will be all over the back pages the next day, undermining him far more effectively than a player ever could. I doubt there is a single umpire in the world who thinks that he never makes a mistake (although I can’t remember the last time I saw Simon Taufel make one) or who would rather have that mistake shown endless times on TV than have it be simply corrected and the game moved on. By the same token it is quite possible to respectfully question a decision. No one is suggesting that players be allowed to crowd around an umpire like footballers (or Australians at the MCG last year).

Although there are purists such as the aforementioned Aggers who oppose the DRS, most of the vocal opposition has come from India. They are the main reason why the ICC has not implemented the DRS full time and they are the only board who still refuse to use it in their series. I have never heard a good explanation for their opposition, apart from the fact that they don’t think the technology is reliable. (Which is patently untrue, otherwise there would not be an option to use it at all.) They certainly aren’t traditionalists or interested in maintaining respect for the umpires. The refused to use the DRS for LBWs in England and it hurt them when Broad took his hat trick at Trent Bridge, but it was worse for England who had a few plumb decisions turned down. Now in Australia they refused any sort of DRS and have got two dodgy wickets for it. It’s probably not going to happen, but the other boards need to force the Indians to use the DRS next time the ICC meet. In the meantime I can only hope that Tendulkar gets a few horrible decisions in this and subsequent series.

Morning at the MCG

As I write this it’s raining at the MCG. It started just before lunch, and we’ll lose almost half of the afternoon session. It’s already been a very good morning, however and there should be a lot about which to talk by the end of the day.

Michael Clarke won the toss at the start of the day and chose to bat on a green wicket. I didn’t, and still don’t, agree with the decision. India’s bowlers are shaky, and there’s every chance that Khan or Sharma will go down with injury at some point in this series. (Sharma looks more likely; Khan, to his credit, looks like he’s in much better shape than when he was in England last summer.) Even if those two do last out the series, a green wicket is probably the best conditions they’ll get in Oz. With Australia’s batting still looking either very inexperienced or very frail it is unwise to give India’s bowlers what would probably be their biggest advantage of the series. A year ago today on a similar (though I think even greener) pitch Australia were bowled out for 98. On the green pitches of England India did not manage to score over 300 in eight innings. If I were in Michael Clarke’s position I would have much rather seen James Pattinson bowling at an Indian batting order that looked unable to play the moving ball in England than an Indian attack probably at their peak bowling at an Australian order who have failed to play the moving ball for four consecutive Tests.

Australia actually had a go at proving me wrong. (And they still might, lots of time left.) Ed Cowan, on debut, and David Warner got off to massively contrasting starts. It wasn’t particularly surprising, Warner being the T20 specialist and Cowan being brought into the side almost specifically because of his patience. At one point Australia were 25-0 with Cowan not out on two. Warner raced to 37 off 49 balls, including a hook for six. He tried to hook a ball that wasn’t really there, however, and was caught behind as it popped up off his glove. Cowan, by contrast, has 29 off 77 as I type this. He kept his nerve when the going was very tough in the morning and kept the innings together after Warner and Marsh went in quick succession. In particular he showed excellent judgement outside his off stump, something badly lacking in the Australian batsmen of recent Tests. Despite this, there were complaints of him being ‘boring’. It’s the same charge that is often levelled at Alastair Cook, who averaged over 80 this year, and is just as ridiculous. In particular I could hardly believe that any Australian would make that complaint. Did they not watch Cook and Trott grind them into the dust last year? Did they not watch their batsmen flash at everything outside off and collapse to 98 all out a year ago, or 47 all out a few months ago. I agree that it is more fun to watch Ian Bell bat than Alastair Cook, but Cook is just as much of a match winner. Australia don’t have an Ian Bell type player, and if they want to start winning Tests again they must embrace Cowan’s style of play.

Australia are now 116-2. The pitch has flattened out and Ponting and Cowan are looking settled. His critics probably won’t mention it, but Ed Cowan’s assuredness may have saved his captain some blushes.

Hilfenhaus plays, Christian doesn’t

Australia have announced their XI for the Boxing Day Test. There’s nothing too surprising in the selection, the XI is Warner, Cowan, Marsh, Ponting, Clarke, Hussey, Haddin, Siddle, Pattinson, Lyon, Hilfenhaus. I am not convinced the selection of Hilfenhaus was wise, Starc didn’t bowl particularly impressive against the Kiwis, but nor did Hilfenhaus look even competent against England. I don’t think two Tests is really enough to write off Starc, but Hilfenhaus has had plenty of chances. It does look like it might be a ‘six down is all out’ sort of XI, so it’s quite good that they resisted the temptation to play Christian as an all-rounder in place of Shaun Marsh. As well as Warner did against New Zealand and as well as Cowan has done, they are still largely untried at this level. With Hussey and Ponting still looking terminally out of form, only marsh and Clarke inspire any sort of confidence. (And Clarke has been quite mercurial recently.)

The announcement of the XI, whilst not surprising, also made me wonder again why Australia usually announce their starting XI so early. In recent times England have named their XI at the toss. This seems like the best course of action, even when the XI names itself, to wait to see the state of the pitch and any late fitness concerns.

Another stupid proposal

There is a story in the Yorkshire Post today (to which I followed a link, I don’t read it habitually) claiming that Yorkshire want a three division County Championship structure with fourteen games a season. (Presumably they think it will be easier to avoid relegation that way.) The proposal that their chairman will advocate at the ECB meeting on 12 January is one to have three divisions of eight teams with the addition of minor counties and university sides.

It’s a poor idea for a multitude of reasons. The original proposal in the Morgan review to reduce the number of Championship matches was met with widespread scepticism, both from fans and from those in the media, and this idea is actually worse. And like the Morgan review, this would not effectively ease fixture congestion, but simply make more of the congestion due to limited overs matches. Furthermore, increasing the number of sides playing in the Championship would spread the ECB’s money even tighter and it would decrease the amount of revenue sides can raise from matches. It is an absolutely terrible idea with no redeeming features that are readily apparent. That isn’t too surprising though; it’s from the same club who earlier advocated dropping two sides from the Championship. The irksome thing is that the ECB may well take the proposal seriously as they will the Morgan review.

The other Boxing Day Test

I’m not sure anyone outside South Africa or Sri Lanka really cares, but there is a Boxing Day Test in Durban too. It’s not exactly a mouth watering contest; Sri Lanka’s only skill recently has the ability to cling on for draws slightly more often than they collapse to massive defeats. They didn’t manage that in the first Test though and I don’t see them getting back into the series. South Africa have a very good seam attack with Dale Steyn looking as good as he ever has and Vernon Philander has had an incredible start to his Test career. Sri Lanka meanwhile rely almost entirely on their senior batsmen, particularly Kumar Sangakkara. The senior batsmen are very good on paper, but they have not been performing reliably and without any bowling of note they cannot hope to play better than they have recently. Not all contests can be exciting of course, and perhaps I’m a bit spoilt after the last few Tests, but come Christmas Day (in my time zone) I’ll be watching Australia v India.

Congratulations England!

The England cricket team won the BBC award for Team of the Year and Andy Flower won coach of the year. I was rather hoping that Lancs would get the first award, given how no one expected us to win the title this year, but England are hardly undeserving. Although there were only eight Tests this year England won six of them and drew the other two. Whitewashing India was one of the highlights of the season. It is also only right that Andy Flower won Coach of the Year. So much of England’s success can be traced back to his leadership. England have lost only one series since he took over, the 0-1 defeat in the West Indies at the start of his reign. Since then England have won seven of out of eight series and drawn the other. Unfortunately neither Strauss nor Cook won Personality of the Year, but Mark Cavendish was hardly undeserving of the award.

My congratulations then to Andy Flower and the England cricket team. Hopefully next year will be even better.

Some friendly advice for Australia

This is a point upon which I touched last night, but now that Australia have announced their squad for the Boxing Day Test I want to go into more detail on it. Specifically I have this bit of advice for John Inverarity and Mickey Arthur: Do not attempt to shore up the bowling by playing one fewer batsman. I know I’m on record as wanting you to fail, but I’m being serious this time. England have been the most successful side in the world over the past two years which is roughly since we started playing just four bowlers. It may not be because we are playing four bowlers (correlation does not imply causation), but it certainly hasn’t been a hindrance. Admittedly, I would actually like Andy Flower to be a bit more flexible about this (since Matt Prior tends to score a shedload of runs and Stuart Broad and Tim Bresnan are perfectly good all-rounders we could easily play one fewer batsman; it’s not like we really need all of 710-7 declared), but I think four bowlers will suit you well on Boxing Day.

True, your quicks aren’t as good as Anderson and co, but really only Dale Steyn is that good right now so that’s hardly a criticism of your bowlers. James Pattinson certainly looks very good and the sooner Pat Cummins returns the better, for you. They look like they will form a formidable new ball pairing and Nathan Lyon is a proper world class spinner. Admittedly Siddle, Starc and Hilfenhaus aren’t as good, but they probably don’t need to be. If you watched India over here last summer you will have noticed that their batting occasionally looked a bit suspect. And by ‘occasionally’ I mean ‘anytime the ball was doing more than it does in the subcontinent’. Yes it would be nice if Cummins was fit and if you had a third seamer to match his skill, but you’ve already had Glenn McGrath. Don’t be greedy. Your bowling has not been your problem recently, at least not since the Ashes. Your problem has been your batting, which is why you don’t want to weaken that further to improve your bowling.

Since the start of the previous Ashes series your top seven average a bit over 34. The only countries worse are Bangladesh, the West Indies and New Zealand. England’s top seven average almost sixty in that time, so you are some way off the pace. You’ve certainly made improvements recently; Warner looks good and most of Oz seem willing to canonise you for finally dropping Hughes for Cowan. (Which seems more like a decision that ought to have been a given, but well.) Your middle order does not inspire confidence, however, and the last thing you need is to make it weaker. There is a rumour that you might play Daniel Christian as an all-rounder, but the easiest player for him to replace would be Marsh. Marsh who admittedly has been injured, but who may be the best batsman in the middle order. (It’s either him or Clarke.) Do not do that. If he must play it’s imperative that he replace Ponting or Hussey (where he could not possibly make the batting any weaker), but the wisdom of effectively ending one of their careers for the sake of what is basically an experiment is suspect. I don’t really see that happening anyway, given the support you have given that pair recently.

Ultimately, of course, I won’t mind if you just ignore my advice. You’re being paid to do your job and I’m not, unless you count the revenue I make from ads on this site. Mostly though you’re Australian (or at least working for Australia) and if you lose it doesn’t really bother me. Quite the reverse, actually.

Australia v India preview

I have been reliably informed that the Boxing Day Test at the MCG is the most eagerly anticipated day on the Australian cricket calendar and this year should be particularly good. (For the Aussies, anyway. As far as I’m concerned there is no way it could top last year’s Boxing Day Test.) Last time India came to Australia the hosts were starting to fade and it was only a year before India replaced them at the top of the Test rankings. That series featured one of the most contentious Test matches since the bodyline series and the tour almost ended early. I don’t see this series being quite so heated, though, as both Australia and India are some way from their peaks now. Of the seven Tests they have each played against England and South Africa in the previous 13 months Australia have two wins and four losses and India one win and five losses. Neither records could be seen as flukes either as both have looked distinctly ordinary, especially against England.

Australia have had more selection difficulties than India, though their bowling looks reasonably settled. Ryan Harris is unlikely to have proven his fitness before the start of the Test, so Mitchell Starc looks likely get the nod despite not particularly impressing against the Kiwis. Shane Watson is also struggling with his fitness, and if he cannot bowl it looks like Daniel Christian could replace him in the side. That said, England did very well against India with a four man attack, so it can be done. Given Australia’s batting woes I think it would be wise to lean toward more batting than more bowling, even at the risk of not having enough firepower to bowl out India’s batsmen twice. The big selection choice, however, is that of the batsmen. Phil Hughes has not done anything to encourage selection whilst Ed Cowan has scored a century against some of the Indian squad in the second tour match. This should make the selectors job pretty easy and I don’t see how they could possibly select Hughes over Cowan at this point. It is possible, of course, that Watson will be fit and return to open as he has done recently, but not only is his fitness a major doubt he will probably fit in better down the order. Shaun Marsh may also return to the middle order, and if Daniel Christian does make his debut it will be at the expense of a batsman. Any of them returning would mean that one of Khawaja, Ponting or Hussey will be dropped. The rumours have been that Khawaja will make way for Marsh, with Watson unlikely to be fit.

(Edited to add: Cricket Australia named a thirteen man squad for the first test and omitted Phil Hughes and Usman Khawaja in favour of Ed Cowan and Shaun Marsh. Ben Hilfenhaus has also been added, slightly oddly. The balance of the side is still in question, but it looks very likely that Ed Cowan will open.)

India also have injury worries, with Ishant Sharma having bowled only 5.3 overs in the first warmup match and taking no part in the second. Zaheer Khan is always a worry and he missed the first warmup match, though with no specific scare. India seem to be trying to reprise their preparations for the tour of England last summer and I think they’ll continue to get the same results if they do not take the tour matches seriously. Yadav did bowl well in the first warmup match, but that was not against a testing batting order. India are helped by the fact that their top seven select themselves; barring injury, Gambhir through Dhoni are all a guarantee. Ashwin will certainly be the first choice spinner and if fit Khan, Sharma and Yadav will be the three seamers. The ‘if fit’ is a major caveat though and there doesn’t appear to be a clear replacement if one of the first choice bowlers goes down. Although their first XI is much more settled than Australia’s they are also a lot more mercurial. Their batsmen are ageing and cannot be relied upon to make the scores they once did (as we saw in England) and the fitness of their bowling is very suspect. If all their players fire they are a side worthy of challenging for number one in the world. If not we get the 0-4 that we saw in England.

The two sides complement each other well; India are strongest batting and Australia are strongest bowling. I think the series will be decided by India’s batsmen. If they can dominate Australia’s young bowlers they stand a good chance of winning, but if they fail as they did in England they will find the going very difficult. I don’t see either side dominating the other and I think the Australian’s home field advantage will allow them to shade it 2-1.

Ten best sporting moments of 2011

I know the sporting year isn’t over yet. I actually had a conversation on Twitter about whether I ought to write a ‘year end’ style post or save it for after the Test. I decided to save my full year in review post for later, but at the same time I would be very surprised if anything happened that warranted an inclusion on this list. If I’m wrong I can always write a revision as well, so with that in mind here are my top ten sporting moments of 2011:

10 – New Zealand winning the Hobart Test
I know my Aussie readers won’t like this, but it was a pretty important moment. New Zealanders probably care more about winning the Rugby World Cup, but they had not won a Test in Australia for 26 years before this. Doug Bracewell may be a great find for the Kiwis and the conclusion of the match was one of the most thrilling you will see.

9 – Tigers winning Game 5 of the ALDS
I love watching the Yankees lose. I love watching the Yankees lose deciding games in the playoffs even more. But most of all I love watching Alex Rodriguez strike out to lose a deciding game in the playoffs in front of a very put out Yankee Stadium crowd.

8 – Royals winning a three game series in New York
The Royals spent most of the month of April this year in or near first place. (It’s true, look it up.) Whilst losing six in a row to the Rangers and Indians at the end of April basically put an end to any notion of contending, there were still bright spots after that. In the second week of May the Royals travelled to New York and won two out of three against the Yankees. The deciding game of the series saw the Royals score six runs in the second inning, including Eric Hosmer’s second major league home run and some terrible defensive mistakes by the Yankees. It was the Royals first series win in New York since 1999.

7 – Manchester United 1-6 Manchester City
It was the match that that caused the media to accept City as genuine title contenders. More importantly it was the match that made United supporters very cross and thus made Liverpool supporters like myself very happy.

6 – Australia reduced to 21-9 at Cape Town
With apologies to my Australian readers. Though as much as I enjoyed this I was more astonished to watch the innings unfold. On no fewer than three occasions I thought there must surely be a recovery, surely they couldn’t lose another wicket. I was wrong on all three occasions, as by the time the recovery did come I had stopped expecting it. Almost as amazing as the innings itself was the shot selection of Brad Haddin and the fact that he wasn’t immediately dropped because of it. Both defy belief.

5 – England winning the Cardiff Test
I already used this in my best moments in English cricket this year, so there isn’t a lot more to say. Nonetheless, it was incredible watching England go from just wanting a few wickets to Sri Lanka not even coming close to saving the Test and certainly belongs on this list as well.

4 – Virender Sehwag making a king pair at Edgbaton/Stuart Broad’s Trent Bridge hat trick
I’ve included these together for their similarity, not only because they both involve Indian wickets falling cheaply. Broad’s hat trick marked the end of the last time India would have an advantage in the series, but I think Sehwag’s king pair marked the last time India had any real hope. It was also a moment of personal pleasure, because Sehwag is massively overrated. He has a good record on the flat pitches of the subcontinent and that is it; his aggression is not suited for English conditions or anywhere the ball does a bit. After the second Test I read about and saw Indians claiming that he would save the series for them and I rather enjoyed being vindicated.

3 – Cardinals winning Game 6 of the World Series
I’m a Royals fan, but years of living amongst Cardinals fans in Kirksville made me rather sympathetic to them. (Though I always hated when they would gripe about ‘barely being .500’ or some such.) Add that to the fact that I hate the Texas Rangers and I was definitely cheering for the Cardinals in the last World Series. Even if I hadn’t, however, I think their multiple comebacks in Game 6 would have had to rank high on a list of best sporting moments, as it was absolutely astonishing.

2 & 1 – Lancashire winning the County Championship and England winning the Ashes
How could I not copy these from my first list? England winning the Ashes in Australia is the only thing that could possibly trump Lancashire winning the title outright. Neither had ever happened before in my lifetime and for them both to happen this year is almost an embarrassment of riches. I have little doubt they will be on a list of best moments in the decade should I make one in 2020.

Edited to add: The Guardian have produced their list of cricketing moments, but there is a lot of World Cup stuff at the expense of Lancs.

Saturday review – 17 Dec

After the thrilling start to the week with New Zealand winning in Hobart, it’s been pretty dull. I haven’t watched the start of the Big Bash; it starts at 02.00 here and in any case last time I watched Shane Warne bowl I had nightmares for about four years. (They stopped just over a year ago.) India played a warmup match against players of whom I have never heard and probably encouraged Australia with their performance. Outside Oz England announced their tour match opponents and Sri Lanka, still missing Murali (who has the third highest wickets per match ratio in history), lost the first Test against South Africa by an innings and 81 runs.

My favourite two articles this week were about Lancashire legend Roy Tattersall, who died late last week. Andrew Hignell in the Cricketer wrote primarily about Tatt’s role in helping Lancs share the 1950 title and Paul Edwards in Cricinfo wrote more broadly about Tatt’s life and career, both during and after his time at Lancashire. Both are fantastic articles.

There is an excellent ‘letter’ posted at King Cricket this week. The writers make some very good points and I’ll certainly try to bring my blog in line with their recommendations.

In Cricinfo, Harsha Bhogle has a good look at Australia’s recent captains and the differing tasks facing Dhoni and Clarke for Boxing Day. I found the historic look the most interesting of almost anything I read this week.

Also in Cricinfo (I spend a lot of my time there) Andy Zaltzman looks in his own almost indescribable way at Australia’s recent batting woes and at the form of dolphins hunting in the Tasman Sea.