Dubai, first Test, day two

Yesterday we saw the worst of England, today we arguably saw the best. After the disappointment of not getting a wicket last night England still looked up for it in the field this morning, and troubled the batsmen early. Even when they did not pick up a wicket for the first ninety minutes of the morning session they did not let their heads drop and were rewarded with two before lunch.

England’s intensity never really abated today. It was clearly hard going in the field and England never instigated a proper collapse, but they kept at it and picked up wickets when they most needed them. Pakistan built several partnerships, but England put a handbrake on the scoring after lunch and although the batsmen occupied the crease for some time they never managed to up the scoring rate. To an extent this is how Pakistan, especially Misbah-ul-Haq, play all the time but England’s bowlers played a big role in that as well. They never lost their line, they never got desperate for a wicket they just kept probing away and waited for their reward. It was great to see and it is one of the reasons England are currently number one in the world. It also makes a sharp contrast to what we have seen in Australia with the Indian bowlers giving up as soon as a partnership has started to build. There are two stats in particular that I think show how well England bowled: Pakistan are 174-7 after their opening partnership and they only scored 75 in an evening session that was extended to get all the overs in. That’s under 2.5 an over for over two hours at a time when Pakistan would have wanted to put the game out of reach.

Pakistan deserve credit for accepting the slow rate of scoring instead of riskily trying to up the run rate (as we’ve seen from many other teams just before they collapsed). Their best batsman statistically was Mohammed Hafeez with his 88 at the top of the order, but I think the best innings was actually played by Misbah during that final session. Hafeez batted with the pressure mostly off; England were probing and testing, of course, but they had not yet found the right line and length and the going was more comfortable, especially as the shine was mostly off the ball by then. Misbah had to face the new ball at a time when Pakistan could easily have collapsed if he had got out though. When Jimmy Anderson removed Asad Shafiq Pakistan were only 39 runs in front with only the tail to come and a young, fairly unreliable batsmen at the crease in the form of the wicket-keeper. If England had got either of them out right then we might already be batting, but Misbah played very slowly, very deliberately and guided his partner through a very tough passage of play. He was eventually undone by Swann, but the partnership was worth what may be a very important 52.

The match is now set up quite well for the next three days. Pakistan could still get a very good first innings lead if the tail can stick around tomorrow morning, but England will be backing themselves to knock them over quickly. A lead of 150 may be too much for England, but that’s still a long way off with the bowlers on top of the batsmen. England’s batsmen are unlikely to recreate their heroics of Brisbane, but something similar could be on the cards. Certainly they are unlikely to bat as poorly as they did in the first innings, so if Pakistan are held to a lead of 100-115 and England have a day and a half in which to amass a large total they could be in a position to exert considerable pressure in the fourth innings.

Pakistan v England preview

The warmup matches are over and now it’s only four days until the first Test between England and Pakistan in Dubai. England have started the tour positively by winning both of the warmup matches, but there have been still been some clear weaknesses, especially in the middle order batting. It may be because they are having trouble adapting to the pitch, or it could just be rust because England have not played cricket for a while. We’ll know more as the series goes on.

The biggest positive from the two warmups for England must be the bowling. Even though Bresnan hasn’t been able to overcome his elbow injury, Finn, Tremlett, Onions and even Monty have put in good performances to stake their claims to replace him. Monty actually had the best figures from that quartet, taking 8-103 in the second warmup. I doubt England will play two spinners, especially in a four man attack, but Monty has made a strong case for inclusion, probably at the expense of Morgan. Tremlett and Onions are almost neck and neck after taking 4-62 and 4-90 in the second warmup, both of which are better than Finn’s match analysis in the first warmup. Finn is probably still the front-runner, it would have taken an exceptional performance by his competitors to overcome that, but Strauss and Flower can be comfortable in the knowledge that there are replacements available if he struggles. Given the gruelling conditions likely to confront England, I would be very surprised if they did not intentionally rotate some of the bowlers anyway.

The batting for England is more of a concern. Strauss, Cook and Trott have all made runs at some point during the first two warmups, but KP, Bell and Morgan averaged 12.9 between them with a top score of 39. This is troubling, but I don’t think it is a disaster. Ian Bell is a very talented player and has had considerable success in the past against Pakistan. He averages 68.8 against them, albeit ‘only’ 52.16 outside of England. Given his skill and history it is very likely that he will come good. KP and Morgan are more uncertain. KP can be a mercurial player, but he was in form last summer. Given that the pitches will favour batsmen one might think that he will find the going to be relatively easy, but he has struggled in his career in the subcontinent. In his career in India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka he averages just 34.6, though he averaged over 80 in two matches in Bangladesh. Eoin Morgan is untried at the highest level, and has never played in a Test outside England, but his technique is said to be good against spin. He has a very inventive style of strokeplay, but he has not yet scored the runs to establish himself as a long term Test candidate. How he fares in this series could tell us quite a bit about if he is a Test batsman or not. Even if KP and Morgan do struggle it is unlikely to be fatal for England. Four firing batsmen can usually carry two out of form ones and when adds Prior and Broad to the mix England’s batting still looks excellent.

For Pakistan, this is their first series against top opposition since they played South Africa in November of 2010. They have won six of their subsequent ten Tests, but drew both matches in that series. Both their bowlers and batsmen performed exceptionally in 2011; their top six averaged just under fifty with the bat and their bowlers averaged under 27 with the ball. Four of their batsmen averaged over 45 last year, and two of those averaged well over fifty, whilst all of their regular bowlers averaged under 30. The caveat to this is that the best team they played was Sri Lanka, and they still almost lost one of those matches. Furthermore, they have recalled Wahab Riaz for this series despite his averaging over 40 last year.

Pakistan have played fairly defensive minded cricket in their last few Tests. It probably cost them a win against Sri Lanka, but may serve them well against England. Whilst England have bowled brilliantly recently, one of their big advantages has been their ability to induce poor shots by choking off scoring. With Pakistan playing cautiously anyway they may not be as susceptible to that tactic, which could in turn make life very difficult for England’s bowlers. At the same time, with Cook and Trott digging in for England it could make it very hard for Pakistan to win. (As well as making the play slow to a crawl, which no one wants.)

Whilst Pakistan are playing well and know the conditions well, I think England are simply a better side. Even if Morgan and KP do not fire we still have six players solid batsmen in the side and a very talented, well drilled and utterly relentless bowling attack. In many ways it doesn’t really matter who replaces Bresnan, England are still going to have an exceptional attack with no real weak point. Going back to the last Ashes they have had 12 Tests in which they have choked the life out of some of the most famous and accomplished batsmen, with only Dravid and Hussey managing to defy them. I think England may still need a Test to get properly acclimatised, but will come back well after that. From what we’ve seen in the warmups I think they can bowl Pakistan out twice and will win the series 2-0.

Morgan’s folly

It was revealed on Cricinfo today that the ECB are going to accept the Morgan review and reduce the County Championship to 14 matches from 2014. I’ve written before about what a dreadful idea it is and that hasn’t changed. The fixture congestion is not going to be effectively eased and the four day game is still popular in England. All this is doing is reducing the amount of proper cricket for no discernible gain. What is particularly galling though is that the reason for the added fixture congestion is that the end of the season is being brought forward to accommodate the Champions League T20 competition.

The fact that we are decimating (more than, actually) our own premier competition for the benefit of a farcical, meaningless T20 competition in which we are not even stakeholders is absolutely infuriating. The ECB have already kowtowed to the BCCI about the DRS and already allow players to play in the IPL instead of for their counties. Now they are going to let our fixture list be dictated by Indian administrators who not only do not care about it’s health, but who have shown an active antipathy toward it! In many ways the ECB are the best run of all the cricket boards, but in addition to not scheduling enough Test matches every time they have looked like properly standing up to India they have folded. It is an absolute disgrace.

I’m not going to be so melodramatic as to say this will ruin the County Championship, but I do think it will hurt it. Sixteen matches is just about enough to avoid flukey results, but even then a lot is dependent on the rain staying away early in the season. What will we do when there is a wet spring and the first nine of 14 matches are badly rain affected? England is the only country in the world where domestic first class matches have their own following. Why damage that at all? Why not try to improve attendance and following of these matches instead of abandoning them for more T20s, both domestic and foreign? I have never seen anything that actually confirms the notion that people who come to the game via T20 actually go on to watch first class cricket. If Indian ‘supporters’ are anything by which to go it seems that T20 viewers are mostly loud, uninformed and at best apathetic toward Test cricket. Their money counts the same as the money of those who care about the first class game, but if the ECB truly care about the long term future of the game they must cater to those who also care, not those who don’t.

Will England succumb to spin?

There has been a lot of suggestion ahead of England’s series against Pakistan that there will be a lot of spin on offer in the pitches and that England will struggle. Leaving aside the question of how well the batsmen will play said spin (though it’s a very good one) it also begs the question of whether the predictions about the wickets will be accurate. The UAE is not technically on the subcontinent, though it is only separated from Pakistan by a narrow body of water, and it is not a given that the pitches will thus be a spinning paradise.

Since the start of 2010, spinners in the UAE have performed very slightly better than their seam bowling colleagues. Each have taken 68 wickets in those five matches, but the spinners have done so at an average of 41.51 as opposed to the seamers’ average of 42.32. There’s not much of a difference, and certainly neither are very good. When you consider the fact that the spinners bowled a lot more overs, it is clear that the seamers are still the more successful bowlers. The spinners’ strike rate was 99.0, compared to the 79.5 of the seamers. (Again we see that neither are very good.) The gap is certainly a lot smaller than it is in England, were over the same period of time spinners took less than a quarter of the total wickets and at an average more than ten runs greater than the seamers.

Interestingly, however, when directly compared spinners have actually fared better in England than in the UAE. In England since the start of 2010, spinners have taken wickets at an average of 39.12 and a strike rate of 69.0 (compare to the above figures in the UAE). That time period comprises 15 Tests in which spinners have taken seven five-fers. In the five matches in that time in the UAE spinners took just one five wicket haul. The implication I take from these figures is that the conditions will hurt all bowlers, but it will hurt the seamers much more than the spinners. So whilst the spinners will have a larger role to play (relative to their role in England) they are not going to get so much help from the pitch that they become an unusually large threat to the batsmen.

England win, Bresnan out

England won the first warmup match by three wickets. It wasn’t particularly convincing; the bowlers conceded lower order runs in both innings and there were a pair of middle order collapses when we batted. I’m not too fussed though. Whilst it’s good that we take warmup matches seriously, they are still called warmup matches for a reason. None of the players have played competitively since October at the earliest and the Test specialists have not played since August, so a bit of rust is to be expected. The conditions are also completely unfamiliar, so whilst England did not look dominant I don’t think there is anything about which to be worried. Hopefully they will look a bit more assured in the second warmup.

Unfortunately, Tim Bresnan was ruled out of the series with the elbow injury he suffered before the match. It is a blow for England; Bresnan’s stamina would have been invaluable in the UAE, plus his bowling style is probably better suited to the slower wickets than a tall bowler. Finn looks the most likely candidate to replace him, having played in the first warmup match, but with Onions likely to be added to the squad to replace Bresnan I would like to see him get a look in the second warmup. He’s not as quick (as I recall) as Bresnan, but I think he is more like Bresnan than Finn is. I mentioned a couple of months ago that I would like to see him get a Test, and that hasn’t changed. I think Finn is a good replacement, but Onions may be able to get more out of the pitch with his style. Hopefully he will get to play in one of them.

Sehwag is not an opener

In my 2011 XI post I remarked upon the fact that there were a dearth of good openers last year. Not only did no full time occupant of the position came close to matching the record of Alastair Cook, but none of them even averaged over fifty. I put it down at first to a statistical anomaly, but watching India ‘bat’ at the SCG I realised that many teams no longer have traditional openers in the mould of Strauss and Cook. Most teams now have at least one opener who tries to get his team off to an ODI-style flier. Sehwag for India is the most notable, but New Zealand have McCullum, Sri Lanka have Dilshan, Bangladesh have Iqbal, Pakistan have Hafeez, South Africa have Smith and Australia have Warner (now) and Watson (prior to his injury). The only team besides England who do not follow this trend are the West Indies, and in their case it is only because of the ongoing feud between the WICB and Chris Gayle.

I think this is central to the spate of collapses and low scores we have seen in Test matches this year. Having an ‘explosive’ batsman at the top of the order is not necessary at Test level and more and more it appears to be a hindrance. New ball bowlers have started to appreciably swing the ball again and especially last year we saw an increase in the number of wickets that helped the bowlers early on. The batsmen trying to hit out and score 100 before lunch are having their technique exposed by the moving ball and are departing early on in the innings. This is borne out by the statistics; through the noughties the average opening partnership was just a shade over 40. In 2011 it was 31.30. Having the number three come in to face a still new ball is obviously far less than ideal, and this is how top order collapses start. We’ve seen it several times this year, and whilst it isn’t all down to the failures of opening batsmen I think that is one of the main culprits. The job of an opening batsmen is to accumulate runs whilst playing the shine off the ball and wearing down the opposition’s best bowlers, not to propel the team to 150-1 at lunch. The teams like England that remember this fact are the ones that will be successful.

The tour starts today!

England fly out to the UAE today for their first Test series there. This day excites me every time England go on tour, but particularly so this time as it will be the first proper look at the UAE conditions. It’s the first series, even including the Ashes, where I’ve been very keen on watching a warmup match. Whilst the conditions are described as ‘subcontinental’ the UAE is not strictly on the subcontinent, but rather the Arab peninsula so I am very eager to see how the conditions actually look. (And not only for the Tests, but for Lancashire’s opener in March.) The first warmup is against an interesting XI as well, so it’s worth marking the calendars for the 7th as well as the 17th.

As far as the actual series is concerned it looks like it should be a good one. England and Pakistan were the two best teams in 2011, though England’s wins came mostly against stronger opposition. Pakistan have shown a willingness to bat slowly and reasonably, however, which I think will be an important skill as a lot of sides in the past year have collapsed playing rash shots and England have capitalised on this. Whilst I don’t see our bowlers panicking or getting desperate for wickets, if Pakistan keep their heads when the runs dry up they could still make life hard for the England bowlers. Unfortunately that could make for a very dull contest, but Pakistan have a lively seam attack as well so if the groundsmen put a bit in the wicket it will probably be to everyone’s benefit. Strauss has hinted that England will play three seamers, but I would not be surprised to see some rotation between Tests. England have a good squad of bowlers, and resting some of them might not be a bad idea.

I won’t guess at a series result this early, but despite a lot of optimism from Pakistan I think England have the edge. England’s success last year was against what had been considered to be the best team in the world and to say that it was emphatic would be an understatement. Whilst England have not yet gone to the subcontinent, the bowlers proved last winter that they can take wickets even when not getting massive amounts of swing. There have also been suggestions that Swann has been figured out after he had a quiet 2011, but I don’t think that’s the case. During last winter’s Ashes and last summer’s home series he only got two wickets that took turn and he picked up five wicket hauls in both of them. In the other matches he didn’t get much of a chance as the seamers were picking up all the wickets before he got the ball. Saeed Ajmal was the better spinner last year, but it is not a given that he will win a head to head matchup with Swann. Pakistan are at ‘home’ and have been impressive this year, but England have better batsmen, better bowlers and a better wicket-keeper and, pending the tour matches, have to be favourites.

2011 XI

After an all-too-few 39 matches, 2011 is over. Well not really, but the next Test is at the SCG on 3 January, so the year is over for all intents and purposes. As my final look back on the year I have compiled an XI for 2011. It’s a generalised lineup; I have given no thought to specialised conditions such as a spinning Indian wicket or a seaming English one. Doing so would also be an interesting exercise, but this is a good place to start. For the balance of the side I went with four bowlers and six batsmen. It’s not one with which I entirely agree, but England were undefeated with it this year so there we are. My XI is thus:

Alastair Cook*
Rahul Dravid
Kumar Sangakkara
Kevin Pietersen
Ian Bell
Younis Khan
Matt Prior†
Stuart Broad
Dale Steyn
Saeed Ajmal
James Anderson

12th Man: Misbah-ul-Haq

Cook is an obvious choice. He started the year by scoring 189 runs at the SCG (in one innings, obviously) and barely slacked off after that. He scored 927 runs in only eight matches this year at an average of 84, including 294 at Edgbaston to form the base of England’s 710-7 declared. I also selected him as captain. Although he does not have a lot of experience none of the players in my XI are currently captain and Cook is being groomed as Strauss’ replacement. This XI should not need a particularly strong captain, however, just look at how successful Ponting was. The selection of his opening partner was much more difficult. Few other openers stood out and none came close to matching Cook. Dravid is not a regular opener, and has said that he does not like to open, but did so with aplomb in England. He was lead run scorer this year and averaged better than 57, but in the five innings in which he opened he averaged almost eighty. Although it’s not his regular position, there are no other openers who impressed in the same way that he and Cook did, so they are my opening pair.

By selecting Dravid as an opener it opens up the number three spot and the choice of Sangakkara is an easy one. He scored over a thousand runs this year (only Dravid scored more) and has just come off a match winning century in Durban. He averaged over fifty batting in the middle order as well, and often seemed to carry his side. Ian Bell, although he has preferred batting at number three, spent a lot of the year at number five, so that is where he goes into this XI. His selection was as easy as Sangakkara’s though; he scored 950 runs at 118 apiece this year. He was the only batsman this year to average over 100 after playing in more than one match. Younis Khan was the last pretty straightforward selection. He scored 765 runs at an average of exactly 85, the second best amongst all middle order players. It was a very good performance, especially as he would have had to put a lot of politics out of his head. The last middle order place went to KP, but it was a very difficult decision between him and Misbah-ul-Haq. In the end I though KP had a better year, making a spectacular resurgence against India. Misbah scored a lot or runs, and did a brilliant job captaining the side, but KP had a better average and also provided a good explosive option after the top three who would have built a solid base. Although he was the last selection he goes in at number four as that is his usual spot.

The selection of a wicket-keeper was easy, Matt Prior has been peerless for some time now. He averaged 64.87 with the bat and 2.25 dismissals per innings. The former is far and away the highest, whilst the latter is second by 0.02 to MS Dhoni. Unfortunately Statsguru doesn’t seem to let me sort wicket-keepers by byes, so I don’t know how he ranks in that regard.
— Edited to add: John Townsend very kindly sent me some bye totals for this year on Twitter: Prior 122 (16 innings), Dhoni 103 (22 innings), Carlton Baugh 65 (19 innings). This surprised me somewhat. I knew Dhoni was a good gloveman, but I thought the combination of Prior’s skill, the accuracy of his bowlers and the fact that he played in fewer matches would give him a better total. The weight of Prior’s runs with the bat still gives him a place in the side (he averaged 37.98 runs better than Dhoni with the bat, so an extra 2.94 per innings conceded is not problematic) but it’s interesting that he has farther to go with the gloves than I thought. —

Dale Steyn and Jimmy Anderson share the new ball in this XI. Both have led their respective attacks brilliantly this year. Steyn finished amongst the top ten quick bowlers in terms of number of wickets despite the fact that South Africa only played five matches and he was also the only full time bowler (Mike Hussey absolutely does not count) to have an average under 20 this year. Anderson had the second highest wicket tally amongst quicks this year, and achieved that in only seven matches (as he missed the Lord’s Test against Sri Lanka). He and Steyn were the only two bowlers to average better than five wickets per match this year. First change is Stuart Broad who finally remembered the importance of pitching it in the batsman’s half of the pitch. His overall numbers this year are quite impressive, 33 wickets in seven matches at an average of 22.30, but he actually did not have a great series against Sri Lanka at the start of the summer. He was still pitching the ball short and trying to be the ‘enforcer’. Against India he went back to the fuller length of the Oval 2009 and took 25 wickets in the four matches at an amazing 13.84 apiece. It was one of the best bowling performances in a series one will see, and he also chipped in by scoring 182 runs at 60.66 against India. As much as it pained me not to give the spinner’s slot to Graeme Swann, the fact is that he had a very quiet year. He only took 27 wickets in eight matches, though a large part of that was because the seamers were cleaning up at the other end. Even if he had had a fantastic year, however, it would have been impossible to ignore Saeed Ajmal. In eight matches he took 50 wickets at just shy of 24. It’s true that they were against weak teams, but statistically he was the best bowler, paceman or spinner, of the year.

I expect there are not a lot people who would agree with every one of my selections. The batsmen were particularly difficult, but amongst the bowlers Umar Gul made a very good case for selection as well. The biggest flaw is probably that there are three proper tailenders after Stuart Broad. The top order is such that those three are very unlikely to have to bat at all though. I doubt many would think the players selected are undeserving, but I would still greatly like to see your XI in the comments.

2011: England’s dominance, India’s collapse

My original plan for this post was a month-by-month review of all sports. I got halfway through May before realising that I was even boring myself and that there was no way anyone else was going to read past the end of the Sydney Test.

I’m not sure if it was the biggest surprise this year, but I don’t think anyone expected England to do as well as we did. England finished 2010 well by beating Australia by an innings at the MCG, but even after the Sydney Test it was not clear if England were very good or Australia very poor. Strauss and Flower’s stated ambition to become number one in the world was clearly possible, but if it was going to happen it looked like it would be a long climb to the summit. Instead it took eight months. India did not play well, but the extent of England’s dominance over the course of the 4-0 whitewash was incredible. There are no weak links in the side; even though Trott finally started to look mortal Ian Bell picked up the slack. He averaged 118 this year, 23 runs more than the next best batsman. Cook was as brilliantly obdurate as ever, KP had a resurgence and Morgan started to look comfortable at Test level. Prior is easily the best wicket-keeper in the world, both with the gloves and with the bat. Broad stopped trying to be an ‘enforcer’ (though I still haven’t stopped making jokes about it) and instead took a shedload of wickets. Bresnan and Tremlett would share the new ball in probably every other country bar South Africa, but right now they can’t both even get into the team unless someone else is injured. Graeme Swann is still the best spinner in the world and Anderson is second only to Dale Steyn. The calm leadership of Andrew Strauss has ensured that no one has got carried away. In eight Tests in 2011 England won six and lost none. They averaged 59.16 with the bat (and that’s the entire XI, not just the top order) and 28.45 with the ball. With Prior, Broad, Bresnan and Swann in the side England could reasonably be said to bat down to number ten. No other side came close to playing better than England in 2011, and the question is no longer if England are the best side in the world but if they can turn their current success into the kind of dominance that the West Indies and Australia did.

Australia did not play for several months after the Ashes, but have made a good effort to rebuild their side. They’re batting is yet to really come around, though Shaun Marsh is talented and the dropping of Phil Hughes for Ed Cowan was long overdue. Ponting and Hussey are still in the side though, and although they made some runs at the MCG they cannot be allowed to stay much longer. They both have had poor years and are in the twilight of their careers. The real improvement for Australia has been their bowling. In Nathan Lyon they finally seem to have found a long term spinner and the injury to Mitchell Johnson was probably the best thing that could have happened. The introduction of Pat Cummins and James Pattinson in particular are major improvements. They still have some way to go, but the strides they have made since the Ashes were clear when they were playing an Indian side who did not adjust at all to being beaten by England. Australia have become a side very difficult to predict, collapsing to 47 all out against South Africa and losing at home to New Zealand, but also recording big wins over South Africa and India. It might be some time before we know how good they are, however; after what should be an easy tour to the Windies next March they do not play again until November.

There was cricket amongst the non-Ashes sides too, although not very much. (It’s not just this year either. If you want to despair look at the number of Test matches in the Future Tours Programme.) The West Indies lost twice to India, and barely avoided losing a Test against Bangladesh. They beat Pakistan in a Test at the beginning of the year though and they made India work for their victories. (Though that’s not too impressive, see below.) All things considered it was probably a positive year, albeit not by much. South Africa didn’t play for nine months after the New Year’s Test, but looked quite good when they did. Then in the Boxing Day Test they looked dreadful and lost to Sri Lanka. It could simply be another attack of their well known mental problems, they’ve lost four Boxing Day Tests on the trot, but their batsmen are starting to age and they will find themselves in a similar position to Australia before too much longer. Pakistan were overshadowed by the spot fixing judgements, but played very well against weak opposition. Statistically they were the second best team in 2011, after England. Sri Lanka had a bad year, but they ended the year on a high with their first victory in South Africa. They need to find more consistent bowling however, over the course of the year only Bangladesh were worse. No one really expected Sri Lanka to play well after the loss of Murali though. Zimbabwe returned to Test cricket and beat Bangladesh and almost beat New Zealand, neither of whom played enough cricket this year to make an impact.

The worst team in 2011 was surely India. They started the year as the number one Test side, but never looked interested. They did not try to force victories in Tests in South Africa or the West Indies, although the former was to win the series. They never bothered to turn up in England and then used their (self-inflicted) lack of preparedness as an excuse. They didn’t try to improve and looked just as bad at the MCG. That match was only close because Australia are not as good as England and collapsed themselves. As bad as India’s performances were, the fact that they do not seem to care is probably worse. Their batsmen are massively overrated, especially Sehwag, and all of the possible replacements are limited overs specialists. They were the worst team this year and unless there is a massive change in attitude they will be next year as well.

Twenty-eleven also featured the 2000th Test of all time. Officially it was a close encounter at Lord’s in which 20,000 people queued for a mile to get into the ground on the last day and England finished off India in the last session. The actual 2000th Test was a week later at Trent Bridge and saw Stuart Broad and Ian Bell turn a close game into a blowout. Outside of the performances of the individual teams, the year was most notable for the resurgence of bowling and some very close finishes. England twice won a Test in the last session, India drew with the West Indies with nine down and the scores level and Australia won by two wickets and lost by seven runs in fairly quick succession. I lost count of how many debutants took five-fers this year, but I can remember at least four, plus Doug Bracewell’s match winning performance in his third Test. It was a year of fascinating and absorbing Test cricket which highlighted the short-sightedness of the administrators who had been increasingly marginalising the longest form of the game. Hopefully next year we’ll see more good performances and those in charge will give Test cricket the respect it deserves.

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.