Hold Your Horses

I feel a bit fraudulent writing about the second astonishing denouement to a Cardiff Test inside two years: after paying scant attention, during a busy week for me, to a weather-affected match (nearly a day and a half lost to rain) that appeared to be petering out into a draw, I'd given up on the match by the end of Saturday; by yesterday evening, I'd basically forgotten it was still going on. (And it seemed like everyone other than Jonathan Trott had, too.)

It was only a couple of excited text messages, late this afternoon, that persuaded me to tune in again and witness the carnage. By that time, it was basically all over: Sri Lanka had lost 6 wickets in 39 balls for only 19 runs.

I did start listening in time to hear Ian Bell assume the Paul Collingwood Blinding Infield Catching mantle, to feel slightly sorry for both Tremlett and Swann that Broad came in at the end to clear up the tail and deny either a 5-for, and to hear a fairly unbelievable suggestion from the otherwise-quite-level-headed CMJ: was this performance a sign that England were about to take their rightful place as No. 1 Test side in world cricket?

Really, Christopher.

Firstly, there's the small matter of 2 further Tests to play against a Sri Lankan side who put together a not inconsiderable first-innings total of 400, not to mention a series against the current No. 1 side, India -- a team with 3 batsmen and 2 bowlers (fairly evenly matched against England's 2 and 3) in the ICC Player Rankings Top 10.

And secondly, it ignores the fact that, apart from extraordinary performances from Tremlett and Swann on the final day, the team effort so far has been no more than par for the course. (Switching sports, there -- as I did in the title of this post -- but it's a Bank Holiday, and I can't be bothered to come up with a better/less clichéd metaphor -- sorry...)

Ok, there were three centuries, but they were made under very little pressure. Of more concern to the England coaching set-up might be the mis-fires from the two mainstays of the batting line-up, Strauss and KP. (I admit that, having not followed the match particularly closely, this judgement may be unduly harsh on my part. Do statistics really lie, though?)

More worryingly, amid talk of 4-or-5-man bowling attacks, England went into the last innings with an attack of 3. (No, Trott and KP don't count.) If they'd faced opposition from a less rabbit-in-the-headlights batting line-up, there might have been rather more treatment along the lines of Tremlett's final over, which was deposited for 12 fairly easy runs by the 22-year-old debutant Thisara Perera.

So yes, this was a brilliant result; no, it's not time for the champagne yet. Here's my 3-point to do list for Team England before the Lord's Test gets underway later this week:


1. Balance the bowling attack: make sure that whoever comes in for the injured Jimmy Anderson provides an alternative to the options already available. (Sorry, Steve Finn.)

2. Consider adding a bowling option: it seems unfair to consign Eoin Morgan to the Test dustbin after scoring 14 not out; but then I wouldn't have picked him in the first place. Ravi Bopara provides a better 5th bowling option than the buffet fare of either Trott or KP, and his selection would also pay him back for his laudable decision to choose county cricket over the riches on offer in the IPL.

3. Have a chat with KP: shouldn't he be on a final warning by now? (Watch out for a match-winning 158* at Lord's, now...)

Why Cricket Doesn't Matter

Umar Gul and Yasir Hameed are two players who have not been at the centre of the Pakistani cricket uproar in recent weeks, but they are significant for two reasons. Firstly, they have provided the Pakistani team with some rare high points in a lacklustre all-round performance in the little-more-than-five days of Test cricket in the series so far: Gul's 65* from no. 9 was not only the team's highest score of the first innings of the first Test, it came at a S/R comfortably higher than those around him, a stat that he reproduced in the second innings; his stats as a bowler have been pretty good, too, with 4 wickets at a respectable 31.5. Hameed's single contribution had less of an impact, but his ability to do what very few of his team-mates had done -- actually hold onto a catch -- makes his role in the side a noteworthy one.

Secondly, however, there is the question of the provenance of these two men. Whilst most of the squad are Punjabi by birth -- nearly half were born in Lahore, in the east of the country -- these two hail from Peshawar, in North-Western Frontier Province. For those of you who've been living under a rock, Gul and Hameed could be forgiven for having things other than the thwack of leather on willow on their mind at present: with current statistics for the flooding in Pakistan touching 12 million affected out of a population of 166 million, it doesn't take a vast imaginative leap to consider that these two -- if not a greater number of the tourists -- might have been directly affected in some way.

It seems to be the done thing at the moment, after successive batting collapses of monumentally inept proportions, to lambast the Pakistani cricket team. Well, after five years that have seen a major earthquake in the vicinity, a terrorist attack on a fellow international cricket team in Lahore, and now this month's floods -- not to mention, within the sport, match-fixing allegations, international bans and the rest -- is it any wonder that they're a bit . . . ermm . . . out of sorts?

A couple of days after my recent post about Murali's status as an all-time great, I read a newspaper piece that suggested Warne's career achievements were the greater as he got a lower percentage of his wickets against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh. I think if the recent travails of the Pakistanis show us anything, they serve as a reminder that the fortunes of all international cricket teams rise and fall -- West Indies after 2003 would be a good example, but England teams of the 90s and early 00s were fairly shocking, too -- and for reasons that don't always have everything to do with the sport. This is the beauty of international cricket: that it is at one and the same time a serious business for millions of people, and something that -- when faced with the natural and political disasters of certain regions of the world -- matters not a jot.

Getting a Grip

Ok, so being beaten by Bangladesh for the first time in all competitive cricket isn't great; but it isn't the end of the world. Amid the storms of gnashing and wailing that may well follow the second failure of a national (male) sports team inside 3 weeks, here's a rather un-English suggestion: let's have a think about the positives to be gleaned from the wreckage of Ian Bell's left foot and another braking of the Craig Kieswetter bandwagon.

It had to be coming

New Zealand, the fifth nation to assume test-playing status, started their first game of international cricket on the 10th of January 1930. Twenty-six years passed before, in Auckland in March 1956, they recorded their first win over a touring West Indies team. Bangladesh's first foray into international cricket came, appropriately enough, in England, in the 1979 ICC Trophy; their first victory over England was thus 31 years in the making. So basically -- even though we're talking about the first victory ever, rather than simply over England, and disregarding the fact that the more recent span will have included far more games of cricket -- it was about time.

We haven't won the Ashes

After the first three matches of the most recent series of ODIs, an uninformed observer could have been forgiven for thinking the England team had managed a repeat of a certain 2005 and 2009 achievement, and a little replica urn was already in the bag (or trophy cabinet, depending on how mixed you like your metaphors). While the final two rubbers dampened the spirits slightly, momentum is a powerful force: a 3-2 scoreline provided ample evidence -- so the thinking inevitably went -- for a surge in English power in the game. This result may just remind the sporting hack fraternity that Brisbane in November is still a long way away.

Calm down, dear

Following on from that last point, it's less than two short months since England's much-praised victory in Barbados, and already cricket journos are talking in animated terms about England's chances in next year's World Cup. Surely a little sense of perspective is a good thing?