Tag Archives: england

South Africa Out, Sri Lanka on Verge

Posted on by

A few days back, Purna pointed out that 5% believed that England would win the Champions Trophy and she decided to cast her lot with Bangladesh! Well, believe it or not, England are just two victories away from being crowned the Champions (the next match against the Kiwis does not matter and they only need to win the semis and finals).

This competition is turning out to be a classic. Two consecutive victories for England. South Africa crashing out in the group stage. The second string West Indies creating major scares for Pakistan and Australia, and probably nightmares for the Indian team. Big favorites Sri Lanka just a few Net Run Rate decimal points away from elimination.

Today’s matches were spectacular. The Sri Lankan team’s batting performance against New Zealand was absolutely stunning despite their loss. Every time you thought that New Zealand had finished them off, another Lankan player would come out and bash a few sixes. Kulasekara hit his best ever ODI score (57 not out) and No. 10 Malinga equaled his. Thanks to their effort, the SL NRR stayed ahead just enough to keep them in the running. Take away 13 runs and South Africa would still be in the tournament and Sri Lanka would be flying back.

And England. Wow! After they had sunk to the absolute depths, losing to Australia 6-1, they are the first team to qualify for the semis. South Africa, yet again, fail to go past the first hurdle as hosts, despite that magnificent 141 by Graeme Smith. No choking this time. Just outplayed.

Tuesday will decide Group B. England are already through and the only effect of a loss is their position in the group (No. 1 or No. 2). But unless they lose by a huge margin, they will remain No. 1. New Zealand will go through if they win. If they lose, it will depend on Net Run Rate.

A quick back-of-the-envelope calculation shows that a low scoring match (less than 237 or so) that goes to the wire may allow New Zealand to overtake Sri Lanka’s net run rate even though they lose. I will post a graph with more details in my next post.

England Throws Group B Into a Spin

Posted on by

So much for conventional wisdom. The only team I had given England a chance against was New Zealand, but England really outdid themselves today, beating one of the tournament favorites Sri Lanka. And that too comfortably without the usual collapse dramatics along the way.

With this loss, Sri Lanka’s semifinal chances have become tenuous. If they lose the next match against New Zealand, they are out of the tournament. And even if they win, they have to depend on net run rate. Unfortunately, the problem is that South Africa and England will know exactly what they need to do to overtake Sri Lanka in the run rate because the Lankans finish their matches on Sunday.

Sri Lanka do deserve some credit from coming back from a terrible collapse. Their middle order had received criticism earlier for not stepping up to the job when the chips were down. But 212 was nowhere near enough. And that coupled with Murali’s lack of form today (1/60 off 10 overs) provided England an easy path to victory.

England could have made it even worse for Sri Lanka, but they are still suffering from lack of confidence in punishing their opposition. A win by the 40th over or more penetrative bowling could have put England way ahead on NRR. But a win in hand is better than an ignominious collapse when trying to accelerate. Losing only one wicket to the spinners was commendable.

What next? It is an elimination match for both Sri Lanka and New Zealand. Whoever loses is out. If Sri Lanka wins, then South Africa has to beat England, and hope England loses to the Kiwis. If New Zealand wins, and South Africa beat England, the England v NZ match will determine the second semifinalist from the group.

What a delicious result to make this all very interesting.

England Win the Ashes

Posted on by

Incredible as the title seems, that is what happened today as England won by 197 runs, after bowling out a sometimes obstinate Australia. A few weeks ago, such a result would have been unthinkable as Australia seemed to have overcome their retirement woes with a new set of world beaters. In a sense, that is still true as Australia have been the better team for much of the series, but England came on top by winning the big moments.

Australia would have retained the Ashes by the fourth Test if only they had found one ball to end the Anderson-Panesar partnership that saved the first Test. They were clearly on the ascendancy in the third Test and may have won it if much time had not already been lost to rain. The story of this Ashes loss has been about two poor first innings at Lord’s and the Oval.

As Ponting pointed (pun intended) out today, the series stats would seem to show Australia as the clear winner. Only 2 centuries for England versus 8 for the Australians. No English bowler crossed 20 wickets in the series, but three Australians did. Except for Mike Hussey, all the Australian batsman ended with a good average for the series.

But the devil is in the details. As Homer explains, the England bowlers took 4 five-for’s when compared to 2 five-for’s for the Australians. And they were bowled out twice a match only in one Test. Also, four of the centuries came in the first Test, two others came while trying impossible chases of record targets never before accomplished in Test cricket and one came in the washed Test. Only one Australian century came when it mattered. England, in contrast, made both their centuries count.

It is a different series than the 2005 one. Partly because the wins have been by huge margins and there has been a see-saw effect throughout the series. Although England had to fight hard to secure their wins, it was only because Australia was chasing that one even gave them a hope against such huge targets. In the 2005 series, the wins were by a nail-biting 2 runs and 2 wickets. This series couldn’t compare to that.

Also, there was nobody like Shane Warne who took 40 wickets in that Ashes tour and hit a lot of runs too. Clarke, North, Siddle and Hilfenhaus had their moments, but nobody dominated the losing team like last time, when Shane Warne tried to do almost anything to prevent England from getting the crown.

On the English side, only Strauss dominated and the other players contributed bits and pieces at different times. Collingwood’s Cardiff moment was almost forgotten by the time we reached the final Test. Flintoff did little of note after Lord’s. Panesar and Bopara were dropped. Pietersen left before the series reached mid-way. Anderson and Swann ended up with 40+ averages, even though they had pivotal moments.

So a series without any big heroes. But that may be good for England as they rely on a team effort to build for future series. Enormous credit must be given to Strauss and Flower that they were able to achieve this result with, let’s admit it, an average team. They kept their cool when things got rough and stuck to their original gameplan.

Spare a thought for Ricky Ponting. One of the greats of the game, but who ends up as the first Australian captain in a century to lose twice in England. He had the unlucky fate to be presiding over the transition of the team. There are quite a few excellent players in the group, but getting them to deliver consistently has been enormously difficult. Will Ponting be able to achieve that before he retires?

Flintoff and Swann Clean Up Australia

Posted on by

England must have had a sleepless night yesterday. Imagine losing a Test after setting a target of 522. Andrew Strauss, in particular, must have been re-thinking that declaration over and over again. With most teams, defending 200 more runs with only 5 wickets to get is a good situation. With the Australians, it seems scary.

In the end, England cleaned it up without too much worry. The second over of the day claimed Haddin. While Clarke and Johnson put a mini-stand, once Clarke fell to Swann, England did not waste too much time cleaning up the tail. Johnson took the opportunity to make a quick 63, but it was only delaying the inevitable without any support from the other side.

And so, Australia lose an Ashes Test for the first time in ages. It was not easy – 406 is among the top scores made in the last innings. And while Clarke and Haddin were there yesterday, they looked like they would win. In the end, their failures in this Test added up – letting the English tail go past 400, the first innings failure and not being able to stop England’s rampage in the second innings.

The Ashes is not over by any means. The last time Australia lost a Lord’s Test, they won the series. Will they repeat that, or will Ponting be the Australian captain who loses two Ashes series? Australia have the talent to bounce back. Their main weakness is the bowling attack that has been toothless against the English batsmen. It is probably time to bring Lee and Clark back, though I would favor Clark over Lee.

England have their own troubles. Injuries to Flintoff and Pietersen make their availability for the next Test suspect. The bowling is as bad as, if not worse than, the Australians. I find it incredible that Strauss still believes that Broad can take wickets. England needs to bring in better firepower if they want to stop a vengeful, marauding Australian team in the third Test.

Australia Well Placed for World Record

Posted on by

This is the reason why Australia is No. 1. Not South Africa. Not India. And not any of the rest. Most teams faced with a mammoth 500+ target in the last innings and two days to play would have simply folded up their tent and spent the fifth day on the beach. In contrast, the Australians have all the momentum with an unbeaten 185-run partnership for the sixth wicket.

When England declared, some Australians would have been praying for rain. At the end of the day, only the English are doing any rain dances. But there won’t be any rain tomorrow. Nor with just 2 runs per over required over the day to win the match, will defense (in bowling) save England.

It has been official for sometime now that the English bowling is garbage of the worst sort. They have exactly one injured bowler who is intimidating and even he gets wickets via umpiring errors. The rest of the bowling can neither take wickets nor restrict the scoring rate. Most of the first innings wickets came through unforced mistakes. Few through any strong bowling effort.

What surprises me is that apparently the English team management knows this and still makes the wrong choices. If your bowling needs 180 overs to bowl out an opposition, you are going to lose. Why not bat another 30 overs, pile up another 100 runs and give your bowlers 150 overs so that if they continue to bowl like they are used to, you don’t lose the match?

Perhaps the English captain and coach read the newspapers where the nothing-to-lose commentators advocate humiliating the Australians. But those who try to teach the Australians end up being the fools themselves. If England manages to squeak by with a win, they can consider themselves lucky. Mind games and strutting are for champions, not upstarts.

Should England Have Enforced the Follow-on?

Posted on by

First of all, I am flabbergasted that England is even in a position that it could tell Australia to follow on. How many people would have bet on that before this game? Especially after they just managed to hang on to save the Cardiff Test.

There were good reasons for England to have enforced the follow-on. There is the possibility of rain. The pitch will remain playable on the last two days. A huge England target with less time (5 sessions) may get Australia playing for a draw on a dead pitch.

That is all true, but I think it misses the big picture. England are the underdogs in this contest and, regardless of all the PR talk, they probably never backed themselves to be in a winning position against the Australians. While the 2005 series was great, that team was coming off a high with several victories in hand, while the present team could not even beat the West Indies in their away tour.

So now, they find themselves dominant. The important thing is to preserve and protect the gains and ensure that there is no likelihood of a loss. If England manage to bat till lunch tomorrow, the chances of Australia winning are infinitesimal. Even if Australia manage to draw, that is okay.

It is different with a team like Australia, who are natural-born winners. When they are ahead, they have the confidence to back them. If Australia were in the same situation, they would have asked England to bat on, and then bowled them out in no time.

But England will always have Adelaide – the match they should never have lost. As long as those memories remain, they will never attempt any risk from a winning position. Safety first. Whether that is right or wrong is a different matter.

Good England Start with Hiccups

Posted on by

At the beginning of the day, England would have been happy with 364/6 at stumps. But considering that they had a close-to-double-century opening partnership, they could have done much better. But most of the wickets were prised out, not thrown away. And Strauss is still there, hopefully to grab a few more runs with the tail to put England with something significant to defend.

There were quite a few surprises:

  1. Collingwood throwing away his wicket. I wouldn’t blame him. He probably spent his full annual quota of concentration in the Cardiff Test.
  2. And gifting it to Clarke. This kind of thing makes you wonder why Ponting did not try him against Anderson and Panesar. Remember his 3 wickets in the penultimate over against India. For some reason, Clarke has the knack of taking wickets when you least expect him to.
  3. England literally hitting Hauritz out of the attack (by hurting his finger). All the more reason why they shouldn’t have allowed another spinner to take a wicket. Apparently, nothing was broken, but I wonder if Hauritz will bowl tomorrow. And if he doesn’t bowl well, will Ponting think it is because of the finger and send him out to pasture.
  4. Broad in the team. He needs to stay with the captain tomorrow and hit something. Nobody expects him to take wickets.
  5. Pietersen. Curiouser and curiouser. No big scores against the enemy yet. What happened to him?
  6. Johnson. 19-2-107-2. Trash bowling except for the wicket-taking balls. Most responsible for England’s good strike rate.
  7. North bowling so many overs. Economical, but shouldn’t Australia be mixing it up a bit?

This is no surprise: Andrew Strauss making another century after reaching his fifty. He now has 14 fifties and 18 hundreds. It is his fourth century this year. Since his last fifty in August 2008, he has made six centuries without falling between 50 and 100. Surprisingly, his highest score is only 177. Now is as good a time to make a double-century as ever.

As for the Australians, I am sure that Johnson will make a strong comeback with his bowling, but if he doesn’t, Australia has a dilemma on its hands. Johnson brings significant strength to the lower batting order, but Australia’s top order is already strong and they are stuck at seeing the England batsmen hang around for too long. England survived 105 overs in both innings and Australia probably lost a chance to win the match when Swann and Anderson made 68 for the ninth wicket. Someone like Stuart Clark would be more than useful.

Surprise! Broad is Still Playing

Posted on by

Stuart Broad, to me, seemed the person most likely to be dropped from the team. He has been very ineffective with his bowling and England really need wicket-taking bowlers. I thought Harmison would replace him. But it seems that he will be playing at Lord’s. This is probably his last chance, because when England loses, he will be the one to go.

And how tragic for Panesar! He is the only person dropped from the England team that played at Cardiff, despite having played his part in a brave partnership that saved England from losing. Still, it was to be expected as his bowling was pretty average and England’s plans for this match did not involve two spinners.

England once again bat first. If this was a match between two equal teams, they would have had the last shot at the Australians on the pitch. But if the Australians continue to make monumental scores, England will be the one trying to save the match once again on the last day.

The Lord’s Test

Posted on by

England are on a temporary high after saving the Cardiff Test against the Australians. But make no mistake – they start as overwhelming favorites to lose the Test. The Australians proved that their batting was as strong as ever and their bowling was good enough to win if rain had not intervened. History is also against the English as they have not won a Lord’s Test since 1934, or, rather more pertinent, Australia have only lost ONE Test ever at Lords in the last and this century.

I am not sure why England has never won for so many decades despite it being a home venue and Australians having had their downs during some of those years. Sports has its crazy streaks (like the Boston Red Sox for so many years) and this is one of them. Can the English reverse the curse? If they do, the Australians will have nowhere to run?

I also wonder how the Cardiff Test draw will pan out. Will it be like the previous Ashes tour by Australia where the last Australian pair saved the Old Trafford Test only for them at Trent Bridge? Or will it be like the last India’s tour where Dhoni and rain combined to deny England a victory and then the Indians won the series?

A few things that we don’t know how it will affect the Test:

  1. Ponting is ticked off. Will he will respond with another century? Or start making petty points while Australia is fielding?
  2. How much will England’s relief translate into momentum for a resurgent performance?
  3. Will Freddie play? Or will Bell take his place?
  4. England is very likely to drop Panesar. It is too bad that he just saved a Test for them. Or will they keep him in out of gratitude?!
  5. Broad is the person most likely to be dropped. Harmison? Onions?
  6. Australia don’t look like changing their team. Will there be any last-minute surprises?

In any case, the Ashes starts from 0-0 once again. Has England re-booted enough to trouble Australia?

Collingwood Buries Adelaide Memories

Posted on by

The most memorable (and heart-wrenching) moment of the last day of this Ashes Test for me was Paul Collingwood’s walk back to the pavilion after he was dismissed. As the crowd cheered him for the most fighting knock of the innings, he raised his bat a few times, but he kept his head down, knowing that his day-long effort had been in vain. Just like in the Adelaide Test of the previous Ashes where he made a double-century and then watched from the other side as England lost a match they never should have.

But Jimmy Anderson and Monty Panesar ensured that there was no repeat of that match by surviving for an incredible 69 balls. And the effort by Collingwood would not go wasted. Australia did almost everything right after they bowled out England in the first innings, but, incredibly for an Australian team, they could not press their advantage to win the match.

Like all of you who watched the final moments of the match, it was one of the most nerve-wracking Tests I have experienced. The recent Sydney Test between India and Australia was much more intense, but that was a match that was more likely to end in a draw until Michael Clarke happened. This one was supposed to be an innings loss much earlier in the day, but England proved to be tougher than anyone expected.

The score stays 0-0 with four more to play. England were outplayed, but they now have the luxury of re-booting without having to come from behind. It is likely that Broad and Panesar will make way for Harmison and Onions. Of the batsmen, Bopara is the one with the biggest question mark, but he is sure to be there for the next Test. I wonder if the selectors may use the result to keep the same team – that would be one strong statement of intent, if unlikely to happen.

In general, I thought England’s problems arose not from any strategy problems, but from execution. It was a good idea to pack two spinners and bat first. Hauritz’s success showed that Panesar and Swann could have posed problems if Australia had been batting last. But the English bowling’s inability to break the Australian defences in the middle days coupled with a less-than-great first innings score lead to their downfall.

On the Australian side, it was a case of “close, but no cigar”. The Australian bowling was good, but they let the English tail wag twice in the match. They have to come up with a game plan to handle that. Mike Hussey is the only weakness in a strong batting lineup.

Next up, the Lord’s Test where Australia have not lost for a few decades now apparently. Australia remain the overwhelming favorites. Can Strauss and Flower turn the England team around in time to create a stunning upset? England, by saving the Test in a show of determination, should build upon it instead of celebrating an escape.