The ODI series against India came as a challenge for a much-improved England side who had made leaps and bounds over the previous two years, reaching new heights over the English summer as well as coming through a hard-fought series against Bangladesh. It promised to be a tough task, but hopes were high for a team much hyped by many corners. What came next was something of a reality check.
Not that it was all bad, of course. Make consecutive scores of 350, 366, and 321 in a three match series and you would probably expect to come away with a series win. The problem was that India were still able to outscore them on two of those occasions, only just falling short in the final ODI. A series that saw many strong performances with the bat, saw few with the ball. It's not a time for drastic action, but in some areas a bit of a rethink could be needed.
The most obvious area of attention is, of course, their performance with the ball. It's a horrible time to be a bowler in ODI cricket right now with run rates going through the roof and records are falling all around, and England's bowlers certainly struggled. Often they were able to get the early breakthroughs - having India facing positions of 63/4, 25/3, and 37/2 across the course of the series - but from there India were able to recover with batsmen like Kohli, Yuvraj, Dhoni, and Jadhav all playing a big role. In the opening two games, these four shared the big match-winning partnerships, the kind that make all the difference in this format of the game. Kohli and Jadhav's 200 run partnership took India from 63/4 to a position of strength at 263/5; Yuvraj and Dhoni's 256 gave them a platform to go all out in attack in the last seven overs. England batted well, no doubt, but never had that truly colossal partnership that makes all the difference. India's bowlers took more wickets in the middle overs. It was also worth noting in the individual century counts, where India had four to England's one.
It is often said that wickets are key in slowing down the run rate in this format, and for the most part, it's true. And that was one of the big problems for England. The bowlers struggled to take wickets in the middle overs, and India could recover before imposing themselves again towards the very end of the innings. Over the last twelve months, Adil Rashid has been a key man in this respect, in 2016 England's leading wicket taker, most economic, and with one of the best strike rates. But Rashid's form is so often in flux, and in this series he played just the one game - five overs, fifty runs. It was difficult for Morgan to have confidence in his man after that. Moeen Ali became England's sole spinner, and was their most economic bowler in the series, but was left wicketless from the three games.
Was it that the bowlers were often failing to consistently hit a line or length, or was it that they lacked that so-called 'x factor', an extra quality to take wickets in the middle overs? An attack relying primarily on swing and seam that can generally do a better job in home conditions looked to be needing that different option - like Mark Wood for instance if fit, or Steven Finn if his confidence returns. It feels somewhat premature to abandon Stuart Broad in this format, too.
In fairness, India's bowlers were far from remarkable either. Ravindra Jadeja was the only bowler on either side with a series economy rate under 6 runs per over, going at 5.23. Figures of 1/50 and 1/45 in the first two games come away as simply brilliant, and were arguably a key difference between the sides. When England had their best day with the ball - when the short ball was used to greater effect, more wickets fell in the middle of the innings, and Stokes and Woakes tied India down at the death - they won the game. Though the series brought three high scoring and thrillingly tense games, part of me was still longing for a more even contest between bat and ball. The basic premise of cricket is obviously 'score more runs than the other team', but in a way that premise was taken to the extreme.
It's a big year for England in ODI cricket, with the format taking centre stage until July and a home Champions Trophy beginning in June. Even if this series provided something of a reality check after what was generally a high flying 2016, England have to be considered among the favourites to win. Home advantage will be a big deal, and for all the bowlers' struggles they should at least go better in their more naturally suited conditions. This tour showed though, that their journey is not complete; they're not world beaters just yet.
The ramblings of an ever suffering but ever optimistic follower of English cricket.
Showing posts with label MS Dhoni. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MS Dhoni. Show all posts
Monday, 23 January 2017
Monday, 18 August 2014
What went wrong for India?
Monday, 18 August 2014
Yesterday, the same story repeated itself - once again India put in a dismal batting display, worse than the previous innings. This time, 94 runs were all that could be managed. They also conceded 101 runs in barely twelve overs at the very start of the day's play. It was the show of a team that had given up, and a long way from the side that had made England suffer with a strong batting display at Trent Bridge and humiliated them at Lord's. Though many had expected England to be the eventual winners of the series - home advantage and better bowlers to be the key - nobody had expected it to end quite this way, with India giving such abject batting displays. It left the simple question: what went wrong?
The batting is the obvious reason for the series loss, given that in their last five innings they failed to pass the 200 mark once. Players such as Kohli, Pujara, and Dhawan failed to live up to the hype surrounding them; simply, the new breed of Indian batsmen post-Tendulkar did not deliver. This would partly be due to a lack of experience in English conditions - and having to face a master of swing like James Anderson in them - with any technical flaws being exposed by the swinging and seaming ball. Some batsmen did perform - though Vijay never topped his century in the first innings at Trent Bridge, he showed sticking power on several occasions; Rahane also impressed at times, making a century at Lord's; Dhoni became his team's only form of resistance at times in the past two tests; and there were a few good knocks from the lower order batsmen, particularly at the start of the series. But it wasn't enough. Though the conditions weren't always suited for batting - and England definitely had the better time with the weather in the last two tests - India still didn't put up enough of a fight, and when England really did bowl well they surrendered all too meekly. After seeing the last two tests, just imagine what England could have done if they had bowled to their potential on that first morning at Lord's.
In terms of bowling it went better for India, often being let down by poor fielding or poor umpiring. Kumar looked a bowler well suited to English conditions - though he doesn't bowl at express pace he bowls a good line and length and swings the ball, often enough to make players struggle and especially when they are out of form. Sharma also bowled well - his height and extra pace offering another dimension to the attack. Even if that haul at Lord's was just as much about England's poor technique against the short ball as Sharma's bowling, India's attack looked much better with him a part of it. Beyond those two it was less simple - many were tried but did not do enough; luck was a factor (poor Pankaj Singh), as was being overworked like Aaron. The spinners also didn't make the impact hoped for, even though conditions weren't always helpful. The bowlers should not be criticised too much though - they certainly can't be faulted for trying. The fielding did let them down several times - catches being dropped in the slips more than once; Jadeja's drop of Cook in Southampton perhaps being the most notable. It wasn't good enough, especially from a young team in an age where fielding standards are ever improving.
In fairness to India, they weren't helped at all by the scheduling. Who thought it was a great idea to put five tests in the space of six weeks, I will never know. There were no opportunities for batsmen to have a knock away from the test arena within the series, not enough time for bowlers to rest up in between games. How was Gambhir supposed to come in and make runs straight away when he replaced Dhawan, if he hadn't had any cricket beforehand? It's also a wider issue, with this being a five test series - something England are used to (albeit not necessarily with this group of players), and India are not. Five match series do need more stamina and strength, mentally and physically; something that Indian players were perhaps not fully prepared for without having such experience. Whilst England got stronger, India faded. Perhaps they should play more of the longer format and have less emphasis on the shorter games - but do we really expect that to happen?
Another issue seemed to be team selection - India just couldn't seem to find the right team. The four bowlers or five bowlers conundrum was one that affected them, and sometimes when players were picked it was difficult to see what role they were there for. Binny is an example - picked for the first test, he batted at eight but then bowled only ten overs in England's innings (out of 144.5 total), before then scoring 78 in India's second innings. Again, at Lord's, he bowled only ten in England's 105.5 over innings, and then didn't even get a go in their second; at The Oval he bowled twelve of 116.3. Though he was expensive, that he was used so little begs the question - what was he there for, what was his role? It was similar with Jadeja, looking not quite like a front line spinner, not quite like a front line batsman. Ashwin was probably a better all round player, yet was only picked for the last two matches. I don't know what the best line up is for India - or which one of four or five bowlers is a better route for them - but it didn't look like they did either.
Finally, the whole 'incident' between Anderson and Jadeja. At first, it seemed like India had come off better from the whole affair (whatever exactly happened), with their victory in the second test. But then the saga dragged on and on, instead firing up Anderson and the England team and perhaps taking India's focus away from what really mattered on the pitch. We might never know the true tale of events, but given the results of the hearing it sounds like far too much was made out of an event where it was always going to be difficult to prove that anything really happened - so was it something really worth pushing for?
As an England supporter, it's difficult for me to complain about a series win and the emphatic manner of the three victories. But still, it was disappointing to see India succumb so easily and give up without a fight towards the end. It's hard to tell if this was worse than the whitewash in 2011, though then they did at least make England work for their victories more. India will come back from this - and players like Kohli and Dhawan will in all probability now go and dominate the ODI series to follow - but it was a dismal defeat, and it looks like much will need to be done in order to improve.
The batting is the obvious reason for the series loss, given that in their last five innings they failed to pass the 200 mark once. Players such as Kohli, Pujara, and Dhawan failed to live up to the hype surrounding them; simply, the new breed of Indian batsmen post-Tendulkar did not deliver. This would partly be due to a lack of experience in English conditions - and having to face a master of swing like James Anderson in them - with any technical flaws being exposed by the swinging and seaming ball. Some batsmen did perform - though Vijay never topped his century in the first innings at Trent Bridge, he showed sticking power on several occasions; Rahane also impressed at times, making a century at Lord's; Dhoni became his team's only form of resistance at times in the past two tests; and there were a few good knocks from the lower order batsmen, particularly at the start of the series. But it wasn't enough. Though the conditions weren't always suited for batting - and England definitely had the better time with the weather in the last two tests - India still didn't put up enough of a fight, and when England really did bowl well they surrendered all too meekly. After seeing the last two tests, just imagine what England could have done if they had bowled to their potential on that first morning at Lord's.
In terms of bowling it went better for India, often being let down by poor fielding or poor umpiring. Kumar looked a bowler well suited to English conditions - though he doesn't bowl at express pace he bowls a good line and length and swings the ball, often enough to make players struggle and especially when they are out of form. Sharma also bowled well - his height and extra pace offering another dimension to the attack. Even if that haul at Lord's was just as much about England's poor technique against the short ball as Sharma's bowling, India's attack looked much better with him a part of it. Beyond those two it was less simple - many were tried but did not do enough; luck was a factor (poor Pankaj Singh), as was being overworked like Aaron. The spinners also didn't make the impact hoped for, even though conditions weren't always helpful. The bowlers should not be criticised too much though - they certainly can't be faulted for trying. The fielding did let them down several times - catches being dropped in the slips more than once; Jadeja's drop of Cook in Southampton perhaps being the most notable. It wasn't good enough, especially from a young team in an age where fielding standards are ever improving.
In fairness to India, they weren't helped at all by the scheduling. Who thought it was a great idea to put five tests in the space of six weeks, I will never know. There were no opportunities for batsmen to have a knock away from the test arena within the series, not enough time for bowlers to rest up in between games. How was Gambhir supposed to come in and make runs straight away when he replaced Dhawan, if he hadn't had any cricket beforehand? It's also a wider issue, with this being a five test series - something England are used to (albeit not necessarily with this group of players), and India are not. Five match series do need more stamina and strength, mentally and physically; something that Indian players were perhaps not fully prepared for without having such experience. Whilst England got stronger, India faded. Perhaps they should play more of the longer format and have less emphasis on the shorter games - but do we really expect that to happen?
Another issue seemed to be team selection - India just couldn't seem to find the right team. The four bowlers or five bowlers conundrum was one that affected them, and sometimes when players were picked it was difficult to see what role they were there for. Binny is an example - picked for the first test, he batted at eight but then bowled only ten overs in England's innings (out of 144.5 total), before then scoring 78 in India's second innings. Again, at Lord's, he bowled only ten in England's 105.5 over innings, and then didn't even get a go in their second; at The Oval he bowled twelve of 116.3. Though he was expensive, that he was used so little begs the question - what was he there for, what was his role? It was similar with Jadeja, looking not quite like a front line spinner, not quite like a front line batsman. Ashwin was probably a better all round player, yet was only picked for the last two matches. I don't know what the best line up is for India - or which one of four or five bowlers is a better route for them - but it didn't look like they did either.
Finally, the whole 'incident' between Anderson and Jadeja. At first, it seemed like India had come off better from the whole affair (whatever exactly happened), with their victory in the second test. But then the saga dragged on and on, instead firing up Anderson and the England team and perhaps taking India's focus away from what really mattered on the pitch. We might never know the true tale of events, but given the results of the hearing it sounds like far too much was made out of an event where it was always going to be difficult to prove that anything really happened - so was it something really worth pushing for?
As an England supporter, it's difficult for me to complain about a series win and the emphatic manner of the three victories. But still, it was disappointing to see India succumb so easily and give up without a fight towards the end. It's hard to tell if this was worse than the whitewash in 2011, though then they did at least make England work for their victories more. India will come back from this - and players like Kohli and Dhawan will in all probability now go and dominate the ODI series to follow - but it was a dismal defeat, and it looks like much will need to be done in order to improve.
Friday, 15 August 2014
England surge; India crumble
Friday, 15 August 2014
Today, India's batting collapsed again. It has now been four innings in a row with a score under 200, and today's was the worst of the lot as they could only muster 148 - and that was including a counter-attacking innings of 82 from Dhoni, containing 15 fours and a six. The next highest score was Murali Vijay's 18. This time round it only took four balls for the first wicket to fall, four balls for the misery to set in. Vijay was the only one of the top five to make double figures - even Rahane falling for a duck this time - and again India were five wickets down before lunch with the prospects of a series-levelling win disappearing before them. Some small slices of luck came their way to prevent being dismissed for under three figures - an edge behind by Dhoni so slight that even the fielders didn't pick it up, and Bell dropping a regulation slip catch from Sharma. Dhoni's answer was to come out swinging, and he did find success, but even then it was not enough to save the innings. A last wicket partnership of 58 may have taken some of the sheen off for England, but it will be difficult for them to complain with India's total of 148.
Where it could be argued that at Old Trafford, England's supporting pair of bowlers in Jordan and Woakes eased the pressure on India, being more expensive with the ball and not offering the same wicket threat, here came more of a team effort among the bowlers. Jordan's first two overs saw two wicket maidens - a sequence of four wickets in 14 balls when added to his two in two to finish off the last test - and then picking up the wicket of Kumar after lunch. Woakes was also in the wickets either side of the break, finally finding himself with some luck and removing Vijay, Ashwin, and Aaron. The pair took six wickets between them, and also both bowled seven maidens out of the fourteen they each bowled, maintaining the pressure after the opening spells of Broad and Anderson. It was a long time before India's run rate made its way above two an over, only Dhoni's attack able to lift it there. Though Jordan was at times inconsistent (though mostly unpunished), England will nevertheless be pleased with the pair's display - after looking like the weak links in the attack at Old Trafford and Southampton, here they took the main spoils in another strong bowling display.
England's batsmen didn't necessarily find it easy going either, but found luck more on their side. Cook survived a couple of close LBW appeals, and should really have been out with one going on to hit the middle stump. Robson also had the odd streaky shot, one going through where fourth slip might have been. It was good to see a solid opening stand from England, something that has been missing this summer with the pair struggling for form. It will also have done a world of good for Sam Robson, who has been the latest player under scrutiny after his struggles with the bat - particularly around the off stump. To have made a start and survived over night will give him an opportunity to build an innings on what looks to be a sunnier day tomorrow, in what could be make-or-break time ahead of the next test tour to the West Indies and the Ashes series in the summer beyond. Likewise, Alastair Cook will be hoping to take his opportunity and end that ever-growing run without a century. The pair were not bogged down in the way India had been, Robson in particular often finding the boundary, and made their way to the close of play at 62/0.
It leaves England once again in a thoroughly dominant position, well and truly favourites to take this final test and wrap up the first series win of this 'new age'. For India, it continues a horrible turn of events since their victory at Lord's; in many ways it feels like completely different sides are now playing. What could have been an exciting series between two young sides with much to prove on a world stage has since turned one-sided, India's struggles as bad as they were in 2011. Problems can be found in several areas - the batting has been frail, players like Kohli and Pujara not filling their boots; team selection a revolving door - the question of whether to go for five bowlers or four looking a constant issue; Dhoni's captaincy at times questionable - for example his insistence on leg slips. For now, it is advantage to England once again.
Where it could be argued that at Old Trafford, England's supporting pair of bowlers in Jordan and Woakes eased the pressure on India, being more expensive with the ball and not offering the same wicket threat, here came more of a team effort among the bowlers. Jordan's first two overs saw two wicket maidens - a sequence of four wickets in 14 balls when added to his two in two to finish off the last test - and then picking up the wicket of Kumar after lunch. Woakes was also in the wickets either side of the break, finally finding himself with some luck and removing Vijay, Ashwin, and Aaron. The pair took six wickets between them, and also both bowled seven maidens out of the fourteen they each bowled, maintaining the pressure after the opening spells of Broad and Anderson. It was a long time before India's run rate made its way above two an over, only Dhoni's attack able to lift it there. Though Jordan was at times inconsistent (though mostly unpunished), England will nevertheless be pleased with the pair's display - after looking like the weak links in the attack at Old Trafford and Southampton, here they took the main spoils in another strong bowling display.
England's batsmen didn't necessarily find it easy going either, but found luck more on their side. Cook survived a couple of close LBW appeals, and should really have been out with one going on to hit the middle stump. Robson also had the odd streaky shot, one going through where fourth slip might have been. It was good to see a solid opening stand from England, something that has been missing this summer with the pair struggling for form. It will also have done a world of good for Sam Robson, who has been the latest player under scrutiny after his struggles with the bat - particularly around the off stump. To have made a start and survived over night will give him an opportunity to build an innings on what looks to be a sunnier day tomorrow, in what could be make-or-break time ahead of the next test tour to the West Indies and the Ashes series in the summer beyond. Likewise, Alastair Cook will be hoping to take his opportunity and end that ever-growing run without a century. The pair were not bogged down in the way India had been, Robson in particular often finding the boundary, and made their way to the close of play at 62/0.
It leaves England once again in a thoroughly dominant position, well and truly favourites to take this final test and wrap up the first series win of this 'new age'. For India, it continues a horrible turn of events since their victory at Lord's; in many ways it feels like completely different sides are now playing. What could have been an exciting series between two young sides with much to prove on a world stage has since turned one-sided, India's struggles as bad as they were in 2011. Problems can be found in several areas - the batting has been frail, players like Kohli and Pujara not filling their boots; team selection a revolving door - the question of whether to go for five bowlers or four looking a constant issue; Dhoni's captaincy at times questionable - for example his insistence on leg slips. For now, it is advantage to England once again.