Alastair Cook: a mixed legacy

It's a difficult thing to write about Alastair Cook's legacy as England captain, because it's difficult to see how his captaincy will be defined. The past few years have at times been a rollercoaster for England's test team, brilliant achievements marred by horrible lows. It's been a period of transition, a time marked by three main coaches, big retirements, and a new generation finding their feet; something reflected in his overall record. 59 tests in charge are the most by any England captain, and 24 wins put him joint-second on England's list; 22 losses put him first.

His biggest success as captain may be his first. He began his tenure in 2012 with a strong team, but one that was fractured after a series loss to South Africa, where events off the field drew more attention than those on it. And they were due to tour India. But Pietersen was reintegrated into the side, and despite going 1-0 down, England pulled through for a famous series victory. Cook led from the front, scoring three centuries in the course of the series, Pietersen made one of his special innings with 186 in Mumbai, and the spin twins of Swann and Panesar shared 37 wickets between them. It was the dream start.

More successes came, of course. There were home Ashes wins in 2013 and 2015, and the win in South Africa last winter another big achievement at a time when away wins have been like gold dust for test teams. But his captaincy will also be remembered for its miserable lows, the failure of the 2013/14 Ashes tour as likely to define him as his success the previous winter. A successful team disintegrated rapidly, and a fresh saga that saw Pietersen's permanent exile from the team would always linger - particularly with the bumbling ECB remarks that followed. And there was this winter, seeing a first test defeat to Bangladesh followed by a 4-0 series defeat in India. There was no way back from that.

Cook won't be remembered as a great captain, his record reflecting the inconsistency of this England side. He was best when leading the way with the bat, the matches when England could get on top early and dominate through big performances with the bat or ball. When the situation called for a plan B, his tactical nous was often found lacking and things would meander in the field. When England were under the cosh Cook's instinct would be for defence – defensive field placings, rotating the bowlers – and other teams would be happy to take advantage. Certainly India did this winter, and Sri Lanka's victory at Headingley in 2014 is another match that springs quickly to my mind.

I've never seen him as a tactical master, but he still earns my respect. His wealth of experience and his stubbornness and determination to succeed (at times a flaw and a virtue) have made him a figure that young players can look up to and respect in the dressing room. He has united a dressing room and created a positive atmosphere, and players have rarely wavered in support of their captain. He has been able to bridge the gap between the old and the new, to the point where it now feels like the right moment to stand down, players like Root and Stokes as the new potential captain and vice-captain now ready to lead the way. Progress under Cook has been stuttering, and his captaincy has been a part of the problem at times, but he's also been without a fixed opening partner throughout his tenure, and for the most part without a world-class spin bowler - two big parts of Strauss's reign. The team has often been in flux, and though he might not have been overly well-suited to the job, there wasn't necessarily a strong alternative.

Now feels like the right time for him to step down, and for the younger generation - Joe Root, in all probability - to step up. There will be the concerns about the captaincy affecting Root's form, particularly with him being a genuinely world class batsman, but it may also be the extra slice of responsibility that he needs. Time will tell how he will fare as captain, but the hope is there that he can build a team in the image of the younger, more aggressive players. With England's next test not until July, there will be plenty of time to prepare for the role. And at 32, Cook still has plenty to offer England still with the bat, being freed from the shackles captaincy so often provides. The team needs freshening up, a new approach after a dismal winter, but what remains is still a highly talented group of players - and Cook is among them.

So what is Cook's legacy? It's hard to say, and I don't really know where I stand on it. It may be a question better answered a few years later with the benefit of hindsight. Was he a good captain, was he a bad one, or just, a captain? Certainly he wasn't one to let his losses define him: determined to keep going even after humiliation in Australia; determined to fight whilst his form and captaincy was on the line in 2014; determined to earn redemption for those defeats. There were highs, there were lows, times when he was at fault, and times when he wasn't. Now it's the time for another man to lead.

The WBBL, the KSL, and the matter of television

Like many here in England, this winter I've been drawn to watching Twenty20 competitions happening on the other side of the world. Whilst the men's Big Bash League has drawn plenty of attention, and often been hailed as an ideal model for T20 competitions to follow, it's been the women's competition that has drawn me in more. The second year of the Women's Big Bash League may not have received a huge amount of publicity on these shores, but has still made plenty of waves throughout the game.

The first WBBL had already taken huge steps for women's cricket. It was the first T20 league of its kind with many of the world's best players featuring, and had the advantage of being able to piggyback upon the popular and established brands of the men's competition. Women received payment for playing domestic cricket, and it was being televised too; doing so well that more games were shown, and moved to Channel Ten's primary station. WBBL02 went even further. Games continued to be televised, and if not they were live-streamed on Facebook for the world to see - brilliant for me as someone, time differences allowing, wanted to see as much of the action live as I possibly could.

As an English cricket fan, it gave me cause to wonder. Whilst the first season of the ECB's big T20 competition, the Kia Super League, was a success, it featured no live television coverage at all. There are arguments for an against that of course, such as Sky's concern about the quality of the end product (something that didn't stop the WBBL in their first season), and issues relating to logistics and infrastructures (more understandable, particularly with the smaller grounds). But a big part of it was the ECB's deal with Sky - and it seemed if they didn't want to show it, then nobody could.

Progress has certainly been made on the television front for 2017, with finals day and several other matches to be broadcast by Sky - these coming as the first halves of double headers with the men's domestic competition. It's a positive step, though double headers shouldn't be seen as the long term option. But I'd still like to see something following Australia's model. In 2014 England streamed ODI matches against India on YouTube for free. I'm not an expert on the ECB's contract and terms with Sky, but if something like this (or via Facebook) is still possible then surely it would be a great opportunity for the KSL. And it would be live cricket that wasn't hidden behind a paywall, sadly a novelty in England over the past ten years.

Double headers might be a good ploy for now, but already the time is coming for women's cricket to stand up on its own. Certainly international games have been capable of standing on their own for a while now, with grounds such as Chelmsford and Hove being packed for T20 matches. It always feels somewhat disappointing then, in contrast, when double headed games with men's international's are played; and that atmosphere is diminished by larger venues going unfilled. Double headers bring the feeling of the women's match being a warm up act before the 'main' event, sold to people who are buying their tickets for men's matches and may not want to see the first game, or aren't able to make the time of the earlier match. The opposite is true also, with the higher ticket prices potentially putting off those who had only wanted to see the women's match. Women's cricket is not just the 'bonus' product any more, and there are enough people interested that it can be sold to.

But at the moment they come as a way of growing the game, a necessary concession to make for the games to be televised. And with television comes more exposure, and with exposure comes a greater accessibility and interest from fans and the media. The international game can stand on its own, but for a domestic competition it could provide an extra boost. Spectators who may just be buying their tickets for the men's game will have an extra opportunity to see some of the best players from England and the rest of the world, and many players will get a chance in front of the cameras for the first time. In the long term I'd like to see fewer and fewer double headers, but in the meantime they can provide their benefits - especially if, as seems the case, it offers the best path for the KSL to get that all-important television coverage. It will be the first time English women's domestic cricket has been broadcast on television, and that in itself is a positive step and something I'm very much looking forward to.

A reality check

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.

England's one day test

India. It's always known as one of the hardest places for any team to tour, in any format of the game. That's something England will know well after a test tour that got worse and worse the longer it went on. Their ODI record in India over the past decade offers little hope too; since 2006 reading 18-3 in India's favour. But this isn't the England team of before, instead one that has risen rapidly over the past two years, that has won five of their last seven series - including two in Asia. An England team that surely has their best chance of major success in a long time.

England's batting power was in full display today. 350/7 was their highest score against India in ODIs, with 105 runs scored in the last eight overs alone as India's death bowling went to pieces. It took 33 balls for Ben Stokes to get to fifty, England's fastest against India. Fifties came from Roy (73 from 61), Root (78 from 95), and Stokes (62 from 40), with cameos a-plenty - Moeen Ali's 28 from 17 another little gem for England at the death of the innings. It was England's ninth score of 350 or more in ODIs; seven of those have come since the 2015 World Cup. It's no longer become a surprise when they do that sort of thing, which in itself shows how far they've come.

But while England might be able to score 350, you wouldn't necessarily back them to defend it - certainly not against India in India, not against Virat Kohli. It was a total that gave them a good chance, but even with such a weight of runs the match still looked set for a close chase. England got the start they needed, the opening pair falling to Willey before Stokes and Ball picked up one apiece. India were 63/4 in the first twelve overs, but their new ODI captain had come to the crease.

It was a familiar tale for England. New format, new year, but Kohli still reigning supreme. It was his 27th ODI century. 27! And he's only 28! Only three players have scored more centuries than Kohli - Jayasuriya (28), Ponting (30), and Tendulkar (49). Think of how many matches they've played. And run chases are his forte, an extraordinary average of 90.90 in successful chases for India. When Kohli bats, everything just looks easy. He's on another level to the rest of us mortals.

He didn't do it alone, of course. It was Kedar Jadhav who was the man of the match, his own century being India's fifth fastest in ODIs. The two shared the partnership that changed the match. It would be easy for a team to crumble at 63/4, still nearly 300 runs adrift, but India weren't going to crumble. The two shared 200 runs for that fifth wicket, utterly demoralising England in the process. England could never get the lid on during those middle overs when the spinners were to bowl; twelve balls from Rashid to Jadhav going for 31 runs alone. The bowling wasn't good enough, but the batting was brilliant.

Yet eventually, Kohli did fall. Jadhav was struggling with cramp and barely able to run, though with a few more sixes in him. But with those two gone, the score at 291/6, the game was far from over. Only England saved perhaps their worst bowling for this stage, not able to find a line or a length to stop India. Jadeja and Pandya had problems of their own, an element of panic setting in: chaotic running between the wickets, trying to whack every ball when it wasn't needed. It became a bit of a scramble towards the end, but Pandya did settle, a vital innings of 40* at the death. The mammoth chase and been chased.

It's a three match series, short and sweet, but leaving no more room for error. Certainly with the bat England have shown their worth, and it's not very often you score 350 and go on to lose. But it feels almost as if no total is enough when coming up against Kohli in this kind of form, and especially so when the man alongside him is playing far more than just the support act. England's bowlers will take a bruising, but they can do better, and they need to do better. They are strong at the start of an innings, but really need to follow that through - the key middle overs where the spinners come to play, and hitting their lines and lengths at the death. ODIs are always a tough game for the bowlers, a contest of which team can batter more runs than another, but wickets will always be the best way to slow down a run rate. India broke partnerships throughout England's innings, whilst Kohli and Jadhav were together for 24.3 overs as the run rate rose and rose. A chance to chase could make a difference too, and much could depend on who wins the toss - or just what call they make. England showed again the team that they are - rough around the edges and still with lessons to be learned, but damn exciting to watch along the way.

2016: Memorable moments

As we reach the end of a long 2016, it's that time when reviews of the year are to be found everywhere you look, and so it's time for me to add another. In the past I've done a list of five highlights; this year I'm going for more of a round-up, some memorable moments of the year mostly from the English game.

Ben Stokes batters South Africa

What list couldn't include this innings? Just the numbers speak for themselves: 258 runs from 198 balls; 130 runs scored in the morning session alone; a partnership of 399 alongside Jonny Bairstow, who made his own 150*. 2016 had barely begun, and it had already had one of its finest performances. It was a brutal assault, and one of the most incredible innings I've seen. And it was the start of a stellar year for Stokes, his finest yet with the bat and with the ball.

Carlos Brathwaite hits a six, and another, and another, and another

But not everything went right for Ben Stokes this year. West Indies needed 19 from the last over in the final of the World T20, with England sensing victory. Though Marlon Samuels stood at the other end with 85*, not much had come in the way of support with England's bowlers keeping it tight and taking regular wickets. But it was never quite over. Stokes was the bowler, Brathwaite was the batsman. Six, six, six, six. Four massive hits, an extraordinary innings for an extraordinary win. England were heartbroken; West Indies could dance the champion dance once again.

West Indies Women win the World T20

The men weren't the only West Indies team celebrating that night. Ahead of the women's World T20 final, Australia were the favourites by a distance. They'd won the last three tournaments, and beaten the West Indies in all eight of their previous meetings in the format. But history doesn't matter when finals are concerned. West Indies had 149 to chase down and were in charge all the way, not losing a wicket until they already had 120 on the board. 18-year-old Hayley Matthews made 66, captain Stafanie Taylor 59, and there was a new team at the top of the women's game. 

A big year for women's cricket

The West Indies' win was just one moment from a big year for women's cricket. The first WBBL in Australia, starting in late 2015, was a huge success, bringing new opportunities for players and bringing women's domestic cricket to the television screens. WBBL02 has built on this further, with more games on television and others streamed across Facebook. In England, it was all change, with a new captain and new coaching regime, with new players coming into the side and making an impact, and others coming on in leaps and bounds - opener Tammy Beaumont leading the way. It was also the first season for England's own Twenty20 competition, the KSL - with the Southern Vipers lifting the trophy. With a World Cup in England in 2017, it promises to be a bumper year again.

Misbah's press-ups

Maybe the most memorable moment of the English summer was not Misbah-ul-Haq's century in the first test at Lord's, but the celebration that followed - the press-ups on the hallowed turf. Four days later, after Yasir Shah had taken ten wickets in the game to defeat England, the whole team followed suit - with Younis Khan leading the way as the drillmaster. It was a Pakistan team united, and putting the ignominy of their last visit firmly in the past, with captain Misbah leading from the front. The series ended 2-2, and Pakistan rose to number one in the test rankings for the first time. 

England reach new heights

Though in test whites England often struggled this year, they were at home in the shortened formats. The pick of the bunch had to be that glorious day at Trent Bridge, where they racked up a mere 444/3 against Pakistan, the highest score in ODI history. Leading the way was Alex Hales, a score of 171 finally breaking Robin Smith's 23-year-old record for England's highest ODI innings. Jos Buttler (90 from 51) and Eoin Morgan (57 from 27) almost made that look boring. Last year's World Cup had become a distant memory.

The County Championship finale

I don't have the chance to go to a great deal of cricket, but I made sure to head down to Lord's for the last two days of the final round of the County Championship. Middlesex, Somerset, and Yorkshire were all still in the running going into the last match, with Middlesex and Yorkshire playing each other. First it was the battle for the bonus points, with Yorkshire needing 350 in the first innings to stay in the race - and rain stopping play at 349/9. Then, after Somerset's win, both sides were needing a victory to win the title. It came down to an engineered run chase, 240 from 40 overs for Yorkshire and a never-say-die attitude. Toby Roland-Jones took a hat trick and Middlesex were the winners, a dramatic end to a thrilling season.

A new star for Bangladesh

A series that England would have expected to win turned into a thrilling two games. The first, won by England, was one that went down to the wire. Ben Stokes was the hero, an all round display capped off by taking the last two wickets, but Bangladesh had only fallen 22 runs short. The second test saw England making a strong start in chasing 273, but 100/0 became 164 all out in the evening session. Bangladesh had claimed their biggest scalp yet, with Mehedi Hasan the hero - nineteen wickets across two tests, including three six-wicket hauls. And he only turned nineteen between tests. The future looked bright.

Bairstow's golden year

The year began with him only just having taken the gloves from Jos Buttler, still looking to really cement his place in the team, and still looking for that first test century having made his debut in 2012. The year ended with him established as one of England's star players, having scored the most test runs by any keeper in a calendar year, and only just falling short of Michael Vaughan's record for most runs by an Englishman in a year. Three centuries and eight fifties came in between, innings where he counterattacked, just attacked, or really had to dig deep and fight. His keeping, whilst still a work in progress, was definitely improving too. 

England, what's going wrong?

So, really all my attempts to be optimistic in the face of impending doom in my last post turned out to be in vain. It's like I made them in the face of impending doom, or something. Funny how that works.

England slipped to their fourth defeat of the series yesterday and their second innings defeat in a row - and that being their second innings defeat in a row after scoring 400 in their first outing with the bat. There's not really a lot you can say about that. India simply outclassed England in every department; everything England did well, India then went and did better. England score 477? India scored 759, and declared. Moeen Ali gets a century? Lokesh Rahul gets 199, and then Karun Nair gets 303* - his very first test century and it's a triple. India never settled for just winning matches, they dominated them, pummeled England into the ground. Nair's triple was scored off only 381 balls, with Jadeja scoring a 55-ball 51 alongside him at the end.

England had a day to bat to save the match, a perfectly achievable aim on a pitch doing nothing for the bowlers. They made a strong start, too, with the openers sharing a century stand. But there was always that sense of inevitability as they crashed to 207 all out, losing by an innings and 75 runs. Their first innings score of 477 became the highest ever to end with an innings defeat.

So what's going wrong? Whilst they're still searching for their best eleven - and more so when playing in Asia than anywhere else - there's still a group of players with unquestionable talents who just aren't adding up to the sum of their parts. And some of it will be tiredness, yes, but when you see the same things happening again and again you'd expect them to learn a lesson at some point. English batting collapses are nothing new, for example, but over this winter they seem to have found a new template. It might even be one more frustrating than before. Mirpur, Vizaj, Mumbai, Chennai - all times when England surrendered completely when sensible batting might have saved them, or at least offered some dignity. I mean, innings like that do happen on occasion - opposing sides start to smell blood and move in for the kill whilst batsmen fall like dominoes - but England have made it a habit this winter, and more than usual. And a lot of the time, they're getting themselves out, playing shots that in the situation they have no business playing. What was Bairstow doing, what was Moeen doing? When you have a very real chance to save the game, to at least salvage some scrap of dignity, why would you do that?

So is it the coaching then? Bayliss has worked wonders with England in the shortened formats, but the test side has gone up and down and not really got anywhere. The year started with a brilliant away win in South Africa and it looked like England were in a position to build from. But since then we've had disappointing draws against Pakistan and Bangladesh and now humiliation in India; with plenty of batsmen going in and out of the team and nearly as many spinners this winter alone. There's no specialist fielding coach whilst chances are going down; no permanent spin coach when the spinners are struggling (and when Saqlain Mushtaq arrived, Rashid for one did much better); there's no wicketkeeping coach for a keeper still learning his craft. The same attitude that's brought so much success in the one-day arena doesn't translate to a match that lasts five days: there's still room to attack with the bat, but application has to come first and foremost. There's a time and a place to take the game to the opposition, and England haven't found either.

Things can go to far the other way though, which they often do in the field. It means coming back to Alastair Cook, and talking about his captaincy is unavoidable. The thing is, though the batsmen can be too aggressive when they don't need to be, in the field England have been defence first, and probably defence later too. And when it goes wrong, Cook rarely has a plan B to turn to. England just drifted in the field, Cook just rotated his bowlers - not really providing a firm leadership or notion of creativity. It's hard to see him continuing in the job for much longer. Even Cook himself has been hinting at it since the start of the winter. Four years in the job is a long time. There have been times before when he might have gone, but there didn't seem to be any heir apparent - or at least one that's ready yet. Now Joe Root has played over fifty tests, and that younger generation that includes star performers like Stokes and Bairstow look ready to step up.

Choosing a star batsman as captain always has that element of risk, that the pressures of leading will take their toll and neuter their offerings to the team with the bat. The same might happen for Joe Root, or it could be the impetus he needs. There's no doubting that he's one of the best batsmen in the world, but his collection of scores in the eighties look more of a missed opportunity than anything. Could the responsibility of being captain give him that edge he needs to convert these into centuries, 'daddy hundreds', the big scores England need to dominate the opposition? It's what Kohli does for India, at least. Root also seems to be more pro-active in nature and could offer that fresh approach England need, a new angle of looking at things, the man they need to shake things up. A tough home series against South Africa and an Ashes tour on the horizon may not be the ideal time to start, but then again, when is? It feels like his time is coming.

There's so many other comments to make about this winter, and it's hard to find the space to go into on just one post here. There are selection issues, often dubious; the lack of penetration with the ball; the question of just how many all-rounders is a blessing and how many makes too many; the scheduling; to name but a few.

The good thing at least is that England have seven months before they next take to the field in their whites, seven months they need. Though the defeat was, well, pretty horrific, it's not a time for rash, knee-jerk decisions. They were expected to lose and did just that against a strong Indian side. The question is why it was so bad.  There will be changes in personnel in the team, but none too drastic. It feels more like changes in approach off the field will make the bigger effect - and even that's not a call for Bayliss to go. They need to address why it is that such a talented bunch of players are underperforming to this extent, why they don't seem able to string together a sequence of performances across tests, even across innings. There are seven months before they play again, seven months to have a long, hard look at what's going wrong.

The see-saw of hope and despair

When I last updated my blog, after the first test of the series, things didn't look too bad for England. Sure, depending on your viewpoint they might have squandered their chance to take a series lead, but they had certainly gone a way to dispel the gloom that followed the series draw in Bangladesh. Since then, whilst I was laid to waste by flu, England were also laid to waste by India's batsmen and bowlers. With India now 2-0 up with two to go, the series practically in the bag, there's a lot less to be happy about.

But still I go 'looking for the positives', that cliché that so often follows a disappointing performance. And England's performance has been disappointing, no doubt about it. There's a batting lineup, that for all its obvious talent, continues to fold too easily. Six different players had passed fifty at some point in the series before today, yet still England have found themselves in positions such as 80/5, 87/4, and 78/5. In Mohali, they had a great chance to post a big score batting first, but so often threw their wickets away in making 283. Then there are the Indian batsmen, classy players such as Virat Kohli and Cheteshwar Pujara in particular, teaching England a lesson. For a long time in the second test, only a dog on the outfield was able to stop them batting. And if they get past them, there's always Ravi Ashwin, nearly as much of a danger with the bat as he is when coming in to bowl at England's many left handers.

Maybe there aren't that many positives then. Maybe I'm clutching at straws. I can't see anything other than an Indian series win, after all. Maybe it's a just fit of excitement from seeing a player like Haseeb Hameed come into the side at 19 and look the part straight away. After scores of 31 and 82 during an impressive debut, in his next two games he continued to look the real deal. A score of 25 might not seem that much on a scorecard, but in the second innings at Visag he occupied the crease for over three hours, 144 balls, 50.2 overs to make those 25 runs. Maybe it wasn't a thrilling and buccaneering innings, but it was absorbing in its own way and the sort England needed in that situation. In Mohali, a badly broken finger wasn't enough to stop him, bravely battling for 59* at number eight and doing all he could to keep England in the game. If the game is about character and temperment, he's got it in spades. And of course when you finally find an opener, two come along at once. Keaton Jennings made his debut in replacing Hameed for the fourth test, and made a century on the very first day. After the amount of openers that have flattered to deceive, I'm wary of declaring anyone as England's savior. But for now at least there's a lot to celebrate with these two.

And others are improving as well. Stokes and Bairstow are ever-improving against the spinners, and continue to be a strong partnership when they often have the chance to bat together. Stokes in particular has added that extra layer to his game, an extra patience for that hard graft when facing the spinners. Maybe there's the odd rush of blood to the head, but he won't give up easily; and he relishes having a big role with bat and ball. Adil Rashid, also, might be getting better with every match. The four ball might still be just round the corner, but more frequently the wickets are too. England's spin consultant, Saqlain Mushtaq, joining the tour has had its effect - but you can't only credit the coach, the bowler has done the work too. He appears to have won the trust of his captain now, which might be half the battle. He will always provide that mix of frustration alongside his element of mystery and genuine wicket taking threat. But with 18 wickets in the series so far, leading England's list by a distance, things are looking up.

Yet, it's still hard to plaster over the team's obvious flaws. They have been beaten twice, and you can't argue against that. I will freely admit that my optimism is, indeed, hopeless. Today they might find themselves in a decent position at 288/5, you can't run away from the fact that they are 2-0 and don't really know their best eleven or the order it should go in. They've tried three spinners, but the third option has never been good enough, so now they're back down to two on a pitch already deteriorating (though I would still say the 4/2 seam/spin should suit England more). With no warm-up games before or in-between, there's no coming back now for dropped batsmen like Ballance or Duckett, Buttler in the team as a specialist number seven. The call-up of Liam Dawson for the injured Zafar Ansari perhaps shows the muddled thinking of the selectors - not knowing if they needed a specialist batsman or a specialist spinner, so going somewhere between the two. If he does play, it must surely be as a batting option first - but where exactly does he fit? Consistency also remains an issue. Batsmen might deliver separately or in pairs but not often as a whole group, and not often for a run of matches in a row. The talent is there, so what's missing? Fatigue from a long year might be a part, but what else?

Instead, I'll flip back one more time and just be happy about today's play. They lost a few wickets foolishly, but all in all it was a solid day of cricket. It's always lovely to see a young player come into the team and make an impact straight away, and Jennings certainly made his presence felt. 288/5 is a position England can work with and build upon, and though Stokes and Buttler will have to fight hard to make their runs as the pitch turns and turns, the promise is there for a score of 350 plus or more if they're lucky. When the ball turns, it's good to have those runs on the board - it's something to work with. Maybe my hope hasn't quite died yet.