What's wrong with Swann?

Since bursting back on to the international scene almost four years ago, Graeme Swann has been continually trumpeted as the best spinner in the world. For the most part that has been no exaggeration, with West Indies, Australia , Pakistan and South Africa all finding themselves bamboozled by the off-spinner. But over the last couple of years, and particularly since last summer, his performances have dropped away and he’s now no longer in the top 10 of the ICC’s bowling rankings. At The Oval he had a surface on which wickets would be expected to come his way, but he still had no luck and was out bowled by the supposedly inferior South African leg-spinner Imran Tahir. Something has gone wrong.

One theory, and the conclusion which most commentators have come to, is that since 2010 Swann has rarely been presented with conditions to his liking. This is true, with most of the Tests in England and those in the 2010/11 Ashes played on seamer-friendly wickets and, in this country, often also under heavy cloud cover. But that neglects two important issues. Firstly, on the rare occasions when conditions do suit him he should be England’s main man. That wasn’t the case in the UAE, where he was comprehensively out bowled by Monty Panesar, or this week at The Oval, where he was generally played with ease by Graeme Smith, Hashim Amla and Jacques Kallis. Secondly, early in his career Swann’s greatest strength was the ability to take crucial wickets in benign conditions: he was player of the series in pace-friendly South Africa in 2009-10 and knocked over left-handers for fun whatever was happening to the pitch. This strength seems to have been nullified in recent series with batsmen taking a more positive approach to him and Swann himself lacking the zip that characterised his bowling in the past. Averages of 40, 40 and 47 in the most recent campaigns in Australia and at home to India and West Indies are not flattering.

An alternative theory is that Swann has taken a back seat because of the incisiveness of England’s pace attack. Sure, that has been true on a number of occasions. But in most of these matches Andrew Strauss has turned to his spinner, and then had to take him out of the attack as he gets dispatched round the park. He could do little to halt Denesh Ramdin and Tino Best’s charge against England last month, and Mike Hussey and Mahela Jayawardene have both taken to hitting him out of the attack early in his spell. This should not be used as an excuse. Somebody claiming to be the leading orthodox spinner in world cricket shouldn’t lose these battles so often.

Some critics would instead point to Swann’s cat-rescuing, sprinkler-dancing, joker-playing antics as a distraction from his cricket. It’s a possibility, but I’d leave it at that - underneath it all I think he is as committed to the task as anybody and, having found out the hard way after his first brief foray into the England setup, knows the amount of work it takes to become a top international cricketer.

One thing which is definitely an issue for Swann is his workload. As somebody who features in all three forms of the game, he is subject to an intense schedule which, sadly, only gets worse over the next few years. He also has a chronic elbow problem, which is possibly effecting his bowling, and which Andy Flower will be keen to manage carefully. In many ways he, as somebody who doesn’t currently feature in the IPL, is the prime candidate for rest and surely won’t feature in the end of season ODIs against South Africa. Hopefully that can get him into shape for a winter in India when England are likely to need him at his best more than ever.

What’s for sure is that Graeme Swann is not bowling at his best, and hasn’t for some time now. It would be premature to say that the axe is hanging over his head, but an upturn in performance is needed - and quick - if England are to retain any hope of staying at number one in the Test rankings for much longer. 

County Championship Round-Up - Week 11: KP knock lifts gloom

Kevin Pietersen lifted the gloom on the resumption of the County Championship, scoring an unbeaten 234 in a week where, as if the Twenty20 break had never happened, the weather dictated that six of the seven matches were drawn.

Pietersen’s stunning knock came on the third afternoon of Surrey’s match with Lancashire at the small ground in Guildford, at a time when the result appeared far from certain. Lancashire had amassed 485 between the showers, with centuries for the underrated Steven Croft (154*) and opener Paul Horton (110). Whilst the bowlers struggled to make much impact, Surrey fans reported Pietersen practicing his golf swing at mid-on. The practice certainly came in handy when he came into bat. After the young Surrey openers struggled a strong rearguard was required. What followed was spectacular as the England star, well supported by Zander de Bruyn (94), launched eight sixes in the highest first-class knock of the season. With little chance of victory, and the lead still 55 runs away, talk of something really special began to circulate – could Kevin score a triple-hundred, or even threaten Brian Lara’s first-class record of 501*? As it happens that became irrelevant, as the weather washed out Saturday’s play and ensured a draw. Surrey take 10 points to Lancashire’s 8. 

The rain ruined Worcestershire’s tight encounter with fellow strugglers Durham, as the fourth day was washed out in its entirety. Although nine players managed double figures, Durham, captained by one-day captain Dale Benkenstein whilst new first-class captain Paul Collingwood continued his recovery from a broken hand, were restricted to 243 after being put into bat despite nine players reaching double figures. Mark Stoneman top scored with just 38, whilst Alan Richardson, having rested throughout the Twenty20, resumed his strong form, taking 4-52. Worcestershire too struggled with the bat, and were indebted to Australian Phil Hughes, prospering in county cricket after an extremely rough spell in the Test team, who made 87 before being trapped lbw by Scott Borthwick. Borthwick, who hasn’t always featured in the Championship this season, reminded England of his improvement, picking up four top order wickets. Chris Rushworth (3-43) mopped up the tail to bowl Worcestershire out for 205. Durham were 67-0 when the rain brought proceedings to a close. Both teams scored 7 bonus points.

Middlesex were in the process of a dramatic turnaround in their game against Nottinghamshire at Uxbridge before the final day was washed out. Nottinghamshire, and Andre Adams in particular, took advantage of conditions on the opening morning to bowl the hosts out for 98. England captain Andrew Strauss (50) and Gareth Berg (32) were the only pair to manage double figures, and there were six ducks. The prolific Adams recorded figures of 6-32. High-flying Notts continued to dominate in their reply, with fifties for the in-form Michael Lumb (50) and captain Chris Read (71). But it was Australian Adam Voges who went on to make three figures, scoring 105 before becoming one of Tim Murtagh’s four victims. There were also four wickets for Toby Roland-Jones. This left Nottinghamshire with a lead of 231, and they could reasonably have sensed an innings victory. But it was not to be as Middlesex cleared the deficit with only two wickets down. Strauss was unbeaten on 127 at the eventual end of the game. Nottinghamshire took 9 points to Middlesex’s 6.
Although play was dramatically curtailed in the match between Warwickshire and Sussex at rain-soaked Edgbaston the Bears put in a superb effort to secure 11 bonus points. They batted first, and reached 400 with four balls to spare. Rikki Clarke was again the hero of the hour, making 110 not out at better than a run a ball after Ian Bell (57) and Jim Troughton (81) had earlier past 50. Monty Panesar (4-95) was the best of the Sussex bowlers. The Sussex innings was then wrapped up for 191 shortly before the close on the final day, thanks to three wickets from Clarke, and five from spinner Jeetan Patel. Warwickshire go top of Division One by a point, with a game in hand on second placed outfit Nottinghamshire.

Joe Root showed everybody why he is rated as a future Test prospect as he starred in Yorkshire’s drawn Division Two game against Hampshire at the Rose Bowl. Root was the only man to pass fifty for Yorkshire, as he made a superb 222*, and guided his team to three batting points. The visitors were 108-6 at one point before Root was supported by Azeem Rafiq, and then by Steve Patterson, in taking Yorkshire to 350-9 declared. Tomlinson (4-80) and Kabir Ali (3-88) were the best of the bowlers. Steve Harmison, on Yorkshire debut, had time to bowl four wides in his first five overs before the rain washed out the final day. 

Gloucestershire v Essex at the pretty College Ground in Cheltenham barely got going before being ended by the elements. Gloucestershire enjoyed themselves, reaching 284-4, in the small periods of play that were possible. Ed Cowan (103), playing for Gloucestershire on a short-term basis before joining up with Australia A, hit a century and there were fifties for Dan Housego (60) and Hamish Marshall (72*). Harbhajan Singh’s Essex debut was uneventful. 

Finally, struggling Glamorgan recorded their first win of the season in an exciting finale to their predictably rain-effected encounter with Northamptonshire at Wantage Road. The hosts won the toss and elected to bat. They managed to compile 350 over the course of four days – David Sales, recently told his contract is unlikely to be renewed, hit an unbeaten 138 and there was 117 for youngster Rob Newton. At this point they declared, and each side forfeited an innings so that Glamorgan needed 351 to win in 90 overs. That they reached the target minutes before the close was down to Marcus North (73), Jim Allenby (67) and captain Mark Wallace (54), as the usually incisive new ball pair of Jack Brooks and Chaminda Vaas proved ineffective. The result pulls the Welsh county off the bottom of the table, though Leicestershire have a game in hand on them in the battle to avoid the wooden spoon.

South Africa v England: Man-for-man

The most anticipated Test series outside of Ashes contests in many a year is just a week away, with most pundits predicting a closely fought battle between the number one and two ranked sides in the ICC’s table. This series is also set to throw up a series of fascinating individual contests, with the sides closely matched man-for-man. In this article I’ll examine all of those individual contests, and see who comes out on top.
THE BATSMEN

Andrew Strauss v Graeme Smith

On stats alone it is easy to say that Smith is the better player, with a significantly better average. The South African captain also has a history of inflicting his best on England, though his form has been patchy of late. That could also be said of his counterpart until recently but, with two hundreds against West Indies, Strauss couldn’t have prepared better for this series. Nevertheless, both bowling attacks will fancy getting an early edge by shifting the opposition captain with the new ball. Both have struggled against left-armers of late but with neither side possessing any in their likely XIs they can breathe as easily as is possible in a series where Anderson, Broad, Steyn and Philander possess the new ball. As leaders both Strauss and Smith tend to err on the side of caution. Both are well respected by their teams, though one feels that Smith’s tenure is reaching a close. 

Verdict: Very tight, but Smith edges it because of his history against England. Can’t be split as captains.

Alastair Cook v Alviro Petersen

Cook is comfortably the better and at Test level more experienced player. Nevertheless, England mustn’t underestimate Petersen, who has gathered experience in these conditions over the last two seasons with first Glamorgan and then Essex. Cook is still only 27, but has played 80 Tests and scored 19 100s. A mediocre series against West Indies notwithstanding, he has been in the form of his life for the past 18 months and it is hard to see him failing here unless Philander exposes his slight weakness outside his off-stump. Anderson has worked out opponents faultlessly in recent times and Petersen will be high on his hit list.

Verdict: Cook, by some margin.

Jonathan Trott v Hashim Amla

If somebody had told you five years ago that Trott and Amla would be amongst the best batsmen in the world in 2012 you might have laughed. But, through contrasting styles – Amla is wristy and graceful whilst Trott is determined and at times ugly – they have turned themselves into world-class number threes. There is perhaps a slight question mark over Trott’s form in the last few series, which have not produced heavy returns even if he has never looked out of touch. However, you would be a brave man to bet against him batting for long periods of time. Amla can also bat all day, and will be a difficult man for the England bowlers to get on top of. 

Verdict: Trott is superb, but Amla’s some player. Advantage Amla, just. 

Kevin Pietersen v Jacques Kallis

The two names that will dominate team meetings most. Kallis remains a top-class all-rounder, who is an under-estimated but crucial cog in the bowling unit, as well as one of the world’s best batsmen. His figures stack up with the very top greats of the game. But KP too has been in ominous form of late, and looks perfectly placed to launch a violent assault on his homeland. Pietersen likes the ball coming on, and so should be well placed to deal with Steyn, Morkel and co. Kallis is not a fading force, though his record in England is underwhelming and he had a particularly poor tour in 2008. 

Verdict: Another tough call, but I’m going for Pietersen. Could take the series away from South Africa.

Ian Bell v AB de Villiers

Two of the most fluent batsmen in the world, who are now nearing the peak of their powers. Both are worth the admission fee alone when at full flow, and recent efforts suggest both are in top form. Any doubts over Bell’s ability to perform when the pressure’s on must now have been quashed. Some will question the wisdom of South Africa’s decision to give de Villiers the gloves in the wake of Mark Boucher’s serious eye injury – it could effect his batting, and in the long-term he is likely to have even more responsibility with the Test captaincy also set to come his way shortly. 

Verdict: By common consent AB is now the leading player in the world. For that reason I can’t look past him as a massive threat.

Ravi Bopara v Jacques Rudolph

Number six has been an issue for both teams, with nobody able to nail it down. One would suggest that Bopara is the more naturally talented, but the fact remains that he has not yet delivered in a major series – though that Ashes contest was now three years ago. Rudolph is considerably more experienced, and his form for Yorkshire in recent years suggests that he is a much more accomplished played than last time England saw him. However, he hasn’t quite performed consistently yet on his international return. Both players are sure to be worked over by the opposition bowlers.

Verdict: Bopara the more talented, but I must go with Rudolph, who knows England well and is a tough man to be faced with at number six.

Matt Prior v JP Duminy

Following the retirement of Boucher and subsequent re-jig of the South African line-up, Duminy is likely to bat seven at The Oval. He is in some ways South Africa’s Bopara in that flashes of success at international level have been interspersed with periods of dreadful form. He has done well of late though, scoring a century when he got an opportunity in the 3rd Test in New Zealand. On face value he is probably a more accomplished batsman than Prior but England, and Graeme Swann in particular, have had great success against Duminy in the past. Swann will again expect to make JP his ‘bunny’ this time round. Prior has established himself as the world’s leading ‘keeper-batsman and is himself a daunting prospect at number seven.

Verdict: Duminy’s troubles against Swann and England give Prior the advantage.

THE BOWLERS

James Anderson v Dale Steyn

These two opening bowlers can lay claim to being the best in the business. Anderson is generally more potent with the new ball than Steyn, holding an ability to swing it round corners even when conditions aren’t in his favour. It is a major surprise if he doesn’t take at least one wicket with the new ball. Steyn, however, has enormous variety, bowls at 90 mph+, and is the most lethal reverse swing bowler in world cricket. Both batting line-ups better watch out!

Verdict: Too close to call. Anderson better with the new ball and Steyn later.

Stuart Broad v Morne Morkel

The tallest bowlers on each team have each come on leaps and bounds in the last year, after working out the right lengths to bowl. Since Broad’s transformation he is perhaps more consistent than Morkel, as was highlighted by his excellent efforts in difficult conditions in Asia this winter. However, Morkel is probably the most destructive of the lot, and when he gets on a role can take a hatful of wickets in a rush. His performance in the tour game was woeful, but with more overs under his belt, one would imagine his threat will grow as the series goes on. Broad also offers crucial lower-order runs to England.

Verdict: These days Broad is more consistent, though Morkel has also improved in that regard.

Tim Bresnan v Vernon Philander

As the unsung hero of the England side Bresnan has gathered figures which currently comfortably outdo legends Andrew Flintoff and even Sir Ian Botham. Philander has also made a sensational start to his Test career, making the batsman play every delivery with the new ball at a better pace than he is given credit for, and in the process picking up hatfuls of wickets. Bresnan is regularly referred to as a trundler, but he is actually far better than that. He has shown tremendous aptitude at working out opposition players, has a dangerous short ball and is England’s best exponent of reverse swing. 

Verdict: Can’t look past Philander’s early career. Will pose a major threat to the openers.

Graeme Swann v Imran Tahir

When Imran Tahir qualified for South Africa the common thinking was that he was the missing link who would take the team to a new level. Thus far, however, Test cricket has been a struggle for him. The wickets haven’t come with the regularity that they have in first-class cricket, and it has become apparent that Test players pick him better than first-class players, and are more likely to take the game to him. Nevertheless, if he gets it right he remains a potential threat. Swann has a sensational record against South Africa in all forms of the game and despite a recent dip in his effectiveness, particularly when it doesn’t turn, you just feel that he will do well in this series. The number of left-handers in the South African line-up will have him licking his lips.

Verdict: Swann is more experienced at Test level and more accomplished than Tahir. He remains a crucial cog in this England side.

THE WICKET-KEEPERS

Matt Prior v AB de Villiers

With Boucher having departed, de Villiers takes the gloves. He is more than a part-time ‘keeper, having done the job on many occasions in ODIs and at the IPL, and having made his Test debut against England with the gloves on. But he’s only kept in three Tests, and last time he did so missed a stumping in India. In that sense it’s a major risk for South Africa to put one of their best batsmen behind the stumps. Prior has improved markedly since he started out, and is now largely flawless with the gloves on.

Verdict: Prior has much more Test experience behind the sticks.

THE RESERVES

Neither side has an experienced batsman to call on, with South Africa playing all seven frontline batsmen in the squad. But both have a battery of fast bowlers desperate to get an opportunity. Steven Finn and Marchant de Lange are two of the brightest young things in the international game, but both will probably have to wait their turn for a chance in the XI. Meanwhile, Graham Onions and Lonwabo Tsotsobe have both had enough success at international level to suggest they could slot straight into the team if need be. England also have a number of other fast bowlers – Chris Tremlett among them – to call on in an emergency. In the spin department England also would appear to have the better number two in Monty Panesar, whilst South Africa have the solid but unspectacular Robin Peterson. 

Verdict: England have the marginally stronger bench. It would be a surprise if Finn and de Lange didn’t get a game at some point.

He got there in the end: Ramprakash retires

For much of his 25-year first-class career Mark Ramprakash looked likely to be remembered as a batsman who never made the most of his obviously great ability. He has consigned that idea to history in the last decade, though it remains remarkable to think that in a Test career lasting the best part of eleven years Ramprakash only reached three figures twice, and averaged a tad over 27. 

Mark Ramprakash burst on to the scene as a teenager in the 1988 NatWest Trophy final between Middlesex and Worcestershire. Coming in at 25 for 4 in pursuit of 162, many youngsters would have followed the lead of their senior team-mates and given their wickets away. When he was out, for 56, Middlesex needed just three more to win. 

From then on greatness beckoned, and Ramprakash was given a Test debut against West Indies at Headingley in 1991, where Malcolm Marshall came on second change. He made 27 in each innings in a rare England victory. But the expected success never really materialised. It took him another two years to pass 50, and the wait for a Test century was seven years. It finally came at Bridgetown in 1998, and hopes were raised that a breakthrough had been made. However, he passed three figures only once more and was jettisoned for good after England’s tour to New Zealand in early 2002. So disappointing were his performances for England that one of my early connections with cricket, as a young child, was to hear the phrase ‘Ramprakash is out’ repeatedly banded around the house as my parents updated each other on what was going on in the Test match.

The reasons for Ramprakash’s failure as an international cricket are probably many and varied. Those who played with him, such as former England captain Michael Vaughan, have suggested that “he couldn’t mentally get it right in the international game”. There may be some truth in this - success often becomes more difficult when you put too much pressure on yourself - but it is hard to say that Ramprakash was totally at fault. The selection policy during his career made it difficult for anybody to establish themselves within the side, and when he did play he batted in every position from two to seven. Meanwhile, in an era before central contracts and the England Performance Programme talented players weren’t prepared for the demands of international cricket in the same way they are today.

If Ramprakash’s international career was underwhelming, his domestic career was anything but. That NatWest Trophy winning innings was followed by an extremely successful career for Middlesex, for whom he passed 2,000 runs in the 1995 season. But it was his move across the river to Surrey in 2001 that set him up for an often Bradman-esque final decade of his career with international ambitions now largely forgotten. In the 2006 season he averaged 105 in Division Two of the County Championship, and followed that up by averaging 101 in the top tier the next season. That was not the end of his run-getting as he was again the country’s leading run-scorer in 2010. 

In amongst all this Ramprakash reached his 100th first-class hundred, a landmark which may well over time become his cricketing legacy, with it increasingly likely than he will be the 25th and last man to do so. The nearest current players are Sachin Tendulkar and Ricky Ponting, with 78 and 77 respectively, but, given their age and that they play so little first-class cricket outside of Tests, it is inconceivable that they could reach that particular milestone.

Ramps, as he was almost universally known throughout his career, shot back into the public eye as the eventual winner of Strictly Come Dancing in 2006. During his time on the show he proved that he could cope with the spotlight, whilst winning the adoration of women around the country, my mother included.

The final season and a bit of Ramprakash’s first-class career failed to deliver plentiful returns as he struggled first with a knee injury picked up playing football in 2011, and then with poor form this year. His final match came against Sussex at Horsham early last month, where scores of 8 and 31 reflected his recent troubles. But his stats from the preceding seasons with Surrey ensure that the memories of Ramprakash the unfulfilled talent will will be dwarfed by those of the domestic run machine.

Franchises not the answer for English Twenty20

When the ECB launched the Twenty20 Cup in 2003 the stated aim was to widen the appeal of county cricket, and introduce supporters to the county sides who could go on to support them in the more traditional formats. The other incentive was to safeguard the financial futures of the counties, by creating the opportunity to host full houses in a prime-time after work slot on warm June evenings. As an infant expectations were not only matched but surpassed - almost every game was sold out in those initial years, and the numbers of families in attendance was significantly higher than at other forms of the game. But in recent seasons Twenty20 has reached its adolescent stage. It asserts its independence by flexing its muscles in India, Bangladesh and Australia. And, back at home, those that adored it as a baby are less interested than they were before. 

All this has led to a flurry of suggestions from players as highly respected as Muttiah Muralitharan, Scott Styris, Dirk Nannes and the number two Twenty20 batsman in the world Eoin Morgan that our Friends Life t20 is falling behind franchise-based competitions such as the Indian and Bangladesh Premier Leagues and Australia’s Big Bash. The answer, they say, is that we must follow their lead and implement a franchise-based system in the UK. I say that, as well as being unworkable, franchises would in fact be disastrous for English cricket. 

The first reason for my position is that a franchise based system would undoubtedly go against the stated aim of English Twenty20 - to rejuvenate county cricket. Some interest might actually be created in the Manchester Mavericks, or the Leeds Leopards, at least whilst the novelty lasts. But what is to say that young supporters of those teams will go on to follow Lancashire and Yorkshire in the Championship? We are not India where the Ranji Trophy is attended by practically none and followed by few more - the County Championship has a stronger following than any other domestic first-class competition, and we must not let anything threaten that. The dominance of franchise cricket could easily do just that, creating the impression that county cricket is second class and driving those newspapers that still cover the Championship away.

Additionally, a franchise system would be sure to centre around our major international venues - the likes of The Oval, Headingley and Trent Bridge. The management at these venues would love a franchise system, to create more major match days, and perhaps bring in more income than the existing competition. But that fails to recognise that Surrey, who brought in an astounding 82,843 for Twenty20 group games last year aside, the counties to make the best success of Twenty20 have been the smaller ones - in particular Somerset, Essex and Sussex. Under a franchise system all three counties would almost certainly be sidelined, and even were a second T20 competition introduced to keep the clubs sweet, it is doubtful that attendances could be maintained. The end of T20 cricket as we know it would almost certainly be disastrous for these counties - the primary income stream would be cut off, and financial turmoil would be the likely result. Even were hefty compensation provided by the ECB, along with the chance to host games in the new competition, that would hardly be the way to treat the loyal supporters of those clubs. 

The success of Twenty20 in smaller towns also highlights a major difference in our culture from that in the countries some think we should copy. In India, cricket dominates the sporting scene and fans will come from far and wide to see their heroes. That isn’t how things work over here. Cricket has to be taken to the people who, in areas where the county cricket club is at the heart of the local community, will happily take advantage of the opportunity to see top class professional sport. For this reason it might well be an uphill struggle for city based franchises to galvanise local support in areas where international cricket and other sports teams dominate. Mancunians have their sport fix from the two Premier League clubs, and Old Trafford’s international cricket. Domestic cricket will thus always have a niche following their. 

A more fundamental reason that franchise cricket will never work in the UK is that it is hard to see who would be willing to put hefty sums of money down to buy a domestic cricket team over here. In India some of the highest profile public figures - from Shah Rukh Khan to Vijay Mallya to Shilpa Shetty - have forked out for IPL teams. But in England the domestic cricket market is narrow, and you have to think that the super-rich would be better off spending their cash on Premier League football clubs than Twenty20 franchises. Certainly, it is unrealistic to imagine Sir Richard Branson, David Beckham and Simon Cowell investing in cricket. Therefore, it is hard to see where the money would come from to lure top Twenty20 players with IPL, or at least Big Bash, style contracts. In fact franchises might be little better off than the counties.

Most pundits seem to agree that we ask too much of our international cricketers these days. It goes without saying that a franchise competition would struggle to work without the presence of Kevin Pietersen, Graeme Swann, James Anderson and all of our other iconic England cricketers. To make itself viable it would have to be contested over at least as many matches as the current Friends Life t20 and probably more, if the Morgan Review’s suggestion of 14 is anything to go by. This would do nothing to ease the schedule, and with international cricket unlikely to be reduced either, it is therefore inconceivable that the England players would be available for more than a couple of games. It would simply be incompatible with the laudable goals of the Strauss-Flower regime to be the best team in the world.

The preceding paragraphs cover the major points, but that is only the tip of the iceberg. Some other factors to consider are that many young (and older) English players would probably be sidelined in a franchise competition, that dumping counties wouldn’t suddenly make AB de Villiers, Lasith Malinga and Chris Gayle available, and that the problems the Friends Life t20 has encountered this year have been accentuated by the weather - something that franchises won’t change.

Of course, we shouldn’t forget that England are both World Twenty20 champions and ranked number one in the world in that form of the game. What we are doing can’t be that wrong then. 

As a final thought we should return to the list of players to put their names to wanting franchise cricket in England - Eoin Morgan, Scott Styris, Dirk Nannes, Murali. Three are overseas players, who probably wouldn’t care if Leicestershire collapsed. And all four would rate their chances of using an English franchise system to further top up their bank accounts. In fact they’ve probably given little thought to whether it would be the right way for English cricket to go. All my evidence suggests it wouldn’t be.