Whatever
happens on England’s final two days in New Zealand the tour will be filed in
the ‘should have done better’ draw. Ahead of the Test series most observers happily
predicted a 3-0 whitewash for England; those that didn’t invariable went for
2-0, accounting for the rain. It is easy to understand why the Kiwis were
written off: they looked totally inept against high quality bowling in South
Africa, had recently been embarrassed by the acrimonious divorce between coach
Mike Hesson and former captain Ross Taylor, and, of course, England were
supposed to be the second best team in the world and New Zealand the eighth.
The truth is that, whilst some credit must go to New Zealand for performing
well above expectations, England have rarely played like one of the world’s two
best teams since August 2011. Indeed, since completing the 4-0 home thrashing
of India they have won just five of eighteen completed matches. Defeats have
regularly been swept under the carpet as freak occurrences, brought on by alien
conditions, lack of preparation or both. However, batting collapses such as
that yesterday, and ineffective bowling displays such as that on the opening
day of the ongoing Test have happened far too regularly in the past eighteen
months to fall into the freak occurrence category. Even in victory, as at home
against West Indies early last summer and at times in India, performances have
been some distance from their 2010-11 peak. It is time that we recognised that
England have some thinking to do before being nailed-on as double Ashes
winners. I’ll now present a handful of theories for this decline.
The Collingwood factor
Paul
Collingwood is perhaps the most underrated England cricketer of the past thirty
years. His departure, following a poor run of form in Australia, seemed to have
little immediate impact and in many ways was quickly forgotten. But with others
struggling at the moment his value to the team has become clearer. He was a
reliable performer with the bat, both on good days and, particularly, on bad
days, contributed something with the ball and was the best fielder. There is no
cricketer like that in the side now. In the course of just five years or so of
Test cricket he managed ten Test hundreds. That between him his replacements –
Eoin Morgan, Samit Patel, Ravi Bopara, Jonny Bairstow and Joe Root – have
managed just two three-figure score between them since 2011 reflects the fact
that he still hasn’t been replaced effectively. There is no quick fix solution
to this problem. Root has looked the likeliest to succeed, and should be given
an extended run. However, it must be of some concern that the much lauded batch
of young cricketers that have come through the England Performance Programme in
recent years are yet to really step up.
Fatigue
In
spite of an extensive rest policy and a number of injuries England’s fast
bowlers look worn out at the moment. Jimmy Anderson has been excellent, but
hasn’t hit the heights as frequently as he did in Australia or at home the
following summer. Meanwhile, Stuart Broad and Steven Finn are yet to win their
battles with consistency and the temptation to bowl too short. The fatigue is
somewhat difficult to explain, given that a rest policy is in place and that
this generation almost certainly bowl less competitive overs than any previous
cohort. Sir Ian Botham would, paradoxically, argue that the remedy is to bowl
more. Others would suggest that the schedule is crazy and that we have to stand
by, even extend, the rest policy. Realistically, there is no silver bullet that
can solve the problem. They haven’t bowled so badly that they should be axed,
but perhaps we need to return to the old policy of bringing in fresh legs in
the middle of important series. To do that we need in-form reserves, which
could bring top county bowlers such as Middlesex’s Toby Roland-Jones into the
equation come the Ashes.
The coach
It is
a truism that coaches tend to have their greatest impact within their first
couple of years in a new job. Andy Flower has been England coach since 2009 and
by now there will be nothing new about his philosophy and coaching methods for
most of the squad. That is not to say that he should be replaced. Far from it.
He has been our most successful coach, but does need to ensure that he doesn’t
become too stuck in his ways like Duncan Fletcher did. Some subtle changes, not
in style but in method, might produce a positive response from the players.
Complacency?
England’s
batsman were regularly accused of complacency before the upturn in fortunes.
Some would now say that this has returned. I’m not sure I agree with that.
However, it is undoubtedly true that England’s top six need to keep working
hard. It may well have been a freak occurrence for Alastair Cook, Jonathan
Trott, Kevin Pietersen and Ian Bell to all produce their very best at the same
time. Nonetheless, if they put the effort in there is nothing to say that they
can’t get back to that form. There have been a few poor shots of late, particularly
from Bell. But I’d argue that he’s rarely more than a knock away from a big
score and that, having previously been dropped, he is far too experienced a player
to have become complacent.
Conclusions
The
paragraphs above propose some preliminary theories which might go some way to
explaining England’s current form dip. None require dramatic remedial action,
and there are surely other factors too. It is hard to argue that any
significant changes of personnel are needed. Eight of England’s XI are proven
international cricketers, and the other three are not far off. Thus, England
remain a strong team, if one which has not really performed of late. Given
Australia’s troubles a double Ashes win in still well within Cook’s grasp, and
if completed could yet make this a sensational year for the England cricket
team. But predictions of 5-0 whitewashes are surely premature on current form.
The team are not performing well, and need to arrest the slide quickly before
it becomes a major slump.
Originally published on The Armchair Selector
