Month: February 2021

Day 3 in Chennai and Great Escapes

A look at Chennai, where England are very well placed, and also at the astonishing events that unfolded in Chittagong today, with a section on other notable ‘steals’.

A two part post here, both parts inspired by goings on in places that begin with a ‘ch’.

ENGLAND CONSOLIDATE

England had already had two good days in Chennai, and resumed on the third morning on 555-8. It took 10.1 overs for the last two wickets to fall, in which time the score advanced to 578 all out. Then Jofra Archer removed both openers with the ball still new, Bess claimed the prize scalp of Kohli and was gifted the wicket of Rahane. India at that point were 73-4, but Rishabh Pant then joined Cheteshwar Pujara in a fine stand. Bess picked them both up eventually, but Sundar and Ashwin held out until the close with the score 257-6. With the pitch beginning to wear England’s likeliest path to victory is to wrap up the Indian innings fairly quickly tomorrow morning, aim for quick runs in their own second innings and give themselves a day and half to bowl India out again. If India bat long but slowly tomorrow it may be necessary to enforce the follow on because there is not time to win it by batting a second time, but going in again for short burst of rapid scoring and having India bat last when the pitch is at its most difficult would be preferable. There would be a case for Burns and especially Sibley being held back in this second innings, to be used only if wickets are tumbling.

BETTER TO BE A LUCKY
GENERAL THAN A GOOD ONE

The nature of the dismissals that gave Bess his four wickets prompted some comments about him being lucky. However, apart from the Napoleon Bonaparte quote that heads this subsection, which is valid in any case, Bess has now had respectable hauls too often for the accusation of being lucky to hold much water. David Denton, the Yorkshire batter of the early 20th century was known as ‘Lucky’ Denton, but the reason people noticed him benefitting from good fortune was because of the use he made of his lucky breaks – 38,000 first class runs cannot be scored by luck alone. Similarly, another Yorkshireman, Herbert Sutcliffe was also renowned as a favourite of fortune, but again the good luck he enjoyed was noticed because he cashed in on it.

THE CHITTAGONG COUP

Yesterday Bangladesh declared their second innings closed at 223-8, an advantage of 394. When the West Indies were 59-3, with Kyle Mayers, a 28 year old test debutant whose first class batting average stood at a modest 28, walking out to bat it was looking a shrewd judgement. He and Nkrumah Bonner, also a debutant, put on 216 for the fourth wicket, reducing the ask to 120, before Bonner fell for 86. Jermaine Blackwood could only muster nine runs, and that was 292-5, still 103 to get. Wicket keeper Joshua Da Silva proved an excellent partner, scoring 20 himself, but playing an excellent support role to Mayers, already by then holder of the record for the highest ever fourth innings score by a test debutant. By the time Da Silva was out Mayers had gone past 200 and only three further runs were needed for victory. One more wicket fell before the target was reached, Mayers 210 not out at the end, and appropriately scoring the winning run. This the third recent match to have been won in the face of seemingly impossible odds, following the Headingley Heist (2019, see here) and what I will now dub the Brisbane Burgle (here). This one tops the lot – Stokes, the hero of Headingley, was on home turf and was already an experienced test cricketer, while of the three key figures on the final day in Brisbane only Sundar had not previously played test cricket. There have been other notable steals in test history, including but not limited to:

  1. The Oval, 1882 – England needed just 82 to win in the fourth innings but FR Spofforth, provoked to fury by WG Grace’s sharp run out of Sammy Jones in Australia’s second dig, took seven wickets as England crashed to defeat by seven runs.
  2. The Oval, 1902 – England were set 263 to win on a pig of a pitch, and at 48-5, with Jack Saunders having taken four cheap wickets it must have looked all over. Gilbert Jessop blasted 104 in 77 minutes, but even at his dismissal England were 187-7. George Hirst rallied the tail, and was on 58 not out, to go with 43 in the first innings and five wickets in Australia’s first innings when the winning single was taken by Wilfred Rhodes, the no11.
  3. Melbourne 1907 – When Syd Barnes, renowned as possibly the greatest of all bowlers, walked in to bat in the final innings England needed 73 from their last two wickets. When the wicket keeper Humphries was adjudged LBW, Arthur Fielder had to join Barnes, and nos 10 and 11 needed to conjure 39 runs to pull off the win. Little by little they inched their way closer, and eventually Barnes took on a sharp run with the scores level. A calm return to the keeper from Hazlitt would have led to test cricket’s first tie, but he panicked and shied wildly at the stumps, and England were home by one wicket.
  4. Lord’s 1984 – England, for about the only time in the 1980s, had the upper hand on the West Indies to the extent that some were criticising skipper Gower for not declaring overnight. Gower’s eventual declaration on the fifth morning left the Windies needing 342 to win. Gordon Greenidge played one of the most brilliant innings ever, scoring 214 not out, well supported by Larry Gomes, a reliable left hander, who was on 92 not out when the Windies sealed victory by nine wickets.

PHOTOGRAPHS

My usual sign off…

Quintuple Nelson, No Balls and Dropped Dollies

This is my account of the second day of the test match in Chennai, though I start by congratulation Sixers on their triumph in the Big Bash League – they won very comfortably over Scorchers in the final, with Vince scoring 95. About the only thing they could have done better was to have given the final over to Vince with occasional medium pace, in view of the fact that they had 30 to defend and AJ Tye was one of the batters in for the Scorchers.

ENGLAND IN CONTROL

England started the day on 263-3, Root 128 not out and Stokes coming in as the new batter after the loss of Sibley. Stokes and Root were still in occupation at lunch and the score had moved past 350, with Stokes starting to score rapidly. Stokes fell for 82 to make it 387-4, Pope was in next and contributed 34, his dismissal making it 473-5. Four runs after that Root finally fell for a magnificent 218, the highest score ever by a visiting batter at this venue, beating the 210 Dean Jones made in the first innings of the second ever tied test in 1986. Two of the other three doubles by overseas batters at this ground came in a single innings during the 1984-5 tour when Gatting and Fowler scored 207 and 201. Buttler was never at his most convincing, and he and Archer fell in successive balls to Ishant Sharma making it 525-8, with Leach walking out to join his Somerset colleague Bess. A ninth wicket should have fallen when Bess hit one straight to Rohit Sharma, but India’s opener was obviously already thinking about batting and dropped an absolute dolly of a catch. By the close England had reached 555-8, with Bess unbeaten on 28, and Leach on 6, which included a straight driven four. Ominously for India after almost two whole days of looking like an absolute road the pitch started offering turn and bounce just before the end of day two, something that Bess and Leach will have noted.

For India Jasprit Bumrah looked formidable at all times, Ishant Sharma bowled economically and his two wickets were just reward for his efforts, Ashwin commanded respect most of the time, but the two younger spinners, Washington Sundar and Shahbaz Nadeem, both looked inadequate. Also in picking Sundar and Nadeem alongside Ashwin and overlooking Kuldeep Yadav India had left themselves with three very orthodox finger spinners. Yadav would have posed more of a challenge to England.

India were guilty of frequent no-balling, erring 19 times in total in this regard. In this match the the third umpire has been given sole responsibility for calling no-balls, and each such call was indicated by the sounding of a klaxon. Kohli was also at fault for his use of DRS – India lost all three of their of reviews in a fairly short period of time, and two were burned up in a manner that would have had Tim Paine blushing. The third (actually chronologically the second) was less outrageous, but DRS is supposed to be for the obvious mistake, not for use in an attempt to swing a close one your way, and the ball was clearly going over the top of the stumps. Having followed the series in Australia closely and heard almost every ball of this England innings thus far I am going to risk bringing down a tide of wrath on my head by saying that Rahane is a far superior skipper to Kohli, and that he should have that job, while Kohli plays purely as a batter. After these reviews had been burned a few close calls went against India, but they had only themselves to blame for the fact that they could not send them upstairs.

England will bat on tomorrow – their approach has made it clear that they are hoping to bat just the once in this game, unless the face either a) a tiny chase in the fourth innings or b)circumstances indicate they would be best served by having a lash for 20 to 30 overs before putting India back in for the fourth innings. An example of situation b could arise if England make say 580 in total, India are all out for a total in the upper 300s, either just avoiding the follow on or being close enough to doing so that it makes sense to rest the bowlers, somewhere around halfway through day four, and England look to score as many as they can be midway through the evening session and then get India back in. It would therefore make little sense to declare at this point – when Buttler and Archer fell in successive balls there would have been a case for a declaration to give a tired Indian side a brief mini-session to negotiate today. Ishant Sharma is on 299 test wickets, while Root moved past Alec Stewart to third on the all time list of England test run scorers, and you have to go down the list to Hanmond, 7,249 at 58.45 to find someone with a higher average. Hammond also features in another context here – the last England batter to score 150+ in an innings of each of three straight test matches was Hammond in 1928, when he scored 251 in the first innings at Sydney, 200 in the first innings of the next match at Melbourne and 119 not out and 177 in the fourth match at Adelaide. Gooch on 8,900 is next in Root’s sights and he may well get there this series the way he is going. Cook, on 12,472 is further in the distance, but I am now firmly expecting Root to get there before he is done. England need to win this series by two clear matches to make the final of the World Test Championship, while a series win of any sort will put India into the final, and the results not covered in the foregoing will see Australia face New Zealand in that final (the black caps are already booked in thanks to Australia’s very late cancellation of their trip to South Africa).

For the moment, England have done a fine job over these two days, but even with the pitch apparently starting to offer more to the bowlers taking 20 wickets will not be an easy task.

PHOTOGRAPHS

A combination of the cricket and solidly grey skies mean that I have few new bird pics, so I got one of my favourite old railway maps out to augment the gallery…

England’s Ascendancy

My account of the first day of India v England in Chennai, plus some photographs.

This post deals with day 1 in Chennai, where India and England have been doing battle. For those of us here in the UK coverage has been available on Channel Four for TV fans (which I am not – don’t look here for any comments about TV coverage) and on Talksport 2 for radio fans who want live commentary (TMS have been running a ‘cricket social’ on n 5 live sports extra). The time difference between the UK and India, and my preferred methods of following the game meant that at 3:45AM local time I was tuned into talksport2 and had a cricinfo window open on my computer for extra detail.

PRELIMINARIES

England were without Zak Crawley due to injury but did have Stokes, Pope and Archer all available and all were duly selected. England also departed from their stated rotation policy with the veterans and gave Anderson a second successive match. Fortunately, for all that some who should have known better were spruiking such a move England did not pick Moeen Ali. The selected lineup was thus: Sibley, Burns, Lawrence, *Root, Stokes, Pope, Buttler, Bess, Archer, Leach, Anderson. India meanwhile had lost left arm spinner Axar Patel to injury. Somewhat surprisingly they opted not pick wrist spinner Kuldeep Yadav, going instead for deepening their batting by picking both offspinners, Sundar and Ashwin, both of whom are handy with the bat alongside a debutant left arm spinner, Shahbaz Nadeem. Joe Root won the toss and chose to bat. Indian skipper Kohli, being a sensible chap, did not resort to the ‘psychological ploy’ of saying that he would have bowled anyway (note to captains who still do this, no one is buying it, OK?) opting instead for honesty.

THE PLAY

The morning started quietly, but with no great trouble for England. With 15 minutes to go until lunch the score was 63-0, but then Burns essayed a reverse sweep, not wise on day one of a test match and especially not so close to lunch, and edged the ball to Pant who took the catch. In the next over the unfortunate Lawrence got an absolute beauty from Bumrah and was pinned LBW and it was 63-2. The third umpire then spent ages agonizing over a decision on a potential run out after Root was a bit dozy, but fortunately he had made his ground. England took lunch at 67-2, and Root and Sibley were able to regroup. Post lunch scoring was slow initially but neither batter looked in any real trouble. Things picked up somewhat in the second half of the afternoon session and England reached tea at 140-2, with Root playing superbly and Sibley doing precisely what he was in the side to do: bat time and get some miles into the bowlers legs.

After tea Root hit the accelerator, while Sibley continued to be an excellent foil at the other end. Sundar was bowled comparatively sparingly, and was expensive and sadly posed little threat. Nadeem’s debut was marred by the bowling of several no-balls (pretty much inexcusable for a spinner), leaving only Ashwin as genuinely threatening spinner. The faster bowlers were better, Ishant being accurate enough to command respect at all times, and Bumrah bowling splendidly and deserving rather more reward than he actually got.

There were three scheduled balls of the day remaining and we were deep into the half hour over spill in which overs can be bowled when another corker of a ball from Bumrah pinned Sibley LBW. Because we were already over time, the dismissal ended play for the day, which means that England will resume on 263-3, Root 128 not out and Stokes the new batter. Root’s innings was a gem, his handling of the spinners especially brilliant. Sibley was rocklike until that fourth last ball of the day beat him, and his determined effort should not be overlooked. Root’s first innings scores in his last three tests have been 228, 186 and now 128 not out with power to add. In terms of an English batter going big successively in two different away countries I can think only of Hammond in 1933 who scored 101 and 75 not out in the fifth and final Ashes test and then produced scores of 227 and 336 not out in New Zealand in the next two games as a performance to rival Root’s.

Sundar’s figures of 12-0-55-0 indicate the problem with picking someone in a bowling role based on their batting ability, and underline the rightness of England not selecting Moeen Ali who is undoubtedly a less skilled practitioner with the ball than Sundar.

Root and Stokes need to get England through the first hour of tomorrow, and then England should have India where they want them. Root after the close made it quite clear that England are aiming to go big, and on this surface which appears to be very unresponsive that is necessary – I reckon that at minimum England need to double their current score before they can feel in control of things. However, I would much rather be in their shoes than India’s at the moment, hence the title of this piece.

PHOTOGRAPHS

There has been some sun today, and the finches are out in force here in North Lynn…

Scorchers Through to #BBL10 Final and England’s No3

An account of the ‘Challenger’ match between Scorchers and Heat, a note on the England no three situation, a link to an important petition and some photographs.

While the main part of this post deals with today’s ‘Challenger’ match, the penultimate game of BBL10, I will also be touching on the question on England’s no 3 with Crawley injured.

SCORCHERS OUTCLASS HEAT

A quiet opening over from which four runs accrued gave no hint of the fireworks that were to follow. The second over bowled by Mark Steketee went for 13 and Scorchers were properly off and running. Bartlett bowled the third, and his second, saving him from what have been a sixth ‘supersubbing’ of the tournament and at the end of it Scorchers were 23-0. 10 came off the fourth over and Scorchers at 33-0 were going reasonably. They moved into higher gear immediately thereafter, cashing in on Bartlett being given a third successive over by taking 14 from it, and then adding another 14 of the leg spin of Swepson in the next over. Heat’s second leg spinner, Labuschagne, was lucky to escape with his first over going for only nine. By the halfway point Scorchers were 108-0 and looking at a monster total. They did not claim the Power Surge immediately, while the expected ‘supersub’ by the Heat bringing Morkel on for Steketee did happen. With Livingstone falling in the 12th for a magnificent 77 off 39 balls Scorchers endured their only quiet spell, overs 11-14 yielding them 19 for the loss of that wicket. At that point, with Bancroft set and Mitch Marsh starting to go well they took the Power Surge, and they took 22 off the first over thereof, and then 11 more off the second to be 160-1 after 16. They maintained the momentum thereafter and were 189-1 off 18.1 overs when the rain came down.

The interruption lasted long enough to terminate the Scorchers innings and eat into the number of overs available for the Heat to chase in. The resumption came with Heat facing a DLS adjusted target of 200 off 18 overs, four overs of Power Play at the start, but controversially only one over of Power Surge later on. Scorchers used both their Power Surge overs, and did so with devastating effect as shown above, and if after 18.1 overs they had failed to do so there would be no real cause for compensating them for their own stupidity in delaying the surge so long. 200 off 18 overs was a fair enough target given that Scorchers had they had their full 20 would have been somewhere in the region of 215-220 or approximately 11 an over, precisely the task facing Heat, but I do feel that Heat should have had two overs of Surge and not one. I do not for one instant believe that this slightly harsh treatment of Heat affected the result in any way.

Heat made a bright start, scoring 32 off the first three overs, to be not a million miles behind the rate. Disaster struck in the next over however, when openers Denly and Lynn fell in successive balls – Denly caught off a skyer during which the batters crossed and Lynn bowled by the next ball, to end the Power Play at 37-2, with Labuschagne and Heazlett together. Heazlett was unable to even threaten to repeat his ‘Sambulance rescue’ act from Heat’s previous match, and at the halfway point Heat were 66-4, needing 134 off nine at 14.89 per over to win. In a last desperate gamble they claimed the Power Surge hoping to revive their innings, but they could only take nine off their single over of Surge and at 75-4 after ten needed 125 off eight overs to win. By the end of the 12th over they were six wickets down and all but out. A flourish in the next period saw them boost the score to 121-7 after 15, but 79 off three overs is not something that one can expect be achieved, especially by lower order batters. In the end Heat just brought up the 150 with a boundary off the last ball of the match, finishing on 150-9, fully 50 short of the target. Scorchers will thus face Sixers in Saturday’s final, and one hopes there will not be another AJ Tye deliberate wide to end that one.

My only mild criticism of Scorchers today is that they should have taken the Power Surge immediately at 108-0 after ten, rather than enduring that brief quiet patch in overs 11-14, but their timing of the taking of the Surge was by no means foolish, and they did make brilliant use of those two overs of fielding restrictions. Heat did well to get as far as they did after a very poor start in the tournament, and Scorchers also made a slow start, although not as much as Heat, and are in their best form at the right time. Sixers have been superb throughout the tournament and will start the final, at the iconic SCG on Saturday, as favourites. In the end, the bizarre and byzantine qualification system and knock out stage has seen justice done with the two best sides locking horns in the final.

ENGLAND’S NUMBER THREE

England’s intention to revert to their preferred top three of Sibley, Burns and Crawley has been thwarted by an injury to Crawley. My understanding is that Crawley will definitely miss the first two tests, and that his place at no3 will be taken by Dan Lawrence. I approve of this – the other options available to England have even less appeal: Have Pope, returning from injury and with no experience of batting near the top of an order, bat at three, move the skipper up one slot from no4 when he has historically never performed at his best in the no3 slot and is enjoying a bonanza at no4, Stokes at no3, which would be a huge ask for an all rounder, or play Buttler as a specialist batter at no3, which is perhaps the least bad of the alternatives. England are definitely underdogs in this series and will need plenty to go right to have any chance, but if Sibley and Burns can see off the new ball, Lawrence manages something at no3 and at least one of the engine room pair of Root and Stokes can go seriously big they could have a chance.

LINK AND PHOTOGRAPHS

Just before my photographs, I have a petition to share with you calling for key workers to be given a pay rise. There is a screenshot below and I urge you to sign and share it by clicking here.

Now it is time for my usual sign off…

A Late Injury for England

An injury to Zak Crawley forces a rejig of England’s batting line up, and in the face of continuing hype for a Moeen Ali recall I once again point out the flaws with that idea.

With the first India v England test match due to get underway in Chennai in 33 hours time news has come through of an injury to Zak Crawley. Better news is that Ollie Pope is definitely fit, while the ridiculous news is that Moeen Ali is till being hyped for a test comeback.

REJIGGING THE ENGLAND BATTING ORDER

With Pope returning and Crawley injured, Dan Lawrence who made a decent start to his international career in Sri Lanka will come into the side. For me he goes in at number three, while Pope makes his return at no6. Thus, the team I expect to see is now: Sibley, Burns, Lawrence, *Root, Stokes, Pope, +Buttler, Bess, Archer, Broad, Leach and the team I would personally pick from those in India is: the same top six, and then +Foakes, Archer, Leach, Anderson, Parkinson. I explained in yesterday’s post why I favour the elevation of Parkinson, but I will not be especially annoyed if Bess retains his place, and I would accept a dogged insistence on strict rotation policy for the veterans. I will be furious if Moeen gets selected. Such a move would be doubly flawed: his record shows him to not be worth a place with either bat or ball, and it is a retrograde step bringing back an oldster.

TWO SPINNERS NEEDED

There is more than a possibility that India will have three front line spinners in their ranks, with the most likely trio being R Ashwin (off spin), Kuldeep Yadav (left arm wrist spin) and Axar Patel (left arm orthodox spin), although Washington Sundar (off spin) is also in the reckoning. Thus, for England to go with only one front line spinner plus Moeen as back up would be foolish, especially given that Root or Lawrence could bowl off spin if such was definitely warranted. The presence of two part time off spinners among the batters is a further reason for favouring the Parkinson/ Leach combo, maximizing the variation available to England. Without Parkinson playing the nearest England have to a leg spin option is Sibley, with a princely tally of four first class wickets to his name.

If England are up for a real gamble, and want to suggest a potential career development path to Bess, they could select all three spinners (Bess alongside Leach and Parkinson) and have Bess come in at number seven – he has shown some skill with the bat and I suspect a move up the order, maybe not so dramatically as the legendary Wilfred Rhodes, is in his future. Moeen Ali does not have enough to offer as a bowler, and very much belongs to the past. At no seven, as third spinner, where I am suggesting Bess he would be less of a disaster, but if he is at no8 in a team aiming for a more conventional balance England will be in trouble – you can only win a test match if you can take 20 wickets. It is time for my ‘spinners’ infographic to get yet another run out:

PHOTOGRAPHS

My usual sign off…

Looking Ahead to India v England

I look at England’s options ahead of the series in India which gets underway on Friday, with a particular focus on spin.

Before I get into the main meat of this post, a note on the coverage of this series: radio commentary is in the hands of talksport2, which means a less good commentary team than if TMS had the rights, while TMS will be running what they call a ‘cricket social’, which does not work anything like as well as commentary, and for TV fans the big news is that UK broadcasting rights have gone to Channel Four, the first time since 2005 that a terrestrial broadcaster has had such rights in this country. Radio coverage (the way I will be following the action) begins at 3:45AM on Friday our time, with the first ball scheduled to bowled at 4:00AM.

INS AND OUTS

Rory Burns is back from paternity leave, Ben Stokes and Jofra Archer are both available after missing the Sri Lanka tour, and the spin situation remains in flux. Burns will open with Sibley, with Crawley reverting to the number three slot from which he hit 267 against Pakistan not so long ago. Root will be at four. England seem to be being absolutely rigid in their rotation policy re Anderson and Broad, so his heroics in the second match in Galle notwithstanding Anderson is likely to be on the sidelines for this match. The most likely top six given continuing uncertainty over Pope’s shoulder, although he is with the tour party, would seem to be: Sibley, Burns, Crawley, Root, Stokes, Lawrence. Foakes is finally going to get another chance with the gloves, although probably not until match 2, with Buttler available this time, and that leaves the bowling to sort out. England will probably select two spinners given that the pitch at Chepauk Stadium, Chennai will take spin late in the game, which almost certainly means that Archer will be paired with Broad to take the new ball, though I would personally retain Anderson rather than be quite so dogmatic about the rotation policy with the veterans. This leaves the spinners to sort out.

ENGLAND’S SPINNING WOES

Current incumbents Jack Leach and Dominic Bess each had their good moments in Sri Lanka but each also looked innocuous at times, and Bess in particular struggled to keep things tight enough when nothing was happening as he bowled too many loose balls. Amar Virdi and Matt Parkinson are in India, officially as reserves, and also in India is Moeen Ali, a man in his middle thirties whose record (60 test matches, batting average 29, bowling average 37) is that of someone who is not up to the task in either department. There have been rumblings about a test recall for him, including an article published on the usually sensible Full Toss blog making what was supposed to be the case for his recall. Whatever the right answer to England’s spinning woes is it is not selecting an ageing mediocrity such as Moeen Ali. I expect that the selectors will persevere with Leach and Bess, but myself, for all that it makes the England lower order look a bit shaky I would be inclined to promote Parkinson (leg spin, FC average 25.22) from the reserves to partner Leach, with off spin if it is deemed necessary being bowled by either Lawrence or Root (skipper, please not the order in which I have listed these two options!). In the longer haul, rather than looking backwards to Moeen Ali, England need to look forwards, and in addition to Parkinson I suggest that Virdi, Liam Patterson-White and Daniel Moriarty as being worthy of attention, with Simon Harmer, now eligible for England, being considered as a stop gap solution so long as he accepts coaching younger spinners as part of his England duties. I might also consider whether Sophie Ecclestone’s left arm spin could prove as effective among the men as it has in the women’s game. Looking to the future, left arm spinning all rounder Lewis Goldsworthy will be worth keeping an eye on. Finally, England might not struggle so much to find spinners if counties who produced turning pitches did not find themselves the subject of sanctions from the ECB.

TWO ENGLAND XIS

I offer in infographic form two XIs for the match starting on Friday, the one I think we will actually see, and the one I would pick from those available:

PHOTOGRAPHS

Just a few pics today:

Blasts From The Past v #BBL10 Composite

A variation on my All Time XI theme pits a ‘Blast from the Past’ XI against a #BBL10 Composite XI. Also, on the 40th anniversary of the Chappell incident I look at under arm bowling.

Today we revisit all-time XI territory with a bit of a twist, and then I have a bonus section prompted by today being the 40th anniversary of Trevor Chappell’s most (in)famous moment on the cricket field.

THE GROUND RULES

I have given this post a hint of an ‘Ashes’ flavour – my Blast From The Past XI is mainly English, though this being put in a T20 setting I have allowed myself two overseas players, while similarly my BBL10 Composite XI is mainly Australian with two overseas players permitted. It is two XIs, with the ‘x-factor sub’ idea given the treatment it deserves – in the bin. A variant on the ‘Bash Boost’ could be used as a tie-splitting procedure if a Super Over doesn’t do the job, while the Power Surge would remain. Naturally, DRS would be in use for this contest, though with my chosen on-field umpires, of whom more later, Claire Polosak as TV Replay umpire probably wouldn’t be overturning many deicisons. If you think I have had mistakes with either XI please feel free to make alternative suggestions, but remember that balance and variety are important, and tell me who should be dropped to make way for the people you want.

THOMAS SUTCLIFFE’S BLASTS FROM THE PAST XI

All members of this team played before T20 was a thing in top level cricket, and only three even played what is now called List A cricket.

  1. Gilbert Jessop – right handed batter, right arm fast bowler, ‘gun’ fielder. The fastest scoring batter with a first class average of over 25 that the game has ever seen, a useful fast bowler and an electrifying fielder, the ‘Croucher’ is a must for this side.
  2. Frank Woolley – left handed batter, left arm orthodox spinner, excellent close catcher. All-out attack was his natural tendency with the bat anyway, his all round record was astonishing – 58,969 runs at 40 an innings, over 2,000 wickets at 19 a piece and 1,018 catches in first class cricket, the latter a record for any outfielder.
  3. Graeme Pollock – left handed batter. One of my overseas players, and one of the three members of this side to have played List A cricket – he actually held the record in that format with an innings of 222, which stood until Ally Brown hit 268 for Surrey v Glamorgan at The Oval, with the pitch for that game being way off centre, giving a very short boundary on one side.
  4. Denis Compton – right handed batter, occasional left arm wrist spinner.
  5. Garry Sobers – left handed batter, left arm bowler of pretty much every type known to cricket. The first person ever to hit six sixes in an over in first class cricket, and without a doubt the most complete player the game has yet seen. My second overseas player, and one of the three members of this side to have played List A. He averaged 38 with the bat and 21 with the ball in list A, though his only ODI innings was a duck (he did bowl respectably in that game).
  6. +Leslie Ames – right handed batter, wicket keeper. Twice a winner of the Lawrence Trophy for the fastest first class hundred of the season, the only keeper ever to score 100 first class hundreds, all-time record holder for first class stumpings – 418 in total in his career.
  7. *Percy Fender – right handed batter, leg spinner, brilliant fielder, captain. He scored the fastest century ever scored off authentic first class bowling, in 35 minutes versus Northamptonshire.
  8. Billy Bates – off spinner, useful lower order batter. Took England’s first ever hat trick, part of a performance in which took seven wickets in each innings and scored 55 with the bat.
  9. Bill Lockwood – right arm fast bowler, useful lower order batter. One of the first fast bowlers to develop a slower ball as part of his armoury, and he caused as many problems with it as any player prior to Franklyn Stephenson.
  10. Alfred Shaw – right arm slow to medium bowler. Bowled more overs in his first class career than he conceded runs, took his wickets at 12 a piece, and once said “length and successful variation of pace are the secrets of good bowling”, a philosophy which would stand him in good stead for T20s.
  11. Derek Underwood – left arm slow-medium bowler. The third member of this side to have played List A cricket. His economy rate in ODIs was 3.44.

This team has massive batting depth, with only Shaw and Underwood unlikely to contribute in that department. Only Pollock and Ames of the XI are completely unrecognized as bowlers, with Sobers’ three styles meaning that there are in total 10 front line options plus Compton’s left arm wrist spin.

#BBL10 COMPOSITE XI

This XI have been selected on their performances during the tournament and with an eye to balance and variety. Note also that I have only allowed myself two non-Aussies.

  1. Alex Hales – right handed opening batter. He has had a quite magnificent tournament, and in many people’s eyes should be back in the mix for England’s T20 team.
  2. +Josh Philippe – right handed batter, wicket keeper. Excellent with both bat and gloves this tournament.
  3. Chris Lynn – right handed batter. Usually an opener, I put him at three here, with his four fifty plus scores in the tournament indicating that he is far from finished just yet.
  4. Sam Heazlett – left handed batter. His ‘Sambulance rescue‘ innings of 74 not out off 49 when his team were in big trouble against Thunder yesterday sealed his place in this XI.
  5. Jordan Silk – right handed batter, excellent fielder. There were many possibilities for this slot, but ‘Astrophysicist’ (in honour of Joseph Silk FRS) gets the nod because in a tournament where there have been rather more sinners than saints in the field he has shone in that department.
  6. *Mitch Marsh – right handed batter, right arm medium fast bowler, captain. A T20 side really needs six front line bowling options at minimum so that you have cover if one misfires, and Marsh’s batting is unequivocally good enough to be no six, usually considered mainly a batter’s position.
  7. Rashid Khan – leg spinner, useful lower order batter. The Afghan, rated the no1 T20 bowler in the world, did superbly for the Strikers before his country’s needs took over and he left the tournament.
  8. Steve O’Keefe – left arm orthodox spinner. He has bowled very economically this tournament.
  9. Peter Siddle – right arm fast bowler. The veteran impressed for the Strikers, still being able to hit the 140kph mark, and generally being very accurate.
  10. Jhye Richardson – right arm fast bowler. The leading wicket taker in this tournament.
  11. Jason Behrendorff – left arm fast medium. Close between him and Ben Dwarshuis for this slot.

This side has good batting strength, and a strong and varied bowling attack, and should be able to give a good account of itself.

MY ON-FIELD UMPIRES

In keeping with this post I choose one umpire who is in the ‘blast from the past’ category and one from the modern era to officiate on the field. I am opting for Frank Chester, who stood in 48 test matches, a record at the time and for many years afterwards as my ‘blast from the past umpire’. One story about Chester to sum up his skill in this role: there was an occasion when he was officiating and a ball went through to the keeper with an audible click en route, the fielding side went up in a huge appeal for caught behind and were shocked when Chester gave it not out, while the umpire, unflustered, walked up to the stumps at the batter’s end, looked at the off stump and nodded to himself – he had identified the faint red mark that confirmed that he was right, and that the click has been the ball brushing the stump not quite hard enough to dislodge a bail. The other on-field umpire for this contest, from the modern era, is Aleem Dar.

THE CHAPPELL INCIDENT AND UNDER ARM BOWLING

It was 40 years ago today that with New Zealand needing six off the last ball to tie the match and no11 Brian McKechnie on strike Greg Chappell ordered his brother Trevor to roll that last ball along the ground. This disgraceful incident led to under arm bowling being ruled illegal, an overreaction in my opinion. Since that time a law change has seen balls that bounce multiple times called no balls, so the Chappell situation can be handled simply by adding a note that a ball that rolls along the deck is considered to have bounced an infinite number of times and is therefore a no-ball. This would keep the way open for a latter-day Jephson or Simpson-Hayward, or indeed a would-be reviver of the art of David Harris to emerge, while preventing dishonourable tactics such as those used by the Chappell brothers 40 years ago (if you would have it so Greg can be considered the chief culprit, but Trevor cannot be held blameless, since he could have challenged his brother and said that he would not adopt those tactics but would bowl the best yorker he could summon up).

PHOTOGRAPHS