There was always going to be a sense of anti-climax at this point of the season unless England won the World Twenty20 series and I could never see that happening.
So after the Test and one-day series wins over the West Indies, England's exit at the Super Eight stage is a come down but hardly an unexpected one.
England look an average team on paper - certainly in comparison to the likes of South Africa and Sri Lanka - and in the end that's how they played.
Pietersen: scintillating strokeplay needs support
You certainly couldn't fault their effort and commitment; they certainly gave us some memorable moments but if you take the emotion out of their campaign then two wins from five matches is pretty much what we expected.
Crooked
I don't think the squad has improved during the tournament. The batting remains overly-reliant on Kevin Pietersen, Ravi Bopara and, to a lesser extent, Owais Shah while the balance of the side, with Paul Collingwood at five and James Foster at six, looks crooked without Andrew Flintoff. England have a long tail and the West Indies exposed it on Monday.
But you do need power players. You can't have only one or two in a team - you need someone in that middle order who is a danger to the opposition and can change the game in an instant.
Michael Atherton
Quotes of the week
Get ready for a Grand Slam Summer on Sky Sports as we bring you exclusively live coverage of an amazing line-up including: The Ashes Series
For more details, go to www.skysports.com/summer
However, there were certainly some plus points along the way. Graeme Swann continues to impress and, for someone coming into his first senior tournament, Adil Rashid bowled well.
He wasn't afraid to think on his feet and showed he had the ability to land it on the spot under pressure; Dwayne Bravo had just whacked him for six when he pushed one out of the front of the hand to bowl Kieron Pollard and leave the Windies on 41-4. From that point they did well to get home.
Some people seem to be under the impression that the Duckworth-Lewis system favoured the West Indies last night; they argue that scoring 80 runs off nine overs with 10 wickets in the bank should have been a cakewalk, but I disagree.
It's true that there is no ideal solution to dealing with rain-interrupted matches but Duckworth-Lewis is certainly the least-worst system available!
We're stuck with it until someone comes up with a formula that makes it fairer and certainly no England supporter should argue that England deserved to go through at the Oval.
Pressure
The current whisper doing the rounds is that if England play two spinners in the first Ashes Test at Cardiff, it is going to be Swann and Rashid. Time will tell if that is the case but if it is so, then it won't bode well for Monty Panesar's career plan because you'd have to think that there is more to come from Rashid.
Similarly, James Foster is in the public eye now too. Everyone's talking about his glove-work and Matt Prior will be thinking 'I'm under pressure when I come back'.
Foster's glove-work is exceptional - it has been for five years; every time I've watched him I've been of the mind that he is head-and-shoulders above every other wicketkeeper in English cricket behind the stumps.
His stumping of India's Yuvraj Singh and Bravo proved that is the case. Batting on the slog is not his strength - he's more of a pusher and a nurdler - but he's on Prior's shoulder.
I still don't think Collingwood is a natural captain; I suspect one of the reasons he took the job was because he was fearful for his place.
If Robert Key had come in as captain, then someone would have had to give way and it might well have been him.
I don't think he did badly; he held his nerve when England got tied down against India, a match England went on to win, but he didn't produce when we needed a power player in the middle order.
Shah didn't fire either and the sad truth is that there seems to be chaos in the ranks every time Pietersen goes and the boundaries dry up.
Danger
It's essential that English players now recognise the way the game is going and how important power-hitting is.
It's not everything by any means. The likes of Mahela Jayawardene and Shivnarine Chanderpaul have shown it is possible to milk the bowling so there is room for the touch player.
But you do need power players. You can't have only one or two in a team - you need someone in that middle order who is a danger to the opposition and can change the game in an instant.
That is something that England must address and focus on at academy level so the players coming through are capable of playing the big shots.
Comments (17)
- Page 1 of 1
- 1
Justin Smart says...
My T20 World Team: Dilshan, Gayle (c), Afridi, Yuvraj Singh, Pietersen, de Villiers, MS Dhoni (w/k), Albie Morkel, Gul, Steyn, Mendis. England still a long way away from competing in any form (no disrespect to Holland but HOW ON EARTH DID ENGLAND ALLOW THE DUTCH TO BEAT THEM?), Australia still a very strong team, even though they're a team in transition, it should be an interesting Ashes Series. All Asian teams are ones to watch, including the ever-improving Bangladesh Tigers. W.Indies back in the limelight, although have some way to go in the 5-day version. S.Africa are a good, strong unit with big hitters all the way down to 8 and 9. Scotland and Ireland keep turning up at these events, they must be doing something right. NZ are not the same team without Fleming, Astle, Macmillan and Cairns. They can't afford to look to McCullum to dig them out of trouble every time.
Posted 00:04 22nd June 2009
Chris White says...
Elizabeth, regulation stumpings surely you jest! I would pick foster everytime for the ashes - prior is a very good bat but his keeping is at the most average. If we go to cardiff with two spinners foster has got to play surely. Nobody will ever take every chance behind the pegs but if you drop say ponting for say 10 and he goes onto get 150 as he does, in my eyes the keeper starts batting on minus 140. Quality keepers like foster tidy a teams alround fielding display and the slightest lift or drag to the spinners and its good night nurse.
Posted 22:55 20th June 2009
Tim Blyth says...
Given a choice between making 160 in 20 overs or 80 in 9 overs, I believe all captains would take the latter. This tells us something doesn't it? That said, I have a better idea, how about a bit of overtime? It would have taken about 45 mins to bowl the extra 11 overs. Why did it have to be restricted to 9 overs? The administrators of Baseball would find it laughable as they keep playing until they get a result or its washed out. Have you ever heard of a restricted innings baseball match? I know there are media requirements but surely prior arrangements for extra time programming can be factored in for events as important as a World Cup .
Posted 11:20 19th June 2009
Mary Spence says...
Don't agree about Collingwood. Why would he be fearful for his place after this perfomance during the winter series, which were better than most of his team mates. It's a pity some people (commentators particularly) can never bring themselves to support him. All they do is criticise him. To me, he is an England man through and through and deserves his place (and the captaincy) more than most.
Posted 19:51 18th June 2009
Mustufa Bharoocha says...
well my view was that england played much better then i expected & their bowlers did a great ,but i still think if we had simon jones fit and playing for us we could have used him like pakistan uses umer gul as a reverse swing bowler in the middle stages of the innings .well our batting had a couple of problems especially our no. 5 u know who
Posted 05:44 18th June 2009
Sam Alex says...
I do not agree w i had an easy target England batted 20 0vers west indies did not have 20 overs to bat so no one know how much they would score if they had twenty overs to bat. the batting would be different england will still lost the match they did not score enough runs on that wicket
Posted 18:22 17th June 2009
Justin Cast says...
I agree with you on the point of the wicket-keeping that Prior is under major pressure again due to Foster's good series. This position will be really vital in the Ashes as you have to take all the catches which will be more inportant than Prior averaging say 10/15 more than the other keepers. I personally believe that purely on glove work Read and Foster are way above all the keepers and that although Prior is an agressive batsman with a decent average the only records he his breaking are in conceeding byes and spilling catches. This doesn't seem to go away because England really has such a wealth of talent in this area. In the past Foster and Read have been overlooked on their batting but they have both improved immensly and score 100's regularly at county level. Nixon, Ambrose & Jones are also always in the runs but Prior 's face seems to fit. p.s not quite sure how Mustard leap frogged all these 6 to get a few games)
Posted 12:50 17th June 2009
Dean Gregory says...
I too thought that the D/L method took into account loss of wickets. For the Windies looking at getting 80 from 9 overs with 3 power plays and 10 wickets in hand, Gayle must have been licking his lips. IMO, wickets must be taken into the equation. Aside from this, what the Windies victory showed is what England have been missing for ages. That is batsmen at 4,5+6 who can get boundaries. England didn't have them and the teams that have gone through do have them. Sarwan and Chanderpaul are great players, who unlike the England middle order, found the fielding gaps often enough to keep the run chase in view. This makes the bowlers job that much more difficult. There is too much sentimentality I fear towards some of the players from the selectors and they won't get dropped. England had been struggling all tournament with the batting and still wouldn't be brave enough to swap it around.
Posted 08:25 17th June 2009
Martin Hicks says...
Mike - I fully agree. We went into last night's game a batsman light and posted a below par score. As D/L was based on our score the Windies target was below par. I expected the Windies to reach the target but not the way it happened and another wicket with 20 wanted would have been interesting. If you are say 50-5 we seem obsessed with batting overs but limping to 110 or 120 might win 1 game in a 100. If you need a minimum of 140 you have to keep going for it.and if you are out for 80 it doesn't matter but occasionally tailenders come off and maybe 5 or 6 times in 100 you get to a competative score. In previous one day competitions we have picked batsmen who can fiddle a few middle overs but Mascarenhas, Wright and Napier are new ball bowlers who can hit. We seemed to treat them as batsmen. We selected 5 batsmen and 5 bowlers plus a wicket keeper and it didn't work. Most of the other teams had options amongst their batsmen and bowlers. It seemed too many of our players were afraid of failure and that affected performance. Pieterson scored his runs quickly and left the rest of the team 16 or 17 overs to produce a total. Time and again they achieved little more than the Windies scored off 9 overs which isn't good enough. I expected at least one England player to say favourite shot the forward defensive.
Posted 19:39 16th June 2009
Mark Punter says...
TBH i think England got what they deserved.....Would love for them to of gone & won it BUT yet again poor selection of players for me....Twenty/20 is a batsmans game so why pick 5 main stream bowlers when its runs on the board you need to win !!!! My team for all of the game/s would of been , KEY BOPARA PIETERSEN NAPIER MASCARENHAS WRIGHT COLLINGWOOD FOSTER SWANN SIDEBOTTOM ANDERSON , Simple.... PS, Good Luck To The West Indies
Posted 19:29 16th June 2009
Paul Woolcott says...
Its a shame in a competition when good batsmens are required to hit 4 &6s england never gave G Napier a go. several of our top batsmen failed again but where given second & third chances. please England if you are going to include players give them all a chance of playing. by the way Napier is also a fine bowler.
Posted 19:05 16th June 2009
Elizabeth Swallocks says...
Foster is a top keeper but his stumpings were regulation stumpings, no more. The last thing England and Prior need is Foster included in an Ashes preperation Squad. Prior has performed best when the management have shown confidence in him.
Posted 18:44 16th June 2009
Neil U says...
Whilst the duckworth lewis method isnt perfect I agree there isnt any other method at the moment that is fairer, its certainly something I would like the number crunchers to look especially in T20. In relation to power hitters, wouldnt it be better to have Wright coming in down the order as he keeps getting found out by better bowlers at start of innings trying to whack em out of ground!!. Just look at SA, Kallis and Smith both capable of hitting ball a long way but rarely do you see them playing stupid reckless shots, Wright is not an opener and never will be, I just hope england end this little experiment and play two proper batsmen at the top, my choices would be Bopara and Key, with Key captaining the side also. In regards to the wicketkeeper posistion, Foster has proved what an excellant gloveman he is, but Prior is a proper batsmen who is capable of hitting the ball a long way, so that leaves two options play Prior as a specialist Batsmen and leave Foster behind the stumps or leave foster out completly. I notice that new zealand played McCullum as a batsmen only!! England now have to look to the future and I hope they do this in the up and coming T20 match against the aussies later this summer, I think its time for the likes of Collingwood & Shah to move over and allow someone else to come in For me assuming everyone is fit my T20 side would be 1 Key (capt) 2 Bopara 3 Pieterson 4 Morgan 5 Prior 6 Flintoff 7 Napier 8 Foster (wkt) 9 Broad 10 Swann 11 Anderson
Posted 18:39 16th June 2009
Glen Stewart says...
Despite being a Scotsman, I felt some sympathy for England yesterday. The D/L Scaling back of target runs and overs was meaningless as the WI were allowed a full batting order to accomplish the task. The number of batsmen available should also have been proportionately scaled back to, say, 6 to simulate the equivalent degree of pressure for WI?
Posted 16:25 16th June 2009
Keith O says...
I am not convinced about the maths in the D/W system being wholey appropriate for the 20/20 format. England got just over 8 an over for 20 overs and then WI had to get just under 9 per over for only 9 overs. In addition they still had the full 10 batsmen. Factoring in that WI obviously started out already knowing their target, where would the bookies have placed the odds in this case? I understand that the laws of probability and statistics are the basis for the formulae which result in these determinations - however I am aware that as your sample shrinks so does the accuracy of the probability calculation - in this case the reduced number of overs in 20/20 would make any maths based on a 50 over model incorrect. I would certainly like to know how the revised total for WI was reached.
Posted 15:38 16th June 2009
Jonathan Bussey says...
Mike, I have to disagree, Over the Course of the Tournament, England didnt deserve a place in the Semi-Finals. However based on their performance last night. I think they did. We posted a score that was just below par and knew we would have to bowl well to defend that score. Obviously the rain came down, the clouds were dark. All england fans chewing their nails thinking will this game go resume. The game resumed and all were informaed that they needed 80 off 9 overs, with 10 wickets to do this. How can the West Indies be allowed 10 wickets in a reduced over game, over 50% reduced. Its an absolute disgrace and I think us taking 5 wickets was enough to win that game. If a Duckworth Lewis score is worked out on the Loss of Englands Wickets, why isnt their a rule saying that West Indies should have had reduced wickets. Everytime they lost a wicket, their score should increase by a few runs, just like the Duckworth Lewis score, they needed to be ahead of it incase more rain came, and it increases every time they lose a wicket. So therefore, everytime they lose a wicket their target should be increased just like in the Duckworth Lewis. I think your a great commentator but in this case, I think you have got it wrong and England are a bit hard done by.
Posted 14:40 16th June 2009
Colin Ashcroft says...
An interesting read Athers, You don't mention Napier and Morgan, big hitters and proven 20-20 specialists selected for the squad and in the end not used - why ? I'm a great admirer of Collingwood - he's a real fighter and has proved many people wrong time and time again but I think he was badly affected by the weight of the captaincy. We know that KP should have been captain (but that's already an old story) and if that had been the case the make up of the team would have been different with his influence. What was most disturbing was that the batsmen under pressure seemed incapable of basic arithmetic i.e. number of balls left to get a decent score. Why no effort to hit the boundaries. The 'tailenders' Broad, Rashid, Swann are all actually capable of hitting 4s and 6s why did the other batsmen have no confidence in them. Indeed was there not a case to put these 3 in earlier in the innings to simply hit or get out ?
Posted 14:18 16th June 2009
- Page 1 of 1
- 1


















Recent Comments:
Darren Kok on Mind the gap
"As much as I would love to see England smash the Aussies, I still think the Aussies have the edge over the English. People talk about them losing Hayden, Martin, Langer etc.. yet they ... " View all comments
Ritesh Lamsal on Time's right for Ravi
"There are five problems with England currently : 1) Hyper passive captain in Strauss, 2) Inexperienced head coach in Flower, 3) The brute attack of injuries (Harmison, Sidebottom, ... " View all comments