A quiz question: who is the only player to have scored a one-day hundred for England against Australia who has not played a Test?
We'll come back to that in a moment, but first, some applause to the selectors for agreeing with my last post and sticking with their original judgement that Jonathan Trott is the batsman most deserving a chance. Presumably this was a decision based on rational assessment of his capabilities, such as averaging over 90 this season in Div 1 of the championship, although since two of the last three debutants were Swann and Onions, one cannot entirely avoid the suspicion that having a name which makes for good punning headlines is now the primary qualification for selection. (Actually, come to think of it, perhaps “Amjad Khan't” counts as well.)
Like Australia's casualty Phil Hughes, Ravi Bopara is too young and too talented a player not to get another chance in the fulness of time, but his failure to establish himself gives Ian Bell his third shot at convincing people that he should be England's No. 3.
A Bell century is a thing of beauty full of fluency, timing and elan, which is why he has many admirers (including me), but it is also the problem with him. Substantial Test batsmen also make ugly hundreds, prising out runs when the team is in trouble and the bowling implacable, and Bell has never gritted such an innings out. That is why it is a little unfair to brand him this generation's Mark Ramprakash: one thing Ramps quite often did for England was run out of partners as he uncharacteristically blocked and nurdled for 47*. Bell is far more aptly termed this generation's Graeme Hick, who scored several Test centuries and for most of his Test career had figures at least comparable to his England peers but who never quite gave the impression that he belonged at the highest level while clearly outclassing everyone else in the county game.
Bell has been out too horribly too often for me to have much further patience with him. Mike Selvey has been labelling him mentally flabby for some months now, and unless he can correct that impression at The Oval, I'd be in favour of junking him entirely.
But if you are going to recommend dropping someone, you have to have a candidate to take over. That brings us back to the quiz question, to which the answer is Ed Joyce, now of Sussex. In the recent round of championship matches, Bell got a hundred after his team-mate Trott had reached the mark first. Such is Bell's way. In the previous round, Joyce came in at three for Sussex and was ninth man out, scoring 183 out of 308 while everyone else failed. Such is Joyce's way.
Slightly to my surprise, for he is not anyone's image of a successful hit-and-giggle merchant, Joyce has been this season's most prolific run-scorer in the medium-length forms of the game, topping the table in both the 50-over Friends Provident and the Pro40. But his 94 against Somerset was on TV last night, and he batted the way he does in first-class cricket, as an anchor around whom the big hitters can bat - though in this case, he stood firm but the others didn't and Sussex lost.
Whereas a Cook or Collingwood trades in singles and a Pietersen or Flintoff in boundaries, Joyce deals in twos. He plays later than the nurdlers, guiding his shots into the gaps between fielders, relying more on precision and timing than on power. He has very pleasant attacking shots – his whipped off-drives are reminiscent of Brian Lara and some of his cutting has the deftness of David Gower – but he deploys them judiciously rather than using them to storm barricades. His substantial innings are memorable less for their brilliant shotmaking than their solid effect: he is the kind of player who reaches 40 before you realise he's there. On an international continuum, he is a little to the Rahul Dravid side of Hashim Amla.
His first-class average may not be all that special, but neither were Michael Vaughan's or Marcus Trescothick's when they were picked: they had the ability but also the character to
play Test cricket, and character is what the current England middle order (oh, all right, Bell and Bopara) apparently lack and Joyce seems to possess.
I have no quarrel with the selectors for picking Trott, but his selection creates a vacancy for the heir-apparent: my contention is that Joyce was the baby thrown out with Duncan Fletcher's bathwater and deserves serious reconsideration. He even offers possibilities for headline writers.
I cannot quite fathom why Bopara deserves another chance. He is young and all that, but one can look hard enough, they would deduce that he is another Bell (and Hick) in the making. No mental resolve, no technique and no ticker. Ed Joyce, I suspect would follow the path of Rob Key and would walk into the sunset without ever getting another chance. English selectors have displayed an enormous amount of nepotism and will continue to do so in the future, since they are a bunch of spineless characters who themselves are in the position because of favours curried by the suits of ECB.
Posted by: Venkat at August 18, 2009 11:10 PM
Batting at #3 is a problem, isn't it? The ability to play like an opener if one comes out to bat in the 1st 10 overs of an innings as opposed to continuing the momentum of a long 1st wicket partnership requires a player to have a sound temperament allied with good technique.
Lara, Dravid, Ponting, Vaughan have set a high standard over the past decade for the #3 spot. All of them have (had) good technique or have been exceptionally gifted or both.
Wish that Bell/Bopara had the luxury to bat lower down the order before moving to #3.
Posted by: John Boon at August 19, 2009 1:09 AM
I know Graeme hicks record in test cricket wasn't all that crash hot, but anyone who saw him reel off 3 hundreds and a 90 in 4 innings down under against australia knows how classy he was. The fact that he was in and out of the team probably didnt help. I think had hick had some continuity in the side he would have made more of his test career.
Posted by: sreeni at August 19, 2009 3:36 AM
I say we choose Boycott's mum for the number three position. I choose her as my numbers 3,4,5,6 for the simple fact that her legend is at par and evokes very nearly the same fantastical possibilities that we associate with the English middle order. Mum's the word then, for the mother of all contests.
Posted by: Rajitha at August 19, 2009 6:19 AM
I think England should have given a chance to Mark Ramprakash instead of Ian Bell. In a position of regaining the Ashes they have to take that decision. With Trott coming at 3 and Ramprakash coming at 4 or 5 there is some solidarity in the middle order.
Posted by: TomNightingale at August 19, 2009 8:50 AM
Will we ever see the end of the comments about Geoff Boycott's granny? It is tiresome even to hear Boycott prattling on.
>>>"Bell got a hundred after his team-mate Trott had reached the mark first. Such is Bell's way."
He batted a for long time to ensure Warwks. rescued 4 points from what had seemed a certain loss...knowing he was in the spotlight and had failed in the first innings.
Posted by: Dan at August 19, 2009 1:58 PM
I'm disappointed in myself for not remembering Joyce, as you say he seems to have all the qualities required, a very classy player capable of the grit and determination that seems to be lacking in the middle order at the moment (bar collingwood, who could, if one was to be picky, do with a bit more class).
I've been part of the recall rob key camp though personally, even though I never thought it would happen. Still one can dream. Key 3, Joyce 4, Trott 5; I'm not sure its a line up to scare an Aussie but it looks less fragile than any lineup with Bell and Bopara in.
Posted by: Ginge at August 19, 2009 3:38 PM
I agree with pretty much everything in this article, I've felt the same way about the players mentioned here for some time, particularly regarding Joyce. I cannot fathom, if Trott is deservedly topping the County averages and gets a call up for the key fifth Test, why Joyce, who in limited overs cricket has been the glue holding the Sussex batting lineup together (topping both 50- and 40-over run tables while also playing key innings in the County Championship) wasn't selected at least for the one-day squad again. Anyone with a one-day century against the Aussies deserves another shot at them, especially since he has done everything England wanted him to do and developed into one of the best limited overs opening batsmen in county cricket. But like a previous poster mentioned, I think it'll be similar to Rob Key's situation, and the England selectors will yet again let a very talented batsman 'walk away into the sunset'.
Posted by: Rod Stark at August 19, 2009 6:08 PM
I fully agree that Joyce is one who may very well deserve a second look as a number 3.
I'm still a little amused that Bell is constantly berated for not turning out to be a great number 3. He was a proven success at 5 or 6 and should have been allowed to continue there. Instead, he gets moved up to the number 3 position, fails there, is dropped, gets back in for a "last chance" (again at number 3)...
Bopara, by contrast, is given the vacant number 3 position, fails terribly, and most people's reaction seems to be that he deserves a change at 5 or 6.
Well, not everyone can get to bat at 5 or 6--especially while Collingwood and Prior hold those positions.
By the way, Collingwood, too, does more or less ok at the number 5 position; perhaps it should be his turn to be forced up to number 3, fail, get criticized, get dropped,...
And so it goes...
[Mike: Bell was not a proven success at 5/6: he was only successful at building 320 into 500 - he never did the kind of thing Steve Waugh would do and build 120 into 300. Rebuilding after a top order collapse is an essential part of the 5/6's job description, and Bell never did that part of it when batting at 5/6.
Bopara's failures against Australia give me no confidence that he is any more ready than Bell to perform that rebuilding role. The point of my comment that he is too young and too talented not to get another chance was not that he should be recalled as soon as possible but that it is far, far too soon to write him off.]
Posted by: Simon McKeown at August 19, 2009 9:55 PM
I think Joyce totally deserves a crack at at aleast the ODI team.Particuarly with his performances this yr and also due to him being made the scapegoat for d lack of firepower at d top of d eng innigs, even tho this still seems to b a failing!!
Personnally being an Irishman I dont mind if he never gets called up. As in a few yrs,he would give up his dream (of test cricket) and play for his homeland (he wil be eligible agian in a few yrs); where he would pass on his invaluable xperience of the game to the next generation of irish cricketers
Posted by: Ricardo Johnson at August 25, 2009 12:06 PM
I remember being involved in some dialogue with some bangladeshi bloggers who were commenting on Ireland's test cricket hopes. this highlights one of their biggest problems. england have deprived ireland of one of their best players, and the same may happen to eoin morgan. why pick someone for 1 test/ODI without giving them a proper career. creaming the best irish county cricketers, and giving then just a "squad call up" or "1 test" or "1 ODI" only hurts Ireland. england have dozens of players to choose from. that is just proving the point i made, and stopping ireland from growing. i think england should not pick him. he is already established with his county, then allow him to have a proper career with ireland. this goes for porterfield, rankin & O'brien also. who is to say ireland cannot play test level cricket in 5 or 10 yrs time? when england already cream the best they have to offer today?
Posted by: Paul Cranswick at August 28, 2009 9:28 AM
The seven batsmen going to South Africa need to be thought through carefully. Strauss, Trott and Pietersen (if fit) are on the plane. For me the other four spots are up for grabs. Cook, Bopara, Collingwood and Bell have simply not done enough this summer. Collingwood doesn't even play county cricket for God's sake! Carberry, Joyce, Key and Hildreth should be given a chance to tour and let's see if they can do a job. Collingwood should only be considered for one day cricket and certainly not as captain whilst Bell, Cook and Bopara should go with the Lions to get some form back away from the brightest of spotlights. Denly (patently not ready for tests), Taylor, Powell and Dalrymple should go with them.
Posted by: Barry Suters at September 14, 2009 1:47 PM
Just hope for England's sake that the selectors don't have short term memory failure and remember just who managed to win the ashes for them.
Posted by: Drerralith at October 11, 2009 1:14 AM
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.,
Posted by: Qiraswen at October 12, 2009 5:49 AM
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!,
Samir Chopra lives in Brooklyn and teaches Computer Science and Philosophy at the City University of New York; his academic interests include the philosophical foundations of artificial intelligence and the politics of technology. In his third undergraduate year, he captained Mathematics in the departmental cricket competition (and lost to Chemistry in the first round). Samir played C-grade cricket in Sydney and makes guest appearances for his old club when possible (and desirable). Samir runs the blog Eye on Cricket and the cricket page at The Faster Times.
Paul Ford is a co-founder of the New Zealand cricket supporters' cult, the Beige Brigade. He was once described by a current New Zealand cricketer as "looking spastic" even mucking about with an Excalibur and a tennis ball in the backyard. Paul bowls right-armed Nathan Astlesque "nudes", his batting would make Ewen Chatfield look elegant, and he is a committed fielder. He sometimes grows a beard to hide his double chin and inhabits a periphery of cricket that Cricinfo is proud to be glimpsing through this blog.
Stephen Gelb grew up in Cape Town, a short walk from the beautiful Newlands ground. Always a better student of the game than player, his passion for cricket survived eight years as a student in Canada, where he learned to love baseball too. He lives in Johannesburg doing economic research at The EDGE Institute and teaching at Wits University.
Mike Holmans, a database consultant by profession, has spent thirty summers (and a few winters) going to the cricket. Brought up in one and working in the other, his dearest wish is for a season to end with Yorkshire winning the county championship by beating runners-up Middlesex by one wicket with five minutes to go. If it’s also a summer when England win the Ashes, so much the better.
Born in Colombo, educated at Oxford and now living in Brisbane - Michael Jeh (Fox) is a cricket lover with a global perspective on the game. An Oxford Blue who played first-class cricket, he is a Playing Member of the MCC and still plays grade cricket. His views on cricket might best be described as those of a "modern traditionalist". Michael now works closely with elite athletes in his job as a manager at Griffith University in Queensland.
Saad Shafqat takes special pride that his cricket-watching life began during the three-month interval between Javed Miandad's debut Test in Lahore and Imran Khan's 12-wicket haul at Sydney. Although a practicing neurologist based in Karachi, cricket has never been far from his activities. He has co-authored Javed Miandad’s autobiography Cutting Edge and has been a contributor to Cricinfo since 2005. His regular column Reverse Swing appears fortnightly in Dawn, Pakistan’s leading English daily.
RSS Feed
