I’ve often pondered as to why English domestic cricket produces so many skilled, pretty boy types who seem to thrive in local competitions but just seem to lack that indefinable ‘X Factor’ when it comes to playing gritty, ugly, effective innings that get you home in tight situations.
Watching every ball of the current ODI series in England has made me dwell even longer on this question. It’s not a question of talent, skill or dedication – Ravi Bopara for example looks classy and is probably more naturally gifted than say Cameron White or Callum Ferguson (on the surface anyway). Yet, when they come up against hard competitors who scrap like junkyard dogs, they forever seem to fall short.
The current Australian team is but a shadow of the vintage of the past two decades but they are the quintessential scavengers, hunting as a pack and feeding on loose scraps. Admittedly, England, sans Pietersen and Flintoff are not without their own personnel issues, but you sense that players like Bopara, Owais Shah and Ian Bell would be in the frame anyway. To watch any of these three players bat is to see fluidity, grace and a touch of class. They look the part. No doubt in County cricket and against some international teams, they act the part too. Their talent is evident for the world to see and yet …
Every time they come out to bat in tough situations that call for attritional rather than attractive cricket, I get that sense of foreboding that precedes an imminent soft dismissal. And so it proves to be, all too often. They don’t seem to get out to particularly good deliveries or struggle for timing but it seems like only a matter of time before they spoon one lazily to cover or get too cute with a lap-sweep or find some soft way to fulfil the prophecy (eg: hit wicket or run-out). The sad thing is I probably enjoy watching them bat more than the effective but less aesthetically pleasing batsmen like Collingwood, Strauss, White, Ferguson etc., but you just know that if your life depended on it, you’d be dashing off to check that the life insurance policy was paid up.
England seem to throw up these sorts of players more regularly than most other countries I can think of. I’m sure all domestic structures have these characters who dominate the local scene but rarely sustain it on the international stage but for some reason, in England, these players seem to enjoy relatively long international careers, recalled time and again for another predictably disappointing reincarnation.
David Gower was an obvious exception – his timeless elegance belied impressive numbers against most opposition but there have been so many others who never inspired genuine confidence, despite always looking a million dollars. On the other hand, you have guys like Collingwood, Thorpe and even Hussain who may not have necessarily been so pleasing on the eye but nonetheless played some memorable knocks when it mattered. When was the last time Bell, Bopara, Shah or even Luke Wright (not quite in the ‘pretty boy club’) scored an ugly 70 that won a tight match against feisty opposition on a difficult pitch?
It’s probably too simplistic to blame the County cricket system for producing these domestic run machines who just can’t seem to produce the goods consistently on the international stage when it really counts. Those issues have been debated for years now and I’m sure the brains inside English cricket have addressed these perceived problems. It’s certainly not a question of talent so much as temperament.
Cameron White is a prime example – in terms of sheer raw talent, Bopara, Bell and Shah probably have more going for them and probably score more heavily in domestic cricket. In fact, their Test and ODI averages are probably higher too. But numbers alone don’t tell the full story. Last night’s game at the Rose Bowl was a classic case in point. It was a slow pitch and a tight game with two relatively mediocre teams (therefore evenly matched) scrapping hard for supremacy but one always got the sense that Beauty would come second to the Beast in that contest. Even Michael Clarke’s tortured innings was eventually a matchwinning contribution. I cannot imagine Bell allowing himself to bat that poorly and yet keep going without throwing it away in frustration.
Perhaps it’s not quite the best time of the season to expect attractive strokeplayers like Bopara and Shah to make runs in September. I enjoy watching them bat, albeit only too briefly, so I’m hoping that the Champions Trophy on South African pitches will see a flood of runs. But I keep coming back to the point that it’s not just the volume of runs that matter – it’s the context in which they are scored. In England it seems, the pretty boys shine on parade days but go missing in the trenches when it all gets a bit down n’ dirty. I wait in hope…
Ravi Bopara more naturally gifted than Ferguson, U gotta kidding.Ferguson is a future star, and possible captainship candidate, where as has a lot of mental and technical deficiency.
But i really liked your column and its true that, when it comes crises situation,non of these current bunch of middle order batters fit into the shoes.
Posted by: Omar at September 11, 2009 6:50 AM
Good read. You note that these 'pretty boys' don't score ugly 70s, which is true to an extent; but I do remember Bopara winning a game against India at Old Trafford with Stuart Broad with a particularly gutsy innings. Now obviously this could be a one-off, but perhaps it is also to do with the stage of Bopara's career - in that innings he didn't have the responsibility he now carries (regardless of batting position). In a strange sort of way, the heavier responsibility may stifle some of these batsmen, and are more likely to play 'uglier' knocks for the sake of their careers as well as a lack of pressure.
Posted by: Anonymous at September 11, 2009 7:36 AM
Bopara and Shah have the talent but they try to play shots which are too risky. It is fine to be innovative once in a while but a player like Shah tries to play too many risky shots and of course he also has a tendency to get run out.
Players like Shah or Bopara don't rotate the strike too much either but they just want to deal in boundaries.
Posted by: Mike Holmans at September 11, 2009 10:40 AM
Fox, a very good piece to which I shall no doubt compose a lengthier reply in due course. But a couple of quick points: the last time Bell scored an ugly 70 against feisty opoosition was in the Test at The Oval, a match which as we all know England won. And the prettiest of England's recent batsmen was Michael Vaughan - admittedly a hopeless ODI player, but surely no-one would question his temperament.
Posted by: Asif Rathod at September 11, 2009 12:48 PM
I don't quite understand the ECB Selection policy. They are giving chance to so many flop player every now and then continuously. Ravi Bopara and Owais Shah is two great examples. Both of this player might be prolific run scorers in county stints, but they are not performing that well at highest level. Where are versatile players like D'mitri Mascerhenance, J Darymplle, Samit Patel? Also, there bowling attack is not suitable for one day bowling, they must play young leggy Adil Rashid.
Posted by: Richard S at September 11, 2009 1:10 PM
I think its just a matter of selector preference at the minute. There are gritty players in the England frame, Joyce and Trott being the most obvious, but the selectors, for a reason yet to be disclosed, seem to prefer Bopara and Shah. Bopara may be an effective player one day but needs a spell out the side and in my opinion Shah has had long enough now to prove that he isnt international class. The selectors seemed to be so haunted by the chop and change mentality of the 90's that they just won't drop them and try someone else. A bigger issue for our one day team is why we don't pick anyone who can hit over the infield and score boundaries. Ive lost count of home many straight or leg stump balls have been defended or nudged for a single. We have destructive players; Mustard & Blackwell at Durham being the most clearly obvious. But they seem to have offended the selectors in some way.
Posted by: ali at September 11, 2009 5:32 PM
Mind part of the game is as important as the skill, talent and natural benevolence. A batter has to play one bad shot to terminate in life, poor judgment to earn a single or indistinct calling can be fatal and all these occurrences do not require more than a split second to happen; these flaws can only be overcomed by the mind and not the body, truly speaking. Great batsmen have inexorable determination and direction while at work; this rule is as much applicable to ODI form of business as to the longer version. ECB and cricket management has to device some scheme to train the pretty boys in these areas. Skill and talent can complement mental attitudes but in no way can subtitle the virtues of staying mindful during batting. Having said this, there could be a debate if this strength is part of the talent, obvious answer will be yes it is part of the overall package but at the same time this is something that can be infused if missing in the first place.
Posted by: Danish at September 11, 2009 8:15 PM
I've been thinking on the same thing each time England play. Y do they keep bringing Bopara and Shah back when they hardly perform. How many times have we seen England losing 2 (or more) quick wickets after one falls?? I can hardly recall any innings when they weren't any man down on the 50-run mark.
Richard here has a point that seriously needs consideration: bring an opener that can hit over the infield to make any use of the Powerplay. England have never correctly used the powerplays, unlike other teams. They play as if they're gonna score in the last 10 overs, but the poor line-up either means that they won't get to that point, or that there's no one left to hit the ball when they do manage to reach it. Y not try Swann as an opener to check if he can hit hard n make quicj runs as he did in the last Ashes match.
Fresh players like Denly and Trott need to be tested
Posted by: JK at September 11, 2009 9:29 PM
No two players exhibit these opposing traits as evidently as the waugh twins. While mark was more gifted and infinitely better looking as a batsman, it was steve who got all the records and a much higher batting average. Another case of pretty boy not doing as well as the tough nut....
Posted by: Michael Jeh at September 12, 2009 12:15 AM
To Mike Holmans; fair point mate. Vaughan was indeed mentally tough, despite being attractive. Funnily enough, Vaughan almost rose to the top of his game against better opposition and frequently (relatively) flopped against poorer bowlers or less intense contests. He's the ultimate contradiction. Also, one would have thought that his game would have been ideally suited to ODI cricket but you're correct - his record isn't that great. Similarly, if you took a cursory glance at Laxman vs Dravid, you'd think Laxam would be the far better ODI player but the reality is different. Michael Slater is another example - his ODI record as an opener is far less impressive than say Geoff Marsh who was a much more conservative player. Cricket's full of contradictions. And YES, I concede that Bell's 70 at the Oval was a gritty, ugly sort of knock so that is one obvious contradiction to my overall theme. Question: would Bell have batted so painfully for 50 like Clarke did at Southampton?
Posted by: lukas at September 12, 2009 3:20 AM
spot on.. I think this not only affects England, but other countries as well. For instance look at the Game the other day between SL and NZ, while the beautiful strokemakers Sangakkara and Jayawardana faltered on a difficult pitch, it was the less stylish and more gritty players Samaraweera and Matthews who took SL to a victory.
Posted by: Marcus at September 12, 2009 5:42 AM
Personally, I think Shah's one of the jerkiest batsman in the England set-up- he never looks convincing and seems to have to slog in order to score quickly. Ferguson is much more of a touch player, and I find him far easier on the eye.
Posted by: greyblazer at September 12, 2009 7:05 AM
Susant,
Bopara and Shah are definitely more talented as they have better range of shots than Ferguson. So the author is very much right.Ferguson scores his runs by not exaggerating his movements and by playing within his limitations. He has a limited range of shots and it is good to see that he doesn't believe in playing shots that he won't be able to play.
Having said that bowlers would study him a lot more now and I believe if the bowlers bowl really full like Anderson did in the second onedayer or in the longer version of the game with the gully around bowlers can bowl back of a length and just around off stump to get him caught in the gully. He doesn't really cover the line of the ball but believes in minimal footwork so the bowlers can surely get him out in test cricket but his greatest strength is he plays within his limitation which both Bopara and Shah don't do!
Posted by: tanmay paradkar at September 14, 2009 6:28 PM
U think ravi boapra nd owais shah are classy?? Haven't u seen them playing their ugly best on flat indian tracks?? Ian Bell surely looks classy but if Shah and Bopara are elegent then Flintoff must be most technically correct batsman in English team!!!
Posted by: Jackie at September 15, 2009 11:15 PM
This is a very odd article. Shah and Bopara are not particularly easy on the eye. It is a very strange claim that they are elegant. Bell certainly is noted as England's most graceful player but he recently did precisely the ugly crucial knock - 72 at the Oval - which you say he can't do!!
So what is your point?
Bell should be in the one-day side. He may not be Ponting standard but he's miles better than Bopara and Shah. In 76 innings Bell got 3431 runs, av 35. Bopara in 41 innings got 969 runs, av 28. You can add another innings and 18 runs from Trent Bridge tonight. Shah has an av. of 30.
Please tell me why Bell isn't playing? He has played in winning Series against Australia/NZ 2007, India 2007, Sri Lanka 2007 and SA 2008.
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
