Cow Corner

Can England improve in the desert?

A very bad three days at the office...

It would be disingenuous to simply explain away England's abject failure with the bat, citing rustiness and a lack of experience in unique conditions.

England were unceremoniously thrashed inside three days at the hands a side in apparent transition and undertaking a steep learning curve.

Make no mistake, Pakistan were clinical, ruthless and professional; meanwhile, England's showing was inept, uninspired and insipid.

England's dire showing with the bat in this Test match was so devoid of substance that scant constructive analysis can be offered.

The facts are not in the tourists' favour: England have now won just two Tests out of their last 18 on the subcontinent.

England began the third day with the steadfast belief that they had done the groundwork for a momentous recovery befitting the number one Test side in the world; they finished it with a second batting debacle and a massive defeat.

It took just 57.5 overs for England to capitulate with the bat second time around: this was not a defeat the tourists wanted to drag out.

In the first innings, England's top four mustered a meagre 41 runs; in the second, the same culprits managed 60 - 49 of which came from the bat of Jonathan Trott.

After a couple of chastening implosions, Australia's top order were commanded to attend a three-day 'Christmas batting camp' prior to the Boxing Day Test against India, and captain Michael Clarke has since led the way with a triple-century among his exploits.

For England, there are deep-rooted problems with batting in foreign conditions, particularly slow, low pitches - the gremlins of which seem to only be encountered by batsmen from these shores.

England's mediocre record in Asia is well documented and they face a formidable task to regroup for the final two Tests of the series.

There was much talk of how conditions in Dubai were tipped too heavily in favour of the batsmen, and the pitch at the Dubai International Cricket Stadium did appear to be pretty flat when Pakistan were making use of it.

England have certainly disproved many of the 'batsman friendly' assumptions regarding the conditions in the UAE, if only in the sense that not every batting unit has managed to exploit them.

It proved to be an excellent Test surface and Pakistan outplayed England from the outset and in two of the three departments, even looking competitive in terms of their fielding.

Where do the world's top-ranked side go from here?

The inquest begins in earnest, and it cannot be soon enough. Any suggestions of rustiness or unfamiliarity with conditions must be cast aside: the problems are technical and they are widespread.

Picking off Ajmal is not something that can be satisfactorily learned in the nets, but England must develop and hone their game plans against the unorthodox spinner.

But perhaps more urgently, England's batsmen need to pore over their transgressions and ensure that they possess the mental application and patient determination required to build a meaningful innings in testing conditions.

What did you make of England's 10-wicket defeat to Pakistan in Dubai? What changes, if any, would you like to see for the second Test in Abu Dhabi? In what ways do you think England need to improve?

Where did it all go wrong?

++++

The Decision Review System has not enjoyed the most auspicious start to its international career: it has been criticised; it has been snubbed; it has been neglected; it has been misused.

They say that all changes are best implemented with strong leadership at the top of an organisation, and the ICC have neglected to provide anything of the sort as the issue of technology becomes all the more hazy.

The BCCI have persistently snubbed the system altogether in acrimonious fashion, and the ICC have simply allowed their new game-changer to be greatly undermined as a result.

Even when the DRS has been effectively used to overturn erroneous decisions, there are too many individuals within the game determined to meet every call with disdain and cynicism.

"Nobody claims the DRS is perfect," Haroon Lorgat, the ICC's chief executive, had reminded everybody in Dubai earlier in the week.

The situation is further complicated by a cluster of confusing and inconsistent innovations: from the mercurial Hot Spot, to the enigmatic Snicko. The various forms of technology appear, to the average punter, to be constantly bickering with each other.

On day three there were two very controversial decisions which prompted some hysterical comments regarding the DRS.

In fact, for both decisions umpire Billy Bowden could not have been 100 per cent certain that either was out; he was at fault in each case along with TV umpire Steve Davis, not the technology.

Strauss comes close to dissent

The DRS, according to Lorgat, had improved decision making to 99 per cent accuracy, but poor Saeed Ajmal fell victim to the remaining one per cent as the third umpire Davis flew in the face of common sense to the dismay of spectators (not at the ground itself, obviously) from both sides.

Equally, Strauss fell victim of the one per cent as Bowden and Davis contrived to uphold the decision to dismiss the England captain, despite Hot Spot showing nothing more than a faint dot on the trouser pocket as the ball flew down the leg side.

Even effective technology can be made to seem inadequate if it is held in disdain by those charged with applying it to aid their decision-making.

++++

STAT OF THE DAY: This Test match was the fifth worst performance by England's first four wickets since the First World War. (via Zaltzcricket)

TWEET OF THE DAY: "Say what you like about 20:20 cricket, but no one's ever wasted their time and money buying a day four ticket." (ECB_PR)

USER COMMENT OF THE DAY: "What is the point of DRS if umpires are still going to give batsmen out when the replay appears to show the ball missing the bat and there is nothing on Hot Spot? Should you really give a batsman out on sound alone? There are all manner of things that can cause a sound. There was not enough there to give Strauss out in my opinion. There was no indication from the replay of the ball having hit the bat either." (Bobito)

SHOT OF THE DAY: It wouldn't be a day at the Dubai International Cricket Stadium without a cursory picture of a man with a stand all to himself. This fella looks incredibly happy, taking up seven seats and nipping out for a drink without a queue.

On your own...

 

35 comments

  • Ollie Hunt  •  4 months ago
    "The facts are not in the tourists' favour: England have now won just two Tests out of their last 18 on the subcontinent."

    This wasn't on the sub-continent so what bearing does that have?
  • joeblogs  •  Shanghai, China  •  4 months ago
    Back to normal, then. Or too much Xmas pud.
  • PIXIE  •  Reading, England  •  4 months ago
    Why oh why would they b e sending the WAGS out to them already. Will this win the next test for England
  • David  •  4 months ago
    The debate on whether to play four or five bowlers seems to have been decisively answered in favour of five, as the bowlers have batted better than most of the batsmen. Perhaps the debate should change as to whether we should play England should select four or five batsmen including Prior. Trott can now surely qualify as a bowler, and Monty could only strengthen the middle order.

    D
  • PETER  •  London, England  •  4 months ago
    They are paid too much and have lost the desire to get out of bed and play. Hungry fighters are good fighters. Too pampered and their positions are too safe. Deduct money from their wages if they fail.
  • yong g  •  Shanghai, China  •  4 months ago
    Wow, impressive battalion of the barmy army. one ugly pooper in shorts! The Stanfords are such a bunch of moaners, I hope they enjoyed the thrashing.
  • V for Vendetta  •  London, England  •  4 months ago
    Simple answer is NO!!
  • Robin Meakins  •  Brighton, England  •  4 months ago
    The English selectors should learn to produce a side that is on form and remove those who prove too arrogant or unsuitable for the conditions in dry Dubai. They should have the guts to drop Pietersen and bring in Monty. Maybe they could even try some of the uncapped great cricketers who show the intention of wanting to win. The current side though so-called No. 1 internationally has by arrogance, lack of practice or sheer incompetence been thrashed by a good Pakistan side. Wake up before we loose again.
  • Brendon  •  Bilbao, Spain  •  4 months ago
    How can England improve? Try changing their name to Australia
    • A Yahoo! User 4 months ago
      that would make them worse so this doesnt make sense
    • JOE 4 months ago
      Why don't Australia change their name to Bangladesh!!!
  • Sydney  •  4 months ago
    Cowers is right. The umpires were at fault for not using the technology properly, rather than the technology failing. There was not enough evidence for Strauss to be given out.
    • Shafiq 4 months ago
      Now we only accept the Umpires word if it is in our favour ! Well the cricket must live in the present.
  • Chand  •  Hull, England  •  4 months ago
    England aren t playing on the Subcontinent...lets get that right first Yahoo. Who knows .. are conditions in Dubai similar? No excuse for capitulating though!!
  • Richard  •  Reading, England  •  4 months ago
    whatever Strauss says about using the nature of the defeat to put things right in the 2nd test Flowers, Gooch & himself have to examine why only 143 runs between the top six in the order was only possible in total for both innings for supposedly the no1 ranked test side. It comes down to more about whats going on between their ears & a reluctance to change the way they play which is worrying & if not changed could result in a whitewash!!
    • V for Vendetta 4 months ago
      Richard: England's Batsmen have been worked out and the bowlers cannot bowl on anything other than an English strip. Because the selectors are unwilling unable or simply too lazy to select players with the drive and skill to play the game at the highest level England will continue to go fro high to low with increasing headings towards the lower areas of the rankings.
  • fletch  •  Edinburgh, Scotland  •  4 months ago
    Well if the only England "batsman" to get close to an acceptable batting score in both innings is Swan what can we expect. The batsmen need to look to score at least 40 in all innings, the occasional failiure is to be expected but this can be carried but the whole batting lineup failling is going to result in these type of results
  • David  •  4 months ago
    As an afterthought, Pietersen could probably also be included as a bowler, given his devasting spin - but only at 9 or 10 where a good tail end slogger can be useful.

    D
  • j g boulter  •  Riyadh, Saudi Arabia  •  4 months ago
    UAE. I'm surprised there are not more spectators. It's a home from home for expats - Pakistani as well as Brit.
    I am often hearing that this Pak team is "in construction" - but why not look at their record on "home soil" away from home. India was No. 1 briefly after an equally brief stint by SA. Can you see any better future for a side whose No 1 status was achieved on home soil. And has not our 1 day game looked ominously weak - dismissed as not reflecting test performance. Well, home truths are due. Perhaps we are seeing the start of a run at the top spot from an unexpected direction ... Pakistan (unbelievable, really, when we reflect on what happened in their away series in NZ, Oz and Pommyland).
  • Jo Publik  •  Vanves, France  •  4 months ago
    Just wanted to crdit Graeme Swann and Broady..who both fought like the old warriors they are. Swann has a license to play freely coming in at number 8..he doesn't feel any prssure as a batsman and that shows in the way he bats. Prior the same. I'd like to see sawnn promoted in he batting order to number 5, even if he continues to post his obligatory 30 then caught..why, because he then gives the rest of the batsmen a kick up the old backside..
  • Naz  •  Manchester, England  •  4 months ago
    Every time England plays Pakistan there is a controversy. This time it's not about ball tempering, deliberate no balling, courtesy of News of the World who framed Pakistani players, it's not about bad umpiring or the pitches but this time it's Saeed Ajmal!
    Because he won the First Test match against England In Dubai single handed. Bob Willis could not stomach that because it happened to his World's No.1 Team - England.
    Shame on you Bob. Instead of praising he guy you labeled him as a "chucker"
    Your suggestion that Ajmal should wear short sleeve shirt on his bowling arm is pathetic and make me sick. I suppose you will start manufacturing new cricket gear, one short sleeve and the other long sleeve shirts, sweater and other cricketing garments. What's on your mind?
    • Harris 4 months ago
      Naz even though I don't agree with Willis' comments but your counter argument is pretty poor. How can you blame "England" on the basis of comments by an individual?

      There are so many other English players who have come out in support of Ajmal!
  • king penguin  •  St Albans, England  •  4 months ago
    what a slaughter, get that guy sitting in the stand
  • Wally  •  4 months ago
    Ok, so England can't be called number 1 Test nation until they learn to play in sub-continent conditions. They've only done half the job so far.
  • Gershon  •  London, England  •  4 months ago
    drop morgan and play bopara.

About Cow Corner

Cow Corner had a sheltered upbringing - it was educated from home and forfeited text books for hardback copies of Wisden Almanack with the only visual stimulation being the John Player League. "Cowers" is the illegitimate sibling of Early Doors and can often be seen on park benches around St John"s Wood trying to sell signed copies of Colin Dredge’s autobiography. Cow has been known to bowl some military medium whilst wielding the long handle at the bottom of the order and answers to one God and one God only, that known as Benaud.