Cook leads the way for England

Alastair Cook 10/10
766 runs at 127.66

A magnificent series. By the end of last summer, Cook was clinging on to his place in the England side and, by his own admission, “couldn’t hit a beach ball.” He averaged just 26 in previous Ashes encounters and his troubles outside the off-stump had the Australian bowlers salivating in anticipation. His career appeared to be in the balance.

It’s not any more. Cook batted for more than 36 hours in the series – no Englishman has ever spent longer at the crease in a Test series – and scored an eye-watering 766 runs. Only Wally Hammond and Don Bradman have scored more in an Ashes series. He fully deserved his man of the series award.

How did he do it? He left the ball outside the off stump and waited for the bowlers to stray into his areas. Then he cut, pulled and flicked to his heart’s content. And, as his confidence grew, he even unveiled a surprisingly elegant cover drives. Aged just 26, he’s already scored over 5,000 Test runs and recorded 16 Test centuries: he’s going to break every English Test batting record in existence.

Credit, too, for the selectors who stuck with him and the coaches who worked with him. Their judgement and faith has been fully vindicated.

Andrew Strauss 8/10
307 runs at 43.85

A sound, if unspectacular, series with the bat. Bouncing back from his first over dismissal at Brisbane, he settled England’s nerves with their first century of the series in the second innings. He passed 50 three more times in the series, often helping his side steal the initiative, but failing to go on.

His greatest contribution, however, remains the captaincy. While he’s somewhat conservative on the pitch, his admirable calm head ans sensible disposition helped England regroup after a shaky start at Brisbane and the debacle of Perth. He’s now one of just three man (Hutton and Brearley are the others) to have led England to Ashes success home and away. There’s little reason to think he can’t go further and lead England to World Cup success and the top of the Test rankings.

Jonathan Trott 9/10
445 runs at 89

You have to go back a long, long time to find a better England No. 3 than Trott. His sound technique, calm head and relentless hunger for runs have created a wonderfully consistent Test batsman who is equally proficient coming in at 0-1 or 200-1. And he seems to love batting against Australia: before his duck in Sydney he averaged more than 100 in the Ashes. Don’t forget that run-out of Katich at Adelaide, either. Trott was superb and has now answered every question about his technique and temperament.

Kevin Pietersen 7/10
360 runs at 60
1 wicket at 16

A somewhat perplexing series. Magnificent at Adelaide – he scored a match-winning double-century and took a crucial wicket – he only passed 50 once more in the series. For a player with as much talent as Pietersen, that’s slightly disappointing. Some of his off-field comments – such as the swipe at Peter Moores – hardly helped team unity, either. Even if there was more than a grain of truth in them.

Paul Collingwood 3.5/10
82 runs at 13.83
2 wickets at 36.50

He took several wonderful catches and a couple of useful wickets but, from a personal perspective, this was a bitterly disappointing series from Collingwood. He rarely looked comfortable at the crease and, while all his colleagues flourished, often looked as if he were struggling to cope with the pace of the Australian bowlers. His retirement was inevitable. It was the right decision, too. For all his determination and all his positive contributions behind the scenes, it’s runs that define a batsman’s worth and Collingwood simply hasn’t scored enough.

Ian Bell 8/10
329 runs at 65.80

If there were still doubters before this series, they are surely silenced now. No-one on either side timed the ball as sweetly as Bell and his century at Sydney, an innings that ensured his side of a series win, was the coming of age of a man who has promised much for a long time. Batting at least one place too low, he was often obliged to sacrifice his wicket in the search for quick runs and the feeling persists that, with more opportunity, Bell might have gained many of the plaudits that have gone to Cook. It is surely telling that, in the first innings at Brisbane and Perth, with all his colleagues struggling, Bell top scored. The next few years promise much.

Matt Prior 7/10
252 runs at 50.40
23 catches

A much improved ‘keeper, Prior was very good against the fast bowlers and, the odd indiscretion apart, reliable against the spinners. His six catches in an innings at Melbourne equalled an Ashes record and he finished with an admirable 23 victims. With the bat, he improved after a shaky start (he was part of Siddle’s hat-trick in Brisbane) and scored a maiden Ashes century at Sydney. To underline the selfless nature of his play, it was the fastest Ashes century by an Englishman since Ian Botham in 1981.

Stuart Broad 3/10
0 runs at 0
2 wickets at 80.50

A bitterly disappointing series. A muscle tear forced Broad out of the series after the second Test, by which time he’d claimed just two wickets and suffered a first ball dismissal. He had bowled somewhat better than the figures suggested, however, conceding just 2.3 runs an over and ensuring his captain a measure of control in the field. The pitch at Perth would surely have suited him ideally bit, with Tremlett, Finn and Bresnan now all pressing for inclusion, Broad can no longer consider himself an automatic selection.

Graeme Swann 6/10
88 runs at 22
15 wickets at 39.80

It was presumed before the series that if England were to win, Swann would need to enjoy a big series. It didn’t turn out that way. Swann failed to find much help from the Australian pitches and found Hussey one of the toughest opponents of his Test career to date. Swann didn’t always look comfortable against Australia’s quick bowling, either. Still, when conditions suited, at Adelaide, he played his part with a five-wicket haul that helped his side to victory, while his excellent bowling at Melbourne went largely unrewarded. He remained cheerful on and off the pitch, too, and certainly contributed to the relaxed and happy mood in the England camp.

Chris Tremlett 9/10
19 runs at 6.33
17 wickets at 23.35

A breakthrough series. Seemingly in the cricketing wilderness just 12-months ago, Tremlett build on his excellent season in county cricket with a performance that announced him as one of the most fearsome fast bowlers in world cricket. Casting off his reputation as injury prone and small hearted, Tremlett bowled with pace, bounce, hostility and skill. In such form, he is as fearsome as fast bowler as any in the world.

Tim Bresnan 8/10
39 runs at 19.50
11 wickets at 19.54

Called into the side for the final two Tests, Bresnan responded with two highly impressive performances. Maintaining an excellent, nagging line and length, Bresnan gained movement in the air and off the pitch and generated surprising pace. While the highlight may have been the superb spell in Melbourne that accounted for Ponting, Hussey and Watson within 18 balls at the cost of just two runs, his batting at Sydney will also have reminded the selectors of his all-round ability.

James Anderson 9/10
22 runs at 4.40
26 wickets at 26.04

The series that established Anderson’s reputation as one of England’s finest post-war bowlers. Answering all the questions, Anderson swung the new ball conventionally, reversed the old ball, gained movement off the seam and, throughout, maintained excellent control and a wonderfully probing line and length. There are very few better fast bowlers in world cricket.

Steve Finn 7/10
3 runs at 3
14 wickets at 33.14

Started the series well, with six wickets in an innings at Brisbane and a brave performance in Adelaide. But he seemed to tire in Perth and paid the price for conceding more than four an over by losing his place for the final two Tests. It was a brave decision from the selectors, however, as, at the time, Finn was England’s leading wicket-taker in the series. Aged only 21, Finn remains one for the future.

Why England won the Ashes

Johnson sparks Australian revival

England exorcise demons with emphatic win

Late wicket revive England’s hopes

Australia grateful for rain respite as KP finds his form

Prolific Cook roasts Australia

Has England ever boasted the better fielding side in an Ashes series?
Before now, anyway.

For many years, Australia have looked fitter, stronger and more
athletic in the field. They have taken more than their fair share of
half chances and, while England have sometimes looked ragged,
Australia punished nearly ever lapse by opposition batsman.

Not any more. England look fitter, better drilled, more athletic and
more confident in the field. And, when chances have come their way -
such as Trott’s run-out of Katich in the first over of this game -
they have, generally, taken them.

Australia, however, have not. And it could prove to be the difference
between the sides in this series.

They did create a few chances on the second day in Adelaide. After the
vital early wicket – Strauss leaving the third ball of the day -
Trott, on just six, survived a run-out chance when Xavier Doherty
missed his shy at the stumps. Trott was also missed on 10 when Hussey
spurned a relatively straightforward chance at gully off Bollinger and
again on 76, when Haddin put down a gloved pull shot off the deserving
Harris. On pitches as flat as this, such profligacy will be punished.

And so it was. Trott, driving through the legside with the sweetest of
timing, continued his superb record against Australia (he currently
has the third highest batting average – 61.63 -of anyone who has
played more than 15 Tests; only Bradman and Barnes better him),
Pietersen returned to something approaching his best form and Cook,
well, Cook just went on and on.

He gave no chances. Instead he recorded his third century in four
Tests and took his series tally to 438 for only one dismissal. He has
now been on the pitch for all but an hour of this series and has
surpassed Wally Hammond’s record of 365 Test runs without being
dismissed. Just 25 years old, Cook already has 15 Test centuries. He’s
going to break every English batting record in existence.

It’s no secret that he is mentally strong. Now, however, he has added
style to his substance. Some of his cover drives were reminiscent of
David Gower and his cutting – particularly off Doherty – was of the
very highest class.

He enjoyed only one nervous moment. He was given out once, on 64, when
the umpire thought he had gloved a hook off Siddle, but successfully
reviewed and scarcely played a false shot afterwards.

Once England had resisted the initial onslaught, there was little to
trouble them from the Australian attack. Though Siddle and Harris
remained admirably hostile, their approach lacks the subtly to
dislodge good batsmen on such wickets, while Bollinger, for all his
passion, lacks the accuracy for Test cricket.

As for Xavier Doherty… well, suffice it to say, the search for an
Australian spinner goes on. He was out bowled by North and milked by
Pietersen, the man Doherty was supposed to threaten, as if he were a
Friesian. It will be some surprise if he remains in the side for
Perth.

The fact is that England’s last three wickets – here and in Brisbane -
had now added 828 runs. Such stats do not lie. And they do not reflect
well on Australia’s bowling.

So, England reached the close 72 ahead and with plenty of power to
add. Australia will have to bat much, much better if they are not to
go one down in this series.

Pakistan sink to new low

Were this series a boxing bout, the referee would have stopped it by now. Had it been a horse race, Pakistan would have fallen at the first. And had it been anything to do with swimming, Pakistan would surely have drowned.
As it is, just one day into the second Test of a four-match series, and Pakistan are being embarrassed. Less than a week after registering their lowest Test score against England (80 at Trent Bridge), they set a grim new record: bowled out in under 40 overs for just 72.

There are some mitigating factors. Pakistan are in a rebuilding phase and their young batsmen – four of their top seven can muster just 15 Tests between them – have precious little experience in such bowler friendly conditions.

Nor can the last 12-months have been easy. The team has been torn apart by off-field issues and the lack of stability – and the flooding – in their homeland can hardly have helped.

England’s bowlers deserve credit, too. In these conditions, Jimmy Anderson is a masterful performer and the movement he gained here – at will and in both directions – would have tested any batsmen. Stuart Broad has also made huge strides this summer and produced a performance of maturity and skill. Instead of straining for pace, both men were content to allow the conditions to help them and remain patient. It wasn’t as if Pakistan’s batsmen made them wait for long.

And that’s the problem. For though Pakistan do have some reasons to feel hard done-by, a total of 72 is hardly excusable. Particularly after winning the toss.

Their batsmen lacked application and technique. Despite having arrived in England over a month ago, they are still pushing, prodding and thrashing at the moving ball as if they are on subcontinent pitches. This contest resembles amateurs against professionals.

Farhat and Butt were both drawn into pushing at deliveries angled across them, Shoaib Malik was brilliantly caught by the impressive Matt Prior after driving at a fine outswinger, before Azhar Ali, petrified at pushing at an outswinger, was trapped by one that nipped back. Umar Akmal was punished for not moving his feet and pinned in front, while Zulqarnain Haider looked out of his depth as he edged a good length ball. Umar Amin flashed optimistically and was well caught at third slip.

There can be few excuses for their fielding, either. They missed between four or five chances (depending on how harshly you want to judge them) in the 34.2 overs of England’s reply, providing their deserving bowlers with very little chance of clawing their way back into the game. Imran Farhat’s drop at first slip, off Mo Asif, when Jonathan Trott had just eight, was a shocker and suffice it to say that the performance of debutant Zulqarnain Haider, who followed his first ball dismissal with an untidy display behind the stumps, suggests the search for a reliable wicket-keeper goes on.

Where do Pakistan go from here? There aren’t any quick fixes. So they have to show patience with this group of players. They have shown they have ability – it is, remember, only a couple of Tests since they defeated Australia – and they will improve. Perhaps the likes of Mohammad Yousuf might add steel to the middle-order, but it’s asking a great deal for a man who hasn’t played cricket for months to come into this side and precipitate an immediate improvement. He’s not an alchemist.

Besides, England have a few concerns of their own. Alastair Cook, who was fooled by a slower ball bouncer and miscued a pull to slip, looks horribly uncomfortable with anything on or outside off stump – which is quite a problem for an opening batsmen – while Kevin Pietersen is pushing for the ball without confidence. He has been dropped twice already. Andrew Strauss edged a good one that swung back at him sharply.

On a larger scale, the ECB must be concerned about the attendance at Edgbaston. After the debacle of Leeds, where Pakistan supporters stayed away in their droves, just 10,000 attended the first day here. A similar number are expected on the second day, but much fewer from there on. It means Warwickshire will fall somewhere below budget (they were anticipating sales of around 45,000 over the course of the game).

It would nice to think that lessons might be learned. Ticket prices here (£60 for adults and between £10 and £20 for under-16s) are patently too high and Pakistan supporters were again very thin on the ground.  But, with the whole of the English game desperately scrabbling for every last pound in order to pay-off their eye-watering debts, it will take a major re-think before anything changes.

The ECB are currently close to securing the right to host next year’s Pakistan v India series; it is to be hoped Indian supporters show more interest in the fortunes of their Test side.

Flower’s appointment key for England

It’s taken 18 attempts and 35 years, but England have finally won a global limited-overs tournament.

Victory over Australia – and a crushing victory at that – in the World Twenty20, finally shed an unwanted record: no longer are England the only major Test nation to never have won a major, world trophy. For a team that last reached a major final in 2004 – and hasn’t looked consistently dangerous in limited overs cricket for nearly 20 years – that is a fine achievement.
Perhaps the most pleasing aspect of this success is that it was based around an all-round team performance. England have only used 12 players in the entire event – and Bopara played just the one game while KP was on paternity leave – with all of the first choice XI contributing.

Ryan Sidebottom, who was controversially selected ahead of James Anderson, vindicated that faith by finishing as England’s leading wicket-taker in the event (equal with the excellent Graeme Swann) and claiming two early wickets in the final. Luke Wright contributed with a couple of fine innings and a nerveless over under pressure in the final, Mike Yardy was mean with the ball and Eoin Morgan, despite limited opportunities, reinforced the impression that he could become one of the finest players in the world.

Neither Lumb – who was exposed by Australia’s pace – or Kieswetter – who was lucky to see Swann catch Watson via a rebound off Kieswetter’s iron-like gloves in the first over and has questions to answer against the short ball – are ready for Test cricket.

But they proved the right choice for this event. Broad conceded fewer than seven runs an over and Bresnan showed well-honed skill with bat and ball. All have fielded with commitment and skill. It has been a highly impressive performance.

For all that, one man stood out this tournament. Kevin Pietersen was immense for England. It was not just that he was the second highest run-scorer in the event (only Mahela Jayawardene managed more), it was the manner he scored them. KP’s batting now intimidates bowlers in a way that few  – Bradman and Viv Richards spring to mind – have ever managed. He’s not just back to his best, he’s batting better than ever. A prolific summer looms.

His batting in the final emboldened the team. Before his arrival, Lumb and Kieswetter had both looked troubled by the extreme pace of Nannes and Tait.

KP looked to have all the time in the world, however. Treating Tait – who topped 97 mph at one stage – like a medium-pace trundler – KP, lent back and drove him for six over mid-off. It was batting of the highest class.

Recognition as player of the tournament was no more than he deserved.
Afterwards, Pietersen admitted that his improved form was rooted in “disappointment”. “It was the disappointment of the last 12 months [that motivated me],” he said. “So I worked very hard in Bangladesh and India. I spent hours in the nets, had lots of nights and dinners with ‘Colly’ [Paul Collingwood] when I had lost sight of how I should play.

“So these are moments to savour. It’s difficult to believe. It’s humbling.
“But the team is the important thing and if not for the team, I wouldn’t be here.”

Kieswetter followed KP’s suit with some audacious strokes. He’s nowhere near the finished article, but he demonstrated some raw talent that bodes very well for the future.

And what of Andy Flower? It’s little over a year ago that Flower assumed the England coaching role against a background of chaos and discord. After a tricky start – remember the ignominy of Jamaica and Holland – he’s now overseen Ashes victory and that elusive limited-overs success. That, by any standards, is an excellent achievement and it is no coincedence that England’s revival coincided his appointment. 

England are almost unrecognisable from the rabble he inherited. Where once the players seemed timid and hesitant, they now appear fearless and positive. Where once England were, at best, workmanlike in the field, they are now consistently superb, and where once their bowling was predictable, it is now intelligent and disciplined. Flower must take much of the credit.

Perhaps England had a little fortune in the final. The dismissal of Haddin surely owed more to poor umpiring than fine bowling, but Michael Clarke was quite right when he admitted afterwards that his team had been “outplayed by a better team.” Indeed, he said England played “wonderful cricket.”

In truth, Australia had been living dangerously for a while. Their top-order had rarely fired at this event and, excellent though the Husseys and White remained until the end, it was asking too much of them to continually rebuild.

Collingwood compared the success favourably with any in his career. Including the Ashes.

“It’s very special,” he said. “This is right up there with the best [moments of my career]. To be the first [England] team to win a [cricket] world cup is amazing and it’s something that can never be taken away from us.

“Everyone in the team contributed but, the really exciting thing is that we have a lot more potential. The good team kick-on and we can do that now.

“This [no global success] has been a real monkey on our back. But now we’ve done it on the big occasion; we’ve done it under pressure and we’ve done it as a team. It’s a very special moment.”

Peter Moores, Kevin Pietersen and me – by Michael Vaughan

SPIN: One of the switches between Duncan Fletcher and Peter Moores was that Moores wanted to select players by measuring averages and stats, rather than on character…

Michael Vaughan: At the highest level I think it’s important to have guys who are very tough. When you start talking about averages you’re getting away from the processes of doing your day-to-day job. You’re looking too far ahead. 

The whole aspect of playing high-level sport is keeping yourself in the now: performing in that minute on that one ball. And the constant talk of averages and methods… I think it affected players. They were looking over their shoulders, thinking if they didn’t average ‘x’ they’d be back on the county treadmill. I’ve never known any player be too comfortable with being in the England team. The reason why players fail is usually because they feel under too much pressure either from themselves or people around them. I always felt my job as captain was trying to release that pressure.

[Peter Moores and I] obviously didn’t have a great professional relationship. Duncan had such a great reign, and I think [Moores] wanted to put his own stamp on it but I don’t think that there was necessarily the amount of change required that he was trying to implement. 

Me and him not having the chance to work with both teams – I resigned as ODI captain straight away after the 2007 World Cup– it wasn’t easy for him. But there’s no point in lying: I didn’t link with Peter Moores as well as I had done with Duncan Fletcher, and if you look back at all the successful reigns the captain-coach situation is such an important one and when it’s not right you can probably tell by the results on the pitch…

Were you consulted over Moores’ appointment?

No. 

That would surprise our readers…

I’d never met him… I’d heard he was doing a great job at Loughborough. At the time I was quite in favour of an English guy coming in. But for some reason it didn’t work. 

But, as the captain, you should have been consulted, shouldn’t you?

Well, I wasn’t consulted about very much. [Chairman of selectors] David Graveney was a guy I trusted and had a good relationship with and he got the axe without my having a phone call. When the Schofield report [into English cricket, post-2006/07 Ashes] came out – we had some very high-profile people on that report making some great suggestions but the most important one about the need for our players to play less cricket’s not even been looked at. So… was it a good report? You’d have to say no.

There seemed to be an overall sense that the team had too much power. But I’m not too sure about that. 

Kevin Pietersen didn’t think England could win the Ashes with Peter Moores as coach. Did you?

[Long pause] If him and Kevin had got on, yeah. But captain and coach not getting on? No chance.

So Moores’ approach was not so flawed that it brought the whole team down…

[slightly incredulous at the idea] Nah… Me and Peter didn’t click. That’s why I had to move over, because I thought someone else needed to take on the team and the new person needed to bond a new relationship with Peter and his new ideas. I don’t have an ego at all. I wasn’t so egotistical that I wanted to stay in the captaincy job as long as I possibly could, ’cos I probably could have done. I wanted to pass it on. And unfortunately Peter and Kevin didn’t get on.

 But in a funny way everything happens for a reason. Getting Andy Flower and Straussy together… it looks like a fantastic partnership. It looks very similar to  the one myself and Duncan had and that Nasser and Duncan had and it’s good to see the England team working in a smooth controlled way.

There’s a perception that you might have had an involvement in the process of  Kevin Pietersen trying to get rid of Peter Moores… Was there anything in that?

Absolute crap.

But you know that’s a perception? That idea that you were some kind of backstage Godfather of English cricket, always having a say even when you weren’t playing…

It’s absolute crap. Anyone who knows Kevin Pietersen knows that he makes his own decisions. Throughout my time I didn’t necessarily agree with a lot of Peter’s ideas, but once I’d gone, I’d gone. I had no input. 

Michael Vaughan’s Time to Declare is in shops now, published by Hodder. The full interview, from which this is extracted, is in the Christmas issue of SPIN, in shops now.

Next Page »