Bangladesh in England, 2010 June 7, 2010

Rust removed ahead of sterner Tests

England encountered more problems than they'd anticipated against Bangladesh, but the scoreline was emphatic in the end. Cricinfo assesses the team's individual performances
25

Andrew Strauss - 7

It was important for the England captain to reassert his authority on and off the field having watched the side claim the World Twenty20, especially having missed the Bangladesh tour. A brace of 80s at Lord's showed his batting was in reasonable working order despite a slow start for Middlesex and the team appeared to have no problems reacquainting themselves with his leadership. He initially gave Steven Finn the wrong end at Lord's, but that was more due to James Anderson's preferences, and some of his field placings were too negative. As he admitted at Lord's, he was a touch rusty after his break, but all the faculties still work.

Alastair Cook - 6

Having filled in successfully as captain in Bangladesh, Cook endured a strange start to the international season, as he received a couple of dodgy (but not shocking) lbw decisions in the first Test before edging softly to slip having look in decent touch at Old Trafford. Didn't have much to do in the field, but was often seen consulting with Strauss as he dipped into the experience he'd gained during the winter.

Jonathan Trott - 8

Rarely can a player have hit a double century and gained such split reviews. A major criticism of England batsmen is a lack of big hundreds so Trott's 226 at Lord's was an ideal start to the summer, but his mannerisms and mindset dominated the debate. His process at the crease is extraordinary and annoyed the Bangladesh coach as it had the South Africans in the winter, but it was hard to argue with the end product even though he went into his shell after making 175 of his runs on the first day of the series. Received a good ball at Old Trafford, but the bowlers cottoned onto rushing him a little more. Will remain a talking point all season.

Kevin Pietersen - 6

This was always unlikely to be a series that would stir great deeds from Pietersen after his Man-of-the-Tournament performance in the Caribbean and the birth of his son. He twice fell to Shakib Al Hasan to make it 17 dismissals against left-arm spinners, but both times his departure owed more to his desire to dominate than any major technical failings. An important direct-hit to remove Tamim Iqbal at Lord's showed the value of all England's fielding work, but there is a sense that KP was saving himself for greater challenges.

Ian Bell - 8

Despite being England's Test batsman of the winter there were still whispers about his place in the side, especially with Trott in form and Eoin Morgan's emergence. He was scratchy at Lord's, but the 128 at Old Trafford was Bell at his best as he timed and placed the ball to perfection on a pitch assisting the spinners. He finally looks the part in England's middle order, and while No. 3 is still an ambition, he'd be better off staying where he is. Remains excellent at short leg.

Eoin Morgan - 5

Benefited from England's rotation policy as Paul Collingwood was rested, but didn't grab his chance with both hands. The selectors like him and he looked untroubled during innings of 44 and 37, which made it even more frustrating when he twice fell in loose fashion. Most left-handers have a weakness outside off when the ball is pushed across them and this is where high-quality pacemen will target him. However, when England take on Pakistan he is likely to be back in the ranks with Middlesex.

Matt Prior - 8

Another who has come under surprising pressure following England's Twenty20 success. Despite turning himself into a high-quality keeper, Craig Kieswetter's performances in West Indies have sparked another debate over who is best for the position. However, Prior should be assured of his spot in the Test line-up and the real question needs to be where he bats. His 93 at Old Trafford has pushed the average over 40 again - which is passable for a No. 6. Was hampered by a finger injury late in the second Test.

Graeme Swann - 7

Few would have bet on Swann going wicketless at Lord's but a dead track meant it was hard toil for the offspinner as he adjusted from Twenty20 mode. Offered a helpful surface at Old Trafford he was back on song with his seventh five-wicket haul, and his first at home, as he ran through a line-up that should play spin well. His ball to remove Jahurul Islam, spinning through the gate, wasn't far off the one to Ricky Ponting at Edgbaston or Hashim Amla at Durban.

Ajmal Shahzad - 7

A very encouraging debut for the Yorkshire allrounder who overcame a nervous start to produce a lively spell of reverse-swing. He pushed the speed gun to 90mph which won't have gone unnoticed. Would be nice to see some more of him, but may struggle to get a game against Pakistan with Stuart Broad back.

James Anderson - 7

Was a bit off-colour for the first three innings of the series after missing out in the World Twenty20. However, he rediscovered some serious zip on the third day at Old Trafford and also located his outswinger which a few observers have suggested had gone AWOL. His second-innings burst in Manchester would have done for better batting line-ups, but he still isn't totally convincing as an attack-leader in all conditions. Proved himself to be an impressive slip to the spinner as he stood in for Collingwood.

Steven Finn - 9

England have unearthed a potential star, but now it's vital that some perspective is maintained alongside Finn's success. Height, pace and bounce make for an intoxicating combination and Finn also appears to have maturity beyond his 21 years. The way he executed bouncer plans to Imrul Kayes was impressive to watch and he has the ability to extract life when conditions are flat as they were at Lord's. Strauss and Andy Flower will have to monitor his workload, but with Angus Fraser as a mentor he won't want for level-headed advice. Must stop falling over in his followthrough because the last thing England need is for him to be needlessly injured.

Tim Bresnan - 4

The major disappointment of the series because he'd advanced his game considerably in Bangladesh and at the World Twenty20. In hindsight he was probably hampered more than he let on by the foot injury that ruled him out of the second Test, but regardless of that he didn't look a Test-quality new-ball bowler in a three-man seam attack. However, Flower is a fan because of the all-round package he offers, and he remains in Ashes contention.

Andrew McGlashan is assistant editor of Cricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • AAJS on June 9, 2010, 14:46 GMT

    Sterner Test!!! I assume one is making a reference to the Pakistanis coming over. I can guarantee it now, they will be even softer than the hapless Bangladeshis.. They are pathetic, have a useless captain without any talent, they have a coach who never fielded well and didn't as much as catch a cold in the field let alone a cricket ball! They have egos to match any in the world and yet talent to match none, they are unprofessional, cannot communicate well and are tactless.. so all in all a motley crew that would Jack Sparrow's crew to shame!!

  • on June 9, 2010, 10:40 GMT

    @Trickstar I DID watch both of the tests and the dismisals!! Those 2 decisions were notout but as the author of the article Mr.Andrew McGlashan states "A COUPLE OF DODGY (BUT NOT SHOCKING)"decisions! Im sure u must have seen more shocking decisions if u do watch lot of cricket!Im not the one moaning to be honest, the ones like you who are suggesting that "Cook got 2 decisions against him" are the real moaners!! Those two guys(kayes n siddique)have scored runs and made a real contribution for the team!These 2 guys have a large portion of runs bdesh made!So i have a strong case for them! U dont live by what would have been and what would have happened!U say that cook was given 2 dodgy decisions!A dodgy decision doesn mean that had the batsman given notout, he would have been scored a triple ton! He may have been bowled the next ball or even worse run his partner out the next ball! So accept the dodgy decision as a true man with ur chin up! Performance speaks not compalins.from an eng fan

  • YorkshirePudding on June 9, 2010, 5:49 GMT

    @vichan, you sir are factually incorrect in the averages, Struass avg 62, Bell avg @72.5, Prior avg 54.9, Cook avg 19.6, if you add add up all the run scored by the players who learnt thier cricket in england, (excluding Trott, KP and Morgan), the average is 36.8125, even ignoring Struass and Priors figures (in case you change the goal posts, and say English born players) the average is around 27, and that includes the figures from 6 bowlers used..... FYI, Strauss, and Prior moved to the UK when they both under 11 and learnt all thier cricket here in the UK.

  • Itchy on June 8, 2010, 22:29 GMT

    @vichan: Not relying on overseas-born cricketers based on marks which many people have pilloried (esp. Cook) in a two test series is not a particularly good statistical analysis. May need to look a little deeper than you have.

  • vichan on June 8, 2010, 18:41 GMT

    Average score of England's home-grown players = 7.0...Average score of the three players that learned their cricket overseas (if Morgan is included, although he learned his cricket at Middlesex) = 6.3...Not great evidence of England relying overly on such cricketers...

  • Itchy on June 8, 2010, 13:05 GMT

    @wgtnpom - Don't think you have watched much cricket from the WACA recently if you think Perth is a bouncy deck. Very ordinary pitch for several years - not that Broad will make much of it as he always bowls too short on such tracks to be effective.

  • Devastating_Finn on June 8, 2010, 11:32 GMT

    @pollok911 I think you forgot to read/see that Cook had two dodgy decision. I agree that he should have had 4/5 but there is nothing to laugh about.

  • sean_kelly on June 8, 2010, 9:53 GMT

    Take 2 points off each man for the fact that they were playing Bangladesh and that will be more accurate

  • crashbang on June 8, 2010, 9:31 GMT

    BANGLADESH out of 10 Zero. OPENING BAT9.5

  • hasithasampath on June 8, 2010, 8:35 GMT

    England were lucky in the matches completed as they got the favorable conditions. It is interesting to see how they will perform under unfavorable conditions against even a minor opposition like Bangladesh.What would have happened if Bangladesh batted first in the second test.....

  • AAJS on June 9, 2010, 14:46 GMT

    Sterner Test!!! I assume one is making a reference to the Pakistanis coming over. I can guarantee it now, they will be even softer than the hapless Bangladeshis.. They are pathetic, have a useless captain without any talent, they have a coach who never fielded well and didn't as much as catch a cold in the field let alone a cricket ball! They have egos to match any in the world and yet talent to match none, they are unprofessional, cannot communicate well and are tactless.. so all in all a motley crew that would Jack Sparrow's crew to shame!!

  • on June 9, 2010, 10:40 GMT

    @Trickstar I DID watch both of the tests and the dismisals!! Those 2 decisions were notout but as the author of the article Mr.Andrew McGlashan states "A COUPLE OF DODGY (BUT NOT SHOCKING)"decisions! Im sure u must have seen more shocking decisions if u do watch lot of cricket!Im not the one moaning to be honest, the ones like you who are suggesting that "Cook got 2 decisions against him" are the real moaners!! Those two guys(kayes n siddique)have scored runs and made a real contribution for the team!These 2 guys have a large portion of runs bdesh made!So i have a strong case for them! U dont live by what would have been and what would have happened!U say that cook was given 2 dodgy decisions!A dodgy decision doesn mean that had the batsman given notout, he would have been scored a triple ton! He may have been bowled the next ball or even worse run his partner out the next ball! So accept the dodgy decision as a true man with ur chin up! Performance speaks not compalins.from an eng fan

  • YorkshirePudding on June 9, 2010, 5:49 GMT

    @vichan, you sir are factually incorrect in the averages, Struass avg 62, Bell avg @72.5, Prior avg 54.9, Cook avg 19.6, if you add add up all the run scored by the players who learnt thier cricket in england, (excluding Trott, KP and Morgan), the average is 36.8125, even ignoring Struass and Priors figures (in case you change the goal posts, and say English born players) the average is around 27, and that includes the figures from 6 bowlers used..... FYI, Strauss, and Prior moved to the UK when they both under 11 and learnt all thier cricket here in the UK.

  • Itchy on June 8, 2010, 22:29 GMT

    @vichan: Not relying on overseas-born cricketers based on marks which many people have pilloried (esp. Cook) in a two test series is not a particularly good statistical analysis. May need to look a little deeper than you have.

  • vichan on June 8, 2010, 18:41 GMT

    Average score of England's home-grown players = 7.0...Average score of the three players that learned their cricket overseas (if Morgan is included, although he learned his cricket at Middlesex) = 6.3...Not great evidence of England relying overly on such cricketers...

  • Itchy on June 8, 2010, 13:05 GMT

    @wgtnpom - Don't think you have watched much cricket from the WACA recently if you think Perth is a bouncy deck. Very ordinary pitch for several years - not that Broad will make much of it as he always bowls too short on such tracks to be effective.

  • Devastating_Finn on June 8, 2010, 11:32 GMT

    @pollok911 I think you forgot to read/see that Cook had two dodgy decision. I agree that he should have had 4/5 but there is nothing to laugh about.

  • sean_kelly on June 8, 2010, 9:53 GMT

    Take 2 points off each man for the fact that they were playing Bangladesh and that will be more accurate

  • crashbang on June 8, 2010, 9:31 GMT

    BANGLADESH out of 10 Zero. OPENING BAT9.5

  • hasithasampath on June 8, 2010, 8:35 GMT

    England were lucky in the matches completed as they got the favorable conditions. It is interesting to see how they will perform under unfavorable conditions against even a minor opposition like Bangladesh.What would have happened if Bangladesh batted first in the second test.....

  • pollok911 on June 8, 2010, 7:19 GMT

    Cook got 6 when his average in the tournament was 19...LOL

  • needgreenpitches4bowlingallrounders on June 8, 2010, 4:42 GMT

    if morgan ranks up 5 then why is cook 6 also if kp is 6 then why is cook 6. I don't see any logic why cook is ranked up so high at 6. Andrew i think personally u don't like ODI players trying to become TEST cricketers. what is expected out of morgan to make twin fifties on debut or test hundred in debut series. This article will be playing on young mans(morgan) dreams just by u r ranking . Please go by STATISTICS NOT by u r FEEL of how well test cricket should be played or how many balls cook has left or played with composure. also its been seen with trott and bresnan. What can u expect from trott making 200+ and still being taunted. I think England commentators and u r rating is expecting excellence from each and every ODI player. by rating bell with just one century 8 and trott 8 is like giving u r own personal feelings. Statistics is a measure rather then how PLEASANT bell is to watch or how UNPLEASANT trott is. over all i feel trott/tamim/fin all deserved 9 !!!!!

  • wgtnpom on June 7, 2010, 22:33 GMT

    Re Morgan - a left hander who got out in loose fashion after getting a start, twice - not the first left hander to ever be guilty of that - I can recall one who went on to have a fair test career by the name of David Gower - if Morgan can emulate him it'll be great but it's true he's likely to make way for Collingwood in the short term. A score of 5 was a bit harsh I think. Broad: should come back in for Bresnan/Shahzad at No. 8 (above Swann) - it'll be fun having two 6ft 7in fast bowlers in the side especially on a bouncy wicket (may not get one till Perth though). Onions will now have to force his way back in as Finn has claimed the spot well and truly - good problems for England for a change.

  • Trickstar on June 7, 2010, 21:26 GMT

    @Sakush Kc If you watched the tests Cook got 2 decisions against him that weren't out by quite some margin,so taking that into account,do you mark the lad down for the umpires bad decisions.Moaning that Siddique & Kayes didn't score high enough at the end of the day they got the same as Pietersen and he played better than them both,though obviously not up to his usual standards I'd have given Morgan a higher score than a 5,he didn't fill his boots ,but on his first test he didn't have any failures either with 44 & 37. Highly impressed with Finn and Shahzad,we'll see what develops later in the summer with these 2,but can see good things.

  • DaisyRoots on June 7, 2010, 20:32 GMT

    I'd still take Onions as the 3rd seamer when hes back!

  • YorkshirePudding on June 7, 2010, 17:57 GMT

    I can see why cook got a 6, two of the dismissals where very unlucky in the first test, as both were missing the stumps by a good margin, In the second innings at Lords he also had agood time in the field in botrh tests.

  • Arthaurian on June 7, 2010, 17:51 GMT

    Cricinfo sure does love England.

  • springonion on June 7, 2010, 16:12 GMT

    Wouldn't disagree with much there though Cook desperately needs to improve quickly and probably deserves a 4 or 5 for the series.

  • Innocent_Abroad on June 7, 2010, 16:04 GMT

    The main selection issue surely is not whether this individual shades out that one, but about the balance of the side. This series was never going to help much with that.

    If Prior is a reasonable #6, then we can play five bowlers, The question then becomes, is it acceptable to have three #8s (assuming Broad's dip in batting form is temporary) with whichever of them is on a streak batting at#7? I don't see us retaining the Ashes with a 6:4 team.

    The other weakness is that none of the batsmen, except Pieterson who appears not to want to, can do a job as a second spinner. (The Aussies take it for granted that they have this base covered.) It's noticeable that until the advent of one-day cricket "batsmen who could bowl" were pretty much all spinners, and often wrist spinners at that: by about 1970 however they had turned to "medium pace filth" of the Boycott/Gooch variety. Hopefully both national and county coaches have identified this issue for the next generation,

  • on June 7, 2010, 15:52 GMT

    the discussion should be between Broad/Sidebottom/Bresnan and Morgan and Tredwell and Rashid; horses for courses. Morgan is a fast scorer at 6 (or 7 if Prior is in the side) and the team that played at Old Trafford was a good one but I still fancy 5 bowlers - most of whom can bat- on a flat pitch against better opposition.

  • phweeee on June 7, 2010, 15:24 GMT

    I don't quite see how Cook has earned 6 out of 10 in this series. Don't get me wrong I like the guy a lot and am not suggesting he should be dropped or anything, but 6 out of 10 for scoring 7, 23, and 29 against a such a weak bowling attack? I think he'd probably agree they were below par performances. Perhaps a 3 or a 4 might be more accurate. Surely he should at least be marked lower than Morgan who managed a higher cumulative series total from just 2 innings?

    Anyway let's hope he's back on song against Pakistan.

  • Tlotoxl on June 7, 2010, 15:11 GMT

    Shazad has had 1 test against terrible opposition in bowling friendly conditions, hardly enough to force his way into the side - if he does the same against Pakistan on batting friendly conditions later this yer then start talking about him being a possible regular.

  • Tigg on June 7, 2010, 14:25 GMT

    I'd definitely like to see more of Shahzad and Finn against the tougher test of Pakistan although it definitely looks promising for Englands pace core. With Anderson, Finn, Shahzad, Onions, Broad and even Sidebottom it gives plenty of options plus players like Harris and Woakes coming through the squad has serious depth.

  • on June 7, 2010, 13:49 GMT

    The way Ajmal Shahzad bowled, I think he should be straight into the playing eleven and the discussion should be between Broad/Sidebottom/Bresnan

  • on June 7, 2010, 13:38 GMT

    AN Cook (Eng) matches 2, innings3, runs 59, highest score 29, average 19.66 Imrul Kayes (Ban) matches 2, innings4, runs163, highest score 75, average 40.75 Junaid Siddique (Ban) matches 2, innings4, runs139, highest score 74, average34.75

    These all end up with 6!! im amazed what has cook done to get 6 or why havent kayes and siddique got 7 :S

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • on June 7, 2010, 13:38 GMT

    AN Cook (Eng) matches 2, innings3, runs 59, highest score 29, average 19.66 Imrul Kayes (Ban) matches 2, innings4, runs163, highest score 75, average 40.75 Junaid Siddique (Ban) matches 2, innings4, runs139, highest score 74, average34.75

    These all end up with 6!! im amazed what has cook done to get 6 or why havent kayes and siddique got 7 :S

  • on June 7, 2010, 13:49 GMT

    The way Ajmal Shahzad bowled, I think he should be straight into the playing eleven and the discussion should be between Broad/Sidebottom/Bresnan

  • Tigg on June 7, 2010, 14:25 GMT

    I'd definitely like to see more of Shahzad and Finn against the tougher test of Pakistan although it definitely looks promising for Englands pace core. With Anderson, Finn, Shahzad, Onions, Broad and even Sidebottom it gives plenty of options plus players like Harris and Woakes coming through the squad has serious depth.

  • Tlotoxl on June 7, 2010, 15:11 GMT

    Shazad has had 1 test against terrible opposition in bowling friendly conditions, hardly enough to force his way into the side - if he does the same against Pakistan on batting friendly conditions later this yer then start talking about him being a possible regular.

  • phweeee on June 7, 2010, 15:24 GMT

    I don't quite see how Cook has earned 6 out of 10 in this series. Don't get me wrong I like the guy a lot and am not suggesting he should be dropped or anything, but 6 out of 10 for scoring 7, 23, and 29 against a such a weak bowling attack? I think he'd probably agree they were below par performances. Perhaps a 3 or a 4 might be more accurate. Surely he should at least be marked lower than Morgan who managed a higher cumulative series total from just 2 innings?

    Anyway let's hope he's back on song against Pakistan.

  • on June 7, 2010, 15:52 GMT

    the discussion should be between Broad/Sidebottom/Bresnan and Morgan and Tredwell and Rashid; horses for courses. Morgan is a fast scorer at 6 (or 7 if Prior is in the side) and the team that played at Old Trafford was a good one but I still fancy 5 bowlers - most of whom can bat- on a flat pitch against better opposition.

  • Innocent_Abroad on June 7, 2010, 16:04 GMT

    The main selection issue surely is not whether this individual shades out that one, but about the balance of the side. This series was never going to help much with that.

    If Prior is a reasonable #6, then we can play five bowlers, The question then becomes, is it acceptable to have three #8s (assuming Broad's dip in batting form is temporary) with whichever of them is on a streak batting at#7? I don't see us retaining the Ashes with a 6:4 team.

    The other weakness is that none of the batsmen, except Pieterson who appears not to want to, can do a job as a second spinner. (The Aussies take it for granted that they have this base covered.) It's noticeable that until the advent of one-day cricket "batsmen who could bowl" were pretty much all spinners, and often wrist spinners at that: by about 1970 however they had turned to "medium pace filth" of the Boycott/Gooch variety. Hopefully both national and county coaches have identified this issue for the next generation,

  • springonion on June 7, 2010, 16:12 GMT

    Wouldn't disagree with much there though Cook desperately needs to improve quickly and probably deserves a 4 or 5 for the series.

  • Arthaurian on June 7, 2010, 17:51 GMT

    Cricinfo sure does love England.

  • YorkshirePudding on June 7, 2010, 17:57 GMT

    I can see why cook got a 6, two of the dismissals where very unlucky in the first test, as both were missing the stumps by a good margin, In the second innings at Lords he also had agood time in the field in botrh tests.