India v England, 1st Test, Ahmedabad, 2nd day

England need to adapt and move on

England's policy of consistent selection has produced success in the past but the present situation must be identified and dealt with

George Dobell in Ahmedabad

November 16, 2012

Comments: 66 | Text size: A | A

Stuart Broad got through ten overs but suffered a heel problem, Mumbai A v England XI, 2nd day, Mumbai, November 4, 2012
Stuart Broad has lacked pace in recent matches (ESPNcricinfo are not carrying live photos of the India v England series due to reporting restrictions imposed by the host board) © Getty Images
Enlarge

Perhaps every silver lining has a cloud. Perhaps, after a time, every strength becomes a weakness and every virtue a vice: determination becomes stubbornness; loyalty becomes inflexibility; consistency becomes a fear of change.

There were times on the second day in Ahmedabad when it seemed that way. There were times when it seemed that England's policy of consistency of selection - a key feature in the upturn in their fortunes in recent years - had resulted in them persisting with players who were past their sell by date and with tactics that were flawed.

Let us be clear: India batted very well. By winning first use of the pitch that will surely deteriorate, they have batted when the conditions were at their best and taken full advantage. England could have bowled to their optimum against these batsmen and still conceded 500. It is not always a disgrace to be second best.

But England did not bowl to their optimum. They did not bowl anywhere near their optimum. Indeed, a couple of the seamers - Tim Bresnan and Stuart Broad - bowled as poorly as any England seamer has for many months. Yes, more poorly then at The Oval. There, England lacked bite: here they lacked direction with Bresnan and Broad consistently drifting not just too straight, but down the leg side. And at no stage did Samit Patel look like a Test-class spin bowler. Sometimes he looked much worse.

It is true that England at least slowed the run-rate as India's innings progressed. But that was more the result of a spread field and a painfully slow pitch than a concerted improvement in the bowling. Only James Anderson and Graeme Swann had the control that should be a pre-requisite of a Test bowler.

England also missed their fifth chance in the field. Like the other four, it was not easy. But it was the sort of chance they used to take more often than not and the sort of chance they rarely take now. Alastair Cook said, in the run-up to the tour, that he had never heard of anyone being selected with a view to them being a good fielder. But perhaps they should be, for if England had held Cheteshwar Pujara here, on 8, or Hashim Amla at Lord's and The Oval and Alviro Petersen at Leeds, they might still be No.1 in the world.

 
 
England have been consistently disappointing all year. They continue to drop catches, they continue to lack penetration and they continue to insist they are good players of spin
 

There is a case for concluding that the balance of the England side is wrong. In hindsight, it seems that England should have made room, somehow, for Monty Panesar though, to be fair, it is hard to recall too many people arguing for Panesar's inclusion before the Test started. He is not perfect, clearly, but he offers control and, on such pitches, as good an attacking option as they possess.

Panesar might have eased the burden on Swann, too. Bowling 51 overs in the first innings of the first Test can have done little to ease his on-going issues with his elbow. Remember what Shane Warne's workload in India in 1998 did to his shoulder? England are asking an awful lot of Swann at present.

It may not have been such a tactical error as an error of execution. Some of England's bowling was simply poor. Steven Finn would have played ahead of Bresnan had he been fit and, had Bresnan bowled as he has done in the past, his selection might have been vindicated. But it is a while since he has bowled with the pace that he once did. And for all the talk of faulty speed guns or the lack of importance of pace, it is quite clear that all three of England's seamers have lost pace in the last year and, as a result, lost some of their effectiveness. England may be in denial on the issue, but the facts are thumping them over the head with increased venom.

Bresnan, for example, has played seven Tests since returning to the side after surgery on his elbow. In that time, his 16 wickets have cost 51.12 apiece. And, since June his five wickets have cost an eye-watering 92.40 each. And he has averaged only 18.50 with the bat. Compare that to his figures before his operation: his wickets cost only 23.60 a piece and his batting average was 45.42. He is clearly not the same player.

Broad is more interesting. Only Swann of any bowler in the world has taken more Test wickets than Broad this year. His average in 2012 - 30.20 - is fine and his strike-rate - 60.09 - is fine. There were times, in Sri Lanka and the UAE, when he bowled as well as he ever has. But in his last five Tests, his wickets have cost 48.07 and he had lacked control or pace. He is, like Bresnan, living largely on credit. At some stage very soon they need to deliver.

There is a clear lack of logic in England's persistent use of a nightwatchmen, too. There may be occasions, such as a batsman falling ill, when it is an appropriate to ask a bowler to do a batsman's job. But generally it is an absurd tactic - it is surely a batman's job to see off the bowlers - that merely betrays fear and gifts momentum to the opposition. In this game, it will also leave Swann, a more than respectable batsman, wasted at No.11.

Yet there is a reluctance from the England management to accept any of this. They are persisting with the same faces, the same tactics and the same balance even though it has been shown not to work. It is true that these same players performed superbly in the Ashes and wonderfully against India at home. But that was then and this is now. England need to adapt and to move on.

For it is not as if they have endured one disappointing game. They have been consistently disappointing all year. They continue to drop catches, they continue to lack penetration and they continue to insist, in the face of all evidence, that they are good players of spin. It is time to shut up and show us.

George Dobell is a senior correspondent at ESPNcricinfo

RSS Feeds: George Dobell

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by markatnotts on (November 17, 2012, 10:20 GMT)

rahulcricket007, I can't comment too much on Indian selection policy and use of bowlers by the skipper. But you do raise a good point. Ojha has superb control, this was shown in England for Surrey in 2011. A Stewart in particular speaks very highly of him. I do now as well! That said Ashwin is a good variation to him.

Posted by   on (November 17, 2012, 10:10 GMT)

Where was Ashwin in the series in Australia.. had series figures of 148-18-492-7. P.Ojha has played all o his 16 tests and taken 75 wkts only in India. Why did Ojha not play in Australia.. Hiding...

Posted by himohan007 on (November 17, 2012, 10:01 GMT)

So far in the second inning good batting by England. Cook looks solid but waiting for single wicket that bursts into 3. Hope Ashwin provides it since Ojha is injured now

Posted by rahulcricket007 on (November 17, 2012, 9:51 GMT)

I THINK OJHA IS BETTER THAN ASHWIN . OJHA 'S LINE & LENGTH ARE MUCH BETTER THAN ASHWIN . ASHWIN GAVE 90 RUNS & PICKED ONLY 3 WKTS . WHILE OJHA PICKED 5 WKT IN JUST 45 RUNS . EVEN IN SECOND INNINGD ASHWIN IS GIVING EASY RUNS TO ENGLISH OPENERS . I WONDER WHY OJHA WAS NOT PLAYED IN AUSTRLIA . I M QUITE SURE DHONI ALWAYS FAVOURS AHSWIN OVER OJHA .

Posted by chokkashokka on (November 17, 2012, 9:29 GMT)

practise in Dubai - practising with loud music - lol, three warm up games and what does the english team have to show for it? seems like a waste of time. Now they've got all the spin practise they like. The result in the second test will be the same.

Posted by markatnotts on (November 17, 2012, 9:27 GMT)

Oh dear England, this is still a good batting pitch, I am watching this and we have followed on. Just because the ball turns, doesn't make it difficult. I am afraid we need a national enquiry into how we make good batting pitches look bad when abroad. That said, congrats to Ojha, he bowled beautifully. The only bad luck England had in this latest debacle was Samit's dismissal!

Posted by mav_nitb on (November 17, 2012, 8:54 GMT)

Maybe Flower needs to step out and show the Poms how its done in India...Even Kumble and Bhajji in their prime had trouble getting him out...But seriously this side looks the weakest English side touring India in a long while...not to mention there recenr no.1 status.

Posted by himohan007 on (November 17, 2012, 8:42 GMT)

Yipee England on Follow on... Seriously am I harsh..... Are u kidding................ I am enjoying.......... Its pay back time folks..... Belated Happy Diwali folks....For reference Watch Enthiran(Tamil)/Robot(Hindi) movie....

Posted by aby_prasad on (November 17, 2012, 8:37 GMT)

Mark my words England. If you think this is the problem/scenario that you have, then you are wrong! If Ahmedabad is difficult for you, then Mumbai is going to be a nightmare! I mean it!, mumbai will turn much more and india might play with 3 spinners. Hope you do some homework by scoring in the 2nd innings and playing monty or somebody else/more in mumbai! Having said that, India and England both have a weakness, one on green seaming and other on a normal flat n spinning or a rank turner. I guess both of these teams have to send their players to such countries and get adapted as soon as possible!

Posted by   on (November 17, 2012, 7:59 GMT)

The Aussies are one who have had success in India in recent times because of their pace attack in which bowlers bowled to the stumps, they had a 3rd man in place and the stopped the singles. I refer to the 2004 series in which Gilly was captain

Comments have now been closed for this article

TopTop
Email Feedback Print
Share
E-mail
Feedback
Print
George DobellClose
Tour Results
India v England at Dharamsala - Jan 27, 2013
England won by 7 wickets (with 16 balls remaining)
India v England at Mohali - Jan 23, 2013
India won by 5 wickets (with 15 balls remaining)
India v England at Ranchi - Jan 19, 2013
India won by 7 wickets (with 131 balls remaining)
India v England at Kochi - Jan 15, 2013
India won by 127 runs
India v England at Rajkot - Jan 11, 2013
England won by 9 runs
More results »
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days