The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

Lessons to be learned for England after MCG drubbing

17th February, 2015
Advertisement
Eoin Morgan and his men have a shot to win the Twenty20 World Cup. (AFP PHOTO/PAUL ELLIS)
Expert
17th February, 2015
45
1579 Reads

When I finally managed to convince my kids to turn off children’s TV and let their dad have a quick look at the cricket score on Saturday morning, Australia had just lost the wicket of George Bailey.

The score read 5-230 in the 39th over and presented a scenario where the batting side could, if a couple more wickets fell, scratch their way to around 280 or power on to a far more commanding total.

Unfortunately for those of a blue rather than yellow persuasion it was the latter as England’s death bowling, contributing healthily to the former in a cricketing sense, once again proved to be way below the required standard.

Being handed the final overs is a poisoned chalice at the best of times with harder balls and harsher fielding restrictions, but serving up length balls at an inviting pace is not a recipe for sustained success.

However, as tardy as the last 10 overs were, England didn’t help themselves by choosing to field first.

This was an admission, unwitting or otherwise, that they didn’t really, and I don’t mean outwardly but deep down, believe they could win the game. If you don’t think you can defend a score or post one that’s competitive enough then you’re in trouble. To hand over an immediate advantage when every sign points to batting first was crackers.

Whatever level of the game you play at, be it in the local park or on the grandest stage, chasing a significant total is more demanding than setting one and I’ve yet to see any evidence to the contrary.

The conditions, as well as the opposition, have to be played to a certain extent, and Eoin Morgan’s call at the toss allowed Australia an unnecessary leg up.

Advertisement

That said, there’s being given the opportunity of an advantage and there’s ruthlessly grasping one, and while criticising England is all too easy, praise should be awarded to the hosts’ batting line-up.

Aaron Finch was excellent, Bailey very good (I’d still pick Michael Clarke in his place), Glenn Maxwell, with a bit of thought, was devastating and both Mitchell Marsh and Brad Haddin effective in the closing stages.

Obviously it was the performance of Finch that caught the eye and if their vanquished opponents could take anything from the contest it was they’re missing a trick at the top of the order.

As a former international bowler said to me a couple of weeks ago, “Finch isn’t technically great but he can hit a perfectly good length ball, at any stage of the innings, out of the ground”.

That, in a nutshell, is modern-day limited overs batting and it is an element that England, for all their tinkering and theorising, haven’t quite grasped. That they have Alex Hales, who isn’t inferior to Finch in any aspect bar ODI experience, sat on the sidelines only adds to the feeling that the wood can’t be seen for the trees.

Even given the manner of the defeat and the insipid nature of the performance – the increasingly impressive James Taylor aside – I don’t subscribe to the ‘change the lot of them’ theory that is the first port of call for many in the wake of a reverse.

If they had their way, Morgan et al would be put up against a wall and shot, without a moment’s consideration of the fact that they are still England’s best players.

Advertisement

Do England have a better new-ball bowler than Jimmy Anderson? A more accomplished keeper-batsman than Jos Buttler? A more savvy middle-order man than Joe Root? A cannier spinner than Moeen Ali? Etcetera, etcetera. No, to all of them.

Should they beat New Zealand later this week they’ll be the best thing since sliced bread again – perspective is rarely the possession of an English sports fan.

As for the tournament as a whole, if nothing else it has proven a few things. Firstly, bat is most definitely king; secondly, ODI cricket isn’t quite at death’s door; thirdly, West Indies are barely even a shadow of their former selves; and fourthly, all the jibes about umpires not knowing the rules are justified!

close