Day 1: England 207/3 – Sibley 86*, Stokes 59*, Chase 2/53
Jofra Archer provided today’s talking point, without being in the team. He was removed from the team at the eleventh hour after he chose to disregard the rules and return to his home in Brighton before heading to Manchester. Google tells me that the Ageas Bowl to Old Trafford is 227 miles (I have done Southampton to Stockport many times and it is quite a nice drive traffic pending). Inject Brighton into the mix and it goes to 320 miles and adds the M25 to the collection of motorways needed. I question the acceptability of this behaviour in normal circumstances, let alone now. It plays into a bizarre narrative of political figures, such as Dominic Cummings amongst other senior political figures globally who have considered themselves above the rules. Carlos Brathwaite spoke of his disappointment on Test Match Special, but said that Archer’s transgression was relatively minor. I do not agree and, as Ashley Giles outlined in interview, the consequences of these actions could have been the end of the cricket season. Brathwaite also played down the role of Archer as a role model. Again, I have to disagree. These players are watched by millions of people of all ages. Like with the politicians, the rules have to be seen to apply to all – even to England’s best bowler.
I wrote last night that cricket in a bio-secure bubble has been shown it can work. Today we were reminded that one foolish action, and Archer’s action was foolish, can bring it all crashing down. Covid-19 is like that. A single mistake can result in an infection. Fortunately for the ECB, the season goes on. One wonders why the players are driving around in cars and not travelling by coach. Failing that, one wonders why nobody noticed that not all the players arrived at Old Trafford at the same time. After the Stokes incident in 2017, I wondered if the players should be more tightly controlled. However, I believe that personal accountability is key to life, both on and off the cricket field. My feeling is that in the public eye you need to be more careful, not less. Players are responsible for their own actions and Archer will now suffer the consequences. I will not criticise the ECB for allowing personal accountability, but perhaps the education on these issues needs to be clearer. And I suspect a coach is now being procured for the next journey to Southampton. As for Archer, he cannot automatically return for the third test match, and nor should youngsters like Sam Curran or Ollie Robinson sit behind Archer in the queue. Archer will have to earn his place in the team again – and he will undoubtedly do so.
A final note on the subject. Brathwaite was not happy with the way Archer was vilified for his actions. Unfortunately, with the image that Archer cultivates, he will have to accept the criticism alongside the adulation. However, now we move on. Archer will have to endure missing the remainder of the series against West Indies. Giles made it clear that an employment disciplinary process will invoke. Other than that, no sanction is needed. A mistake was made, a foolish one. But we all make mistakes. What matters the most is what we learn from them.
Eventually we were able to focus on the action, and England have had a good day, despite working extremely hard to turn Roston Chase into Shane Warne. Burns and Crawley both perished to Chase, but really both should not have done so. Burns missed a straight ball and Crawley pushed the ball into Jason Holder’s waiting hands. Joe Root looked ‘rusty’ and played a poor shot. Mike Atherton said on commentary that as a ‘glass half empty’ opener, he would have been expecting that trap – the wide ball to drive at. But after so many months away from the game, and bot even being able to play in the intersquad game, I think we can cut Root some slack. He could do with a century or two this summer though.
I was surprised to hear some criticism of Dominic Sibley by Ebony Rainford-Brent though. He clearly needs to improve some aspects of his game (who doesn’t?) but you cannot argue with his record so far at the highest level. As Nasser Hussain pointed out, also on Sky, he needs to find a way to deal with spin. Without Stokes’ proactive approach to the spin, perhaps Sibley would have ground himself into a mess. For me though, the only time Sibley got into trouble was when he felt under pressure to score, and some of this pressure came from Stokes, who was frustrated. However, once Stokes settled down, they formed a strong partnership. It is a reminder that 2 people can work together in totally different ways and be effective. Sibley needs to ensure he does not get totally stuck, but other than that change nothing. His approach of ‘grinding the bowlers down’ will make him popular with the middle order, not to mention the bowlers. We have been crying out for a Geoffrey Boycott / Atherton / Alastair Cook opener for years and we must not criticise him in the way that Nick Compton was criticised for slow scoring. Indeed, Sibley is the first England opener since Cook to score 50s in consecutive games.
It was not such a good day for West Indies, though again they never lost control. One hopes that they will be able to get Shannon Gabriel through the game. Playing him was a risk, but an understandable one. However, it will increase the other bowlers workload. Chase bowled accurately and Holder could easily have had a few wickets. Sky made a great deal of the fact that Kemar Roach not taken a wicket for ages, but while maintaining an economy rate of 1.85 he does not need to worry – his time will come. He is part of an overall attack, and by bowling so tightly, makes a great contribution.
England now have to take the opportunity. They should get 400 here, but anything less than 300 is a total failure.
Finally, another complaint about the amount of time taken to get the game started. For an hour we saw a rain free ground with no cricket happening. Then the players came out for an hour before going back into lunch. It meant that by 2PM we had only seen an hour of play. Yes conditions have to be safe, but test match cricket has to deal better with rain delays. Either play could have started at 12, or if that was really not safe (unlikely) then lunch should have been taken at 11:45 to allow play to start at 12. Tea could be taken early or an extra break slotted into the session (2 twenty minute breaks as opposed to a 40 minute and a 20 minute break). We have to get flexible, or else test match cricket will die.
Cricketed 