Cricketed

Stunning victory for England thanks to Buttler and Woakes but still more questions than answers. A missed chance for Pakistan. Time for Jimmy to say goodbye.

England 219 (Pope 62, Yasir 4/66) and 277/7 (Woakes 84, Buttler 75, Yasir 4/99) beat Pakistan 326 (Masood 156, Broad 3/54) and 169 (Yasir 33, Broad 3/37) by 3 wickets

I was not able to watch all of the first test match, but the bits I saw on days 1-3 did little to encourage me to watch it. I saw the players leave the field for bad light, in natural light that was perfectly adequate when spinners were bowling and the floodlights were on. This madness of bad light needs to be addressed. I saw Joe Root bowling himself before lunch on day 2. I saw a scrappy England with multiple mistakes in the field, including from the beleaguered Jos Buttler. I saw Jofra Archer not bowling at full tilt, James Anderson looking ‘past it’ and Dominic Bess dropping one short every over. It had all the signs of another first game in a series for England. Yes, England won, but it still looked like they were undercooked when the came started.

All that being said, Pakistan looked a good team, well drilled and well supported. When I say well supported, I refer to the backroom staff. However, we know that Old Trafford would have been absolutely ‘buzzing’ in normal conditions with the green and white flags everywhere. Once again, the players were able to raise above the empty stadium and play some good cricket. Shan Masood was solid at the top and made the difference between a 250 score and the eventual 326. Another 50 would have been enough. Yasir Shah evoked memories of Shane Warne in 2005 with runs and 8 wickets. Yet like Warne in 2005 (only in 2005!) Yasir was on the loosing side.

It all changed on the 3rd innings. Michael Holding observed the importance of first innings runs and batting a team out of the game and getting a big score. Masood needed a partner in crime, in the way that Dominic Sibley and Ben Stokes were able to work together in the 2nd test match of the summer against West Indies. With a low 300s score, you always need to find a few runs second time round. We know that test matches can be turned in the 3rd innings (remember Adelaide 2006 with a shudder – and Warne in his more habitual role as a winner). The Asad Shafiq run out was probably a key moment – and the carelessness moved from England to Pakistan.

A target of 277 at Old Trafford ought to have been enough. This pitch was not as good as some that we have seen in Manchester over the years, but the pitches always give bowlers a chance. At 117/5, the bowlers were taking the chance. But we finally saw why Buttler is in the team, and formed a perfect partnership with Woakes. Buttler had a bad game with the gloves, but has been showing more and more consistency with the bat this summer, and really just needs that second century. Woakes has looked unsure which end of the bat to hold though, despite possessing a Lords century. I think the situation gave Woakes some freedom with the bat, and once he was ‘in’ he showed a real ‘Woakes quality’ of calmness. It was a brilliant effort from 2 people who are really well liked in the team – and the game.

Sadly, as Root’s captainly was inept in the first innings, Azhar Ali did make some mistakes in the last dig. Woakes should have been peppered with bouncers when he arrived, and the field should have been much more aggressive. Often ex-players demand ultra-aggressive fields (Holding and Sir Ian Botham would probably be unhappy with less than 9 slips). A ball scoots through extra cover for 4 and people say ‘the bowler does not need to worry about that’. The reality is that setting an aggressive field is a risk when playing with a sub-300 target. But we knew a draw was impossible and once the target was below 50, the field needed to be in. Ali though is a young captain. It cannot be easy being a captain when your country’s prime minister is one of the best all rounders of all time! I hope he gets some time to learn. Misbah-ul-Haq pointed to inexperience as being a factor in the loss – but experience cannot just be picked up in the supermarket.

As ever, it is hard to weigh up England as a team. Yes it was a great win, but if they had played better on days 1 to 3 they would have won the game easily. It is a frustration that we have to endure really bad sessions before we see the brilliance. That means England lose far too many games. However, it is a relief to see some fight. If England cannot avoid defeat in Brisbane next year, it does not need to mean 5-0 or 4-0 as in recent times. Even the captains of the 90s and early noughties (Michael Atherton, Alec Stewart and Nasser Hussain) won one game in away Ashes series, and in 2010/11, England had to fight back from a terrible situation in Brisbane. We need to see more of that ‘fight’ from England – and Buttler has the potential to be a fighter, along with the likes of Sibley and Pope.

The question is what do England do next? The Ben Stokes conundrum goes away now as Stokes has to miss the next 2 games for family reasons. We all wish Stokes and family all the best. Given that Stokes did bowl last week, it seems that England played 5 bowlers to make sure that Stokes did not injure himself further by ‘demanding to bowl’ – in the way that Andrew Flintoff did sometimes. Stokes deserves a little bit of ‘slack’ here though given his unstinting commitment. Dan Lawrence has also left the ‘bubble’ following a bereavement which means we can be fairly certain what top 6 England will put out, with Zak Crawley coming back in at 3 with Root moving down.

I said before the series that you need a longer batting line up against Pakistan and I still maintain that England picked the wrong team for this game. Woakes is realistically a number 8 more than a number 7, and Bess at 9 and Archer at 10 starts to look better. Therefore I would bring Ben Foakes into the team to bat at 7 and keep wicket, taking the gloves away from Buttler, while asking him to nail down a spot at number 6 which is where he has the best record in test matches. With Buttler, it seems that clarity of role is essential, and he understands the role at 6. At 7, he is not sure whether to ‘stick or twist’ – particularly when batting with the tail. Additionally, England will need perfect wicket keeping in India this winter. Looking back, I wonder if Buttler at 6 and Bairstow at 7 was the test match answer all along – but many, including Michael Vaughan, talked Bairstow up as a number 5. At 20/3, his technique let him down, but Bairstow the number 7 created some mayhem. Again – clarity of role. Now though, Foakes is ahead in the line surely? An extra batsman would also make it easier for England to pick Jack Leach over Bess – despite previous heroics, Bess’ batting is superior to Leach. I would keep Bess for now though.

We are back to 1 spot and 2 bowlers again. It pains me to say it, but I would leave out James Anderson. I have always felt that Woakes and Anderson in the same team does not quite work as they both fill the same space in a bowling attack, albeit Anderson with more skill. Woakes has put on a bit of pace now, but I still think that 5 full time bowlers creates confusion unless 1 of the 5 is an allrounder. Personally, I think it is time for Anderson to move aside now. When Graham Gooch retired, he left it too late and in Australia in 1995 was a shadow of his former self. Anderson can go on his own terms, out while still performing well, allowing Broad to follow in a couple of years and allowing England to move forward smoothly. Sir Alastair Cook showed us how to retire back in 2018 – Jimmy should learn from Chef.

Having said all of that, I predict England will simply bring in Crawley for Stokes and Anderson will play on.

Expected England team for Southampton (what I think will happen): Sibley, Burns, Crawley, Root(c), Pope, Buttler(v/c, w/k), Woakes, Bess, Archer, Broad, Anderson

My team for Southampton (what I would do): Sibley, Burns, Crawley, Root(c), Pope, Buttler(v/c), Foakes(w/k), Woakes, Bess, Archer, Broad

England 369 (Pope 91, Roach 4/72) and 226/2 (Burns 90, Holder 1/24) beat West Indies 197 (Holder 46, Broad 6/31) and 129 (Hope 31, Woakes 5/50) by 269 runs and win series 2-1

This series in 2020 was totally different to any international cricket we have seen before, certainly for an England team. What can we learn from it?

1. West Indies are a ‘cracking’ bunch of blokes. For them to come to England has been amazing, but in every interview I have seen they showed courtesy, respect, humour…and just came over as really good people. We really appreciate that they have come. Cricket has a responsibility to make every effort to make sure the West Indies get cricket ‘at home’ this year. And by the way, that also applies to Pakistan who England face next week.
2. England loose far too many games for the talent they have. England ought to have won the series 3-0. Too often, England have a terrible session somewhere that gives away a game. Often it is the first game in a series, as it was in the winter against South Africa, but against India in 2018 it was the 3rd test match and at home against South Africa in 2017 it was the second game. It is a bad habit, and against good sides including Pakistan and Australia, losing the first game in the series ended up being the difference between a drawn series and a won series. England have to address this.
3. West Indies are close to making a transition into a really good team. However, they rely too much on Shannon Gabriel and Kemar Roach. Perhaps Alzarri Joseph and Gabriel should have been rotated in this series as I think Joseph will develop and Gabriel never looked fit. With those bowlers, West Indies can be a handful if the batsman can score 300 in the first innings. The problem is that they cannot consistently do it – they only did it once in this series.
4. England’s new opening pair of Dominic Sibley and Rory Burns looks like it may provide the answer England have needed. One does wonder why Burns was not picked sooner to open with Alastair Cook, as he has been performing for Surrey for years. Burns needed a big score and the only reason he did not get a century in the final game was because he was trying to score quickly. Sibley has been ‘feast or famine’, and that is because once he gets ‘in’ he makes it count, unlike Joe Denly who makes painful 30s and does not go on.
5. West Indies love playing England. Jermaine Blackwood averages 55 batting against England and 24 against everyone else. Roston Chase gets more wickets against England than anyone else. West Indies have always loved beating England! England must stop under estimating them.
6. James Anderson and Stuart Broad are both brilliant bowlers, and at test match level remain well ahead of the rest of the pack. Don’t get me wrong, Jofra Archer, Chris Woakes and Mark Wood are fine bowlers and Archer will develop into one of England’s best. But right now, Broad and Anderson are in another league and the pair can be considered in the same terms as Botham and Willis, Akram and Younis, Walsh and Ambrose….take your pick from the greats.
7. At Old Trafford you win the toss and bat first. If you pick an extra spinner you bat first.. If in doubt, ask former Australian greats Mark Taylor, Steve Waugh and Shane Warne about the 1997 Ashes test match when Taylor batted first in terrible conditions and won by 268 runs. Mind you, with Warne in the team, you bat first too. Just ask Ricky Ponting.
8. Joe Root is growing into the job. It has taken a while, but in South Africa and at Old Trafford, it felt like Root’s team. He played magnificently in the second innings of the last test match – I know he scored a double century in New Zealand but this innings was close to Root at his best. I was critical of the Headingley declaration in 2017 which, in my view, threw away a game that England did not need to win. Here, England did need to win but he got all his declarations exactly right. He is at his best when he can be aggressive.
9. Balancing team selection for the short and long term is tricky – particularly in lockdown. England got it wrong at Southampton by leaving out Broad. West Indies got it wrong at Old Trafford by not resting Gabriel and then played a spinner and bowled first. The lesson is surely that you pick your best team at the start of a series, but if in doubt that someone is fit, rest them.
10. Both teams deserve a pat on the back for professionalism. Playing in front of an empty stadium was surely odd, but the cricket was a good standard and was compelling viewing. We want the crowd back – but the teams showed that good cricket can be put on behind closed doors. I suspect the doors will have to be closed for a while yet after today’s announcements.

For England, we would like to have learned a couple more things, and they will hope to work out a few more things in the remaining test matches this summer. Joe Denly again has not done enough to justify his place. Zak Crawley has done better but has not quite done enough to ensure selection, however he should be restored to the number 3 slot and get a sustained run in that position now. Whether Ben Stokes bowls or not, England cannot get away with just 6 batsman against Pakistan so Jos Buttler will go back to 7 – and I am not sure it suits him at 7 – his record at 6 is better. However, at 6 he had a chance to cement his place, but did not quite take it. He will keep his place, but needs a hundred.

As for the bowlers? We knew England had strong options, but it would be good to see match changing performances from Woakes, Archer and Wood. Archer was close at Southampton and Woakes followed on from Broad’s magic and Wood was not at his best. Team selection does not get any easier in a biosecure bubble.

Day 1: England 258/4 – Pope 91*, Burns 57, Buttler 56*, Roach 2/56

The most important thing about this test match is the focus on The Ruth Strauss Foundation – #RedforRuth. Sir Andrew Strauss spoke perfectly about the challenges he has faced in recent years and the work of the foundation. I would ask anyone reading this to take a look at the Foundation or watch the video. It was Ian Bishop on commentary who said that he could not begin to imagine what Strauss has been through. I would not try to do it justice either – other than to say that Strauss and his family deserve so much love and respect.

The cricket seems secondary, but it was a good day of cricket. By the end of the day England were moving ahead but the first two sessions were tight. Both sides made interesting selections at the start of the day.

West Indies selection of Rahkeem Cornwall made some sense initially, but combined with bowling first seems surprising. However, the toss was tricky given the (unusual?) Manchester weather today and the forecast. I suspect Joe Root will be happy to have not had to make the choice. Undoubtedly, questions will be asked about Cornwall’s build, but at the end of day all that will matter will be his performances. Cornwall bowled ok and is clearly a sharp slip catcher – highlighted by the catch taken to dismiss Rory Burns. I think questions also have to be asked about the fitness of Shannon Gabriel. Gabriel seems to keep bowling, but I am not sure it is acceptable for him to be on and off the field so much. However, when he does bowl, it is generally quick. West Indies best bowler has has been Kemar Roach, who has deserved more luck in the series.

England always had a tricky call to make when it became clear that Ben Stokes was not fully fit. The problem with players like Stokes is that they want to do everything – so England had to pick a bowling attack that could cope without Stokes, but also ensure Stokes does not feel forced to bowl when not fit. This was sometimes a problem when managing Andrew Flintoff. In the end, the option England took was to drop a batsman. It is not the choice I would have made, and Zak Crawley can feel very unlucky. However, in the end I quite like the selection in the context of the must win game that might well be rain shortened. Going in with Jos Buttler batting at 6 carries some risk, but it is also an aggressive move – and this England team are best when playing positive cricket. I also would not play Chris Woakes and James Anderson in the same team too often and would have selected Sam Curran. However, Woakes is the stronger batting option at number 7.

Once play started, England lost Dominic Sibley early thanks to some clever bowling by Roach. Root was starting to find some form when he needlessly ran himself out. It was a fine piece of fielding by Roston Chase, but runs like that are not sensible on day 1. Stokes was undone by a slight lack of footwork and some swing. Burns batted well but played a poor shot on 57 and missed the chance to cement his place in the team with a century. Burns has a rather Root-like tendency to fall between 50 and 100 and a definite problem with Chase who keeps getting him out. However, he does look like a good option at the top of the order though I fear for his technique in Australia. With Crawley around and Dan Lawrence, Burns’ place is not yet certain.

From then on England were in control. Ollie Pope was lucky to escape a top edged pull and also should have been run out early on. Pope has all the makings of a class player for England in all formats, though in test cricket might need to tighten up when driving through the off side. He played well and deserves a 100 tomorrow. After his performance in South Africa, Pope was assured of his spot. The same cannot be said of Jos Buttler, though 40 in the last game would have got him a few more games. Today he played extremely well and looked just the player that England keep looking for when selecting him. He looked every inch a test match player. If Buttler could get up to three figures, England will have enough runs and he will be sure of a place for a while.

With Buttler, England really do have a conundrum. People have considered that Buttler is suited to the Adam Gilchrist role. When one looks at Gilchrist’s record, it is incredible that he so often made runs at 7 with no recognised allrounders to follow. Buttler though has played better at 6 than 7. I think Buttler needs to understand his role. In that World Cup Final batting with Stokes, his role was clear. At number 7 in test matches, I think Buttler has struggled to know how to play. At 6, Buttler knows he can play a proper innings. I think batting with a proactive player like Pope helps too. When both Buttler and Jonny Bairstow have played in the same team, England tended to put Buttler at 7 and Bairstow at 5. However, I wonder now if this was the wrong way around. Bairstow was much more successful at 7 and Buttler has played well at 6. However, if Buttler is going to keep wicket, it is hard to find a way for him to bat regularly at 6 – unless Root bats at 3. Why such small differences of position seem to impact England batsman so much is a mystery. However, England need to look at how they have handled Crawley who soon will have batted in every spot in the top 6. Clarity of role is clearly something England players need.

Day 2 will almost certainly be rain curtailed at some point, but will be crucial. If England can push up to 350 they will have a strong position. However, with such a long tail England could fall short of 300 if West Indies bowl well tomorrow. Experience tells us that in England, test matches where the first innings score is around 300 are generally exciting games. Lets hope that is the case in this game.

2nd Test Match: England win by 113 runs – Series tied at 1-1

Early on day 5, Ben Stokes hit a massive 6 into the empty seats at the biosecure Old Trafford. He would end up plundering 78. That was when I wondered if England were going to pull off a victory. On Sunday afternoon, I could not see an England win being possible until Stokes’ endless short pitched bowling finally removed Kraigg Brathwaite for 75. None of this was possible without Stokes, who scored 176 in the first innings. Did I mention Ben Stokes?

On day 5 at Old Trafford Joe Root and his team did almost everything perfectly. The only blemish was the failure to review when Shamarh Brooks was given not out having clearly edged the ball behind (and this was another mistake by umpire Richard Illingworth). Over the 4 days (with one day washed out) England played the game that Root has often talked about:

1. Build a good first innings total around solid batting by the top order. Generally, a 400+ score is not a losing score.
2. Attack with the ball and if this does not work immediately, apply pressure over a long period by finding a way to keep the scoring rate down.
3. Later in the game allow the strokemakers to attack and score quick runs meaning that you have enough time to take 20 wickets in the game.

Nothing remarkable in that game plan, but it is hard to think of another example of a single player having such an impact on a game in so many different ways. You could talk about Headingley in 1981 – but of course Sir Ian Botham played aggressively throughout. Perhaps in 2005 at Edgbaston Andrew Flintoff had an even greater impact on the game (debatable) but again the style was largely aggressive. We already know that Stokes is adaptable. Let us not forget that at Headingley in 2019 Stokes finished day 3 having scored on 2 off 50 balls. In the first innings here he batted for over 300 balls with a strike rate just under 50, before he batted for 57 in the second innings at a strike rate of 136. I know that by now, we should be used to the exploits of Ben Stokes, but this was another astonishing performance.

Only 5 times in history has a player taken 3 or more wickets and scored 250+ runs. Ben stokes is now one of them.

Stokes would say this was a team performance – and he would be right. He was clearly well supported, most notably by Dominic Sibley and Stuart Broad, though others also made important contributions. Without Sibley’s 120, England did not win this game, simple as that, and I hope the ludicrous criticism of his strike rate now goes away. Broad ripped through the West Indies late on day 4 which was vital. However, Stokes just underpins the whole game.

I think we need to give Root some credit as well. I have to admit that I would not have opened up the second innings with Stokes and Jos Buttler – I thought that was bound to fail. Some felt he should have declared earlier on day 5, though I thought he got it just right. I was very critical of Root in 2017, when he clearly declared too early. However, he has not let that game impact his decision making, and we did not see a repeat of Sir Andrew Strauss declaring too late in 2009 in the West Indies.

This was a lucky escape for England, who needed the win. If they had gone into the final game of the series in a situation where they could not win the series, this would have been viewed as a failure. As a Manchester local, it pains me to say it, but the Manchester weather also was against England from the start – though once again Old Trafford came up with a great pitch. But England have dodged a bullet. This failure to win the first game of a series is a real problem which nearly cost England the series here.

England now need to win again and keep that strong record against West Indies in England – were England have not lost a series since 1988.

My team for the third test match – but with a ‘get out’ clause between Sam Curran and Jofra Archer

Burns, Sibley, Crawley, Root (c), Stokes (v/c), Pope, Buttler (w/c), Bess, Curran/Archer, Broad, Anderson

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.

England v West Indies 2nd test match: 11:00 on 16th July at Old Trafford

The return of test match cricket was a success. The bio-secure environment worked and can be copied elsewhere. It was not perfect, and the total silence that greeted runs and wickets took some getting used to. The silence reminded me of silence at Lords in 1981 when Sir Ian Botham returned to the Pavilion. At Southampton, both teams deserve a great deal of credit for being competitive from ball one – despite the silence and limited preparation. We now know that test matches behind closed doors can work, and that is a huge relief to all of us in need of cricket to watch.

In the first test match we saw a good game with an exciting last day, and established that ‘this can work’. However, England made some poor decisions and missed chances. West Indies were workmanlike, consistent and well led. Only Shai Hope and John Campbell failed to make a significant contribution. West Indies played a style of cricket that took advantage of England’s mistakes. West Indies showed that they can be a high quality team and deserved to win, but England were to some degree responsible for their own downfall. At 1-0 down with 2 to go, England cannot afford to underestimate the opposition or make mistakes. The catches must be taken, but perhaps even more crucially, some of the 20+ scores need to become centuries – and Joe Root needs to take a lead on this and set the example.

Maybe England should consider whether playing matches with one eye on series months away in a different country is an appropriate thing to do. Or indeed a respectful thing to do to worthy opponents.

— Mike Selvey #StandWithUkraine (@selvecricket) July 12, 2020

It starts with selection though. After the first test match, Mike Selvey tweeted that England should focus on the opposition in front of them, not the opposition they face in 18 months time (he went on to make some good clarifications in later tweets). The requirement to build a team for the Ashes is clear, but if that results in confused decision making that undervalues the immediate opposition, it will do more harm than good. West Indies are a dangerous team to underestimate, and the decision to rest Jimmy Anderson and Stuart Broad in 2012 at Edgebaston led to a second string attack being punished by, of all people, Tino Best in a memorable 95. Selvey is right – England must pick the best team for today. That does not mean we ignore the future, nor does it mean that England cannot pick different teams for different games. It does mean that England have a clarity of selection, and flexibility to make changes.

Today England have announced 13 players for the second test match starting, and it is an interesting squad. I had expected that England would persist with Joe Denly at the expense of Zak Crawley. This would have been the wrong decision so I was pleased to see England announce that Crawley will bat at number 3. After the performances of both Denly and Crawley at Southampton, only one decision was sensible. One could argue that if England are dropping Denly they should also drop Jos Buttler, but I think it is reasonable for Buttler to be given until the end of the series. However, Buttler cannot be allowed to play as he is doing for the rest of the summer. With Buttler, it seems that confidence is more of an issue than perhaps he would like to admit, and England must be careful not to damage Buttler’s one day game in pursuit of the test match Buttler.

The bowling raises an eyebrow. England have ‘rested’ both Anderson and Mark Wood. One assumes that Broad and Chris Woakes will play, though Sam Curran will never be far away. One wonders if the decision about which bowlers would play in which games was made before the series started, because it does seem some odd decisions are being made – resting two bowlers at once creates a totally different attack. Whilst Anderson and Wood need to be looked after, it is Jofra Archer that needs to be looked after the most, as he bowled the most overs of the 3 at Southampton and is most likely to impact an Ashes tour (Anderson should not go to Australia and Wood’s impact is not as consistent as Archer’s). Ironically, Old Trafford would usually be the place for Wood to succeed – and is of course Anderson’s home ground. Broad ought to have played at Southampton (instead of Wood), and perhaps England needed to make a late change to the plan when conditions changed.

Talking about flexibility, England need to make sure they are flexible when the coin is tossed. Ben Stokes defended his decision to bat first, arguing that events of the last day justified it. However, the reason England lost the game is because they conceded a 100 run lead on first innings. When it was dark and damp on day 1 after a long rain delay, it was the time to bowl – whatever the preconceived plan was.

For West Indies, it will be a case of ‘more of the same’ and I am sure Hope and Campbell will keep places, though a full time spiner would be useful at Old Trafford, bringing Rahkeem Cornwall into the picture. The question will be if Shannon Gabriel can get through the series – and if he does, England will struggle to win 2 games.

My team:

Burns, Sibley, Crawley, Root (c), Stokes (v/c), Pope, Buttler (w/c), Woakes, Bess, Archer, Broad

Day 4: England 284/8 – Archer 5, Wood 1, Gabriel 3/62

For England, Day 4 must be considered a missed opportunity. Whilst West Indies again bowled well, the top order scores of 42, 50, 29, 76 and 46 show a failure to capitalise. Someone in the top 5 needed a century, as it was always likely that wickets would fall in a hurry once a breakthrough came. Burns and Denly contrived to gift their wickets, Crawley was a slightly soft dismissal and Sibley appeared to lose concentration. Twice. For Stokes, it is too scores in the forties and 2 below par dismissals – but credit to the bowlers for putting the ball in the right place often.

The West Indies key tactic has been about keeping control of the game. At no point did the scoring rate get remotely out of control. With the exception of Shannon Gabriel, all the West Indies bowlers had economy rates well under 3, and Gabriel took 3 wickets. For a while, England seemed to be picking things up when Crawley and Stokes were batting – but Crawley had the higher strike rate of the two which was still below 60. It means when that wicket came, England were still not far ahead. They went on to lose 5 late wickets cheaply late in the day. The West Indies discipline has kept them well ahead of the game and they should beat England comfortably.

What are England to do? Well, for now, they must focus on trying to get as near to a 200 lead as possible. The bowlers still have a chance – with bat and ball – to show they were the right selections. When England bowl, they must be ‘on the money’ from the first over, and will need to have West Indies 30/3 and shift the limpet-like Kraigg Brathwaite to have a chance of an unlikely victory. If Brathwaite digs in, as he often does against England, West Indies will cruise to any sub 250 target. Looking ahead to Old Trafford, it is a shame that none of the top 4 have really grabbed their position in this game, but it would seem extremely odd if Denly plays at Crawley’s expense to accommodate Joe Root.

One other talking point is the Gabriel no ball. Sir Ian Botham bowled famously few no balls, and he just kept back from the line. I think no balls should be minimised and therefore the penalty for no balls should be harsh. I also think that it would be easier to have a policy of ‘if in doubt, call it a no ball’, rather than the current policy which is the other way round. This would speed the game up as well. Of course, in the end, it made little difference to the day.

Time of writing: Day 3 – 12:20 – West Indies 108/2 – Brathwaite 50, Brooks 5, Bess 1/11

Day 2 was back to the same old England. At 35/1, England needed to be looking at 300. They barely made 200. West Indies bowled well, but the England batting looked weak and nobody scored a 50. We kept talking about how you cannot judge a pitch until both sides have batted and bowled on it – but West Indies closed just 1 wicket down and looked strong.

England seem to struggle with the pace of batting. Back in 2010, the likes of Jonathan Trott and Alistair Cook were happy to dig in and bat and bat. They did not score quickly, though Trott did not let bad balls go to often. When Burns and Denly were batting, it all looked ok but runs were not coming. Ben Stokes and Jos Buttler batted sensibly but Stokes played a poor shot and Buttler got a good ball. Dom Bess saved the day with the bat, and has just got a wicket. England need to find the balance of patience and aggression as they did in South Africa.

However, South Africa’s bowling in January is not up to the quality of what we are now seeing from West Indies. West Indies have a really good bowling attack in this game and have responded well to the empty grounds. In the face of it, it seems that Jason Holder should not be taking 6 wickets too often, but as part of a 4 man pace attack, he is extremely handy. It was a team bowling effort – even if the bowlers were shared between 2 bowlers only.

At the moment, Holder is well ahead in the battle with Ben Stokes – including in the context of DRS reviews. At the moment, Holder has made good decisions – including with regards to DRS. At the moment, Stokes made a poor decision to bat first – it made no sense in such murky conditions. At the moment England made a poor decision to drop Stuart Broad – this pitch looks perfect for Broad.

It can all change in a flash of course – and England really need it to. Jimmy Anderson, Jofra Archer and Mark Wood can show that England’s selection was good – and Bess already is well on his way to doing so.

One other talking point from this test match. The on field umpiring has not been good at all. Richard Illingworth and Richard Kettleborough want to be very grateful for the excellent third umpiring we have seen from Michael Gough – and thank goodness West Indies had not run out of reviews a la Tim Paine. We must remember that this lockdown situation is as hard for umpires as it is for players. These are proven good umpires and are absolutely full of integrity. However, any suggestion that we do not need neutral umpires has been dismissed already in these game. But I think the ICC need to reconsider if all 3 umpires need to be neutral.

England 35/1 – Burns 20, Denly 14, Gabriel 1/19

In many ways, the cricket was an anticlimax. But in a sense, it was reassuring to begin the season with delays due to rain and bad light. That was just so typical, especially after the dry June. Not being at the ground it is hard to know, but on television we saw the pictures of a covered pitch with no rain currently falling. Later, we saw the ridiculous spectacle of an early finish due to bad light – with flood lights. This has been going on for a few years now, but going off for bad light – with flood lights beaming – does not look good. If today had been a One Day fixture, we would have seen more overs. If Test Matches are to survive, the ICC just have to sort this out.

The cricket we did see was good, solid test match cricket. I really rate Shannon Gabriel as a bowler and he easily could have had more wickets then he did. The wicket he did get made Dom Sibley look slightly foolish, but was a result of the ball before when he beat the bat with a little bit of away movement. We cannot be critical of Sibley – sometimes openers do get out to good bowling, but he did make a misjudgement. Denly was fortunate, but he can resume his innings tomorrow – he needs a score, but hopefully he can also use up a lot of balls. Burns also needs to re-establish himself, but after an early LBW scare – saved by ‘Umpire’s Call’ – looked solid. Both batsman need to dig in tomorrow as the West Indies bowling attack is strong – their stats over the last 2 years show real consistency and the worst thing for England would be Stokes coming to the crease before England post 50.

Away from cricket and weather, the day will be memorable for the coverage. It is great to see Test Matches back on the BBC – just highlights of course, but the music evokes memories of those voices from yesteryear (Benaud and Laker mainly). The BBC have made a good (re)start. However, Sky chose to focus on #BlackLivesMatter. Hearing Michael Holding and Ebony Rainford-Brent talking about their experiences of racism was chilling. Both were emotional, both were strong, both were positive about the future. The players were united. Cricket owes it to them, and many others, to make sure that racism in cricket is stamped out.