ECB - What have you done?

I have been away for the past week sampling the delights of camping across various rain stricken sites in England and Wales, so you’ll hopefully forgive me for this rather late piece on the Kevin Pietersen retirement debacle. I must also apologise for another piece on the inventor of the switch-hit, alas it seems noteworthy occurrences and Mr Pietersen come very much as a package. I’m a huge fan of KP, and have made no bones about it in past articles, so you can only imagine my horror when after minutes twiddling thumbs as my ancient iPhone 3 strove heroically to gain a modicum of reception I was given the news by my trusty ESPNcricinfo app.

Twenty20 will miss the switch hit..

The One Day International retirement in itself wasn’t the cause of the horror. I saw that one coming, albeit perhaps twelve months or so down the line. Pietersen isn’t the first English cricketer to make noises suggesting that all is not well with the players when it comes to the deluge of 50 over cricket pencilled in to their calendars. The likes of Graeme Swann, another key performer across all three formats of the game, have mumbled their misgivings, and it is easy to sympathise given the vast amount of time spent away from their young families each year as they don the three lions in all corners of the world. It was the seemingly desperate handling of the situation by the ECB that provided the greatest cause for concern, not to mention blindingly obvious double standards.

The ECB inform us that their strategies across the two limited overs formats are closely aligned, and hence require the same personnel to be available for both. Despite being an utterly ludicrous statement, given that the difference between ODI’s and Twenty20 cricket is every bit as vast as the difference between Test cricket and ODI’s, do the ECB believe we have forgotten that, up until last year’s world cup, Andrew Strauss played ODI cricket despite having already announced his retirement from Twenty20 cricket?  Likewise, England’s ODI strategy is very much based around the solidarity of Alastair Cook and Jonathan Trott at the top of their batting order, yet neither name features on England’s Twenty20 teamsheet. Players of such a style can find success in ODI cricket, but an ability to nudge the singles fetches little reward in the shortest format. Why, then, must Pietersen be available for both or none?

Have the ECB forgotten that Pietersen remains the number one ranked batsman in the world in Twenty20 cricket? Have they also, in their hour of lunacy, overlooked the fact that shorn of Pietersen (man of the tournament as England triumphed four years ago, lest we forget) England hold two hopes, slim and none, of retaining their world Twenty20 crown in Sri Lanka later this year? Oh, and in the words of boxing eccentric Don King, “slim’s outta town.” Without Pietersen, England’s side begins to look all too ordinary.

Pietersen retiring from ODI’s isn’t ideal - losing a world class player and your best batsman in each and every format never is - but the needs of the individual need to be considered. The ECB have shown appalling man management in issuing their abrupt ultimatum. The question of whether they would have acted similarly had it been another member of the side is a delicate one, but perhaps worth asking. Tensions do, after all, run high where the ECB and Kevin Pietersen are concerned. After a series of run-ins commencing with the captaincy and Peter Moores saga, through to a brace of confrontations over Pietersen’s use of the social networking site Twitter (he aimed a barb at the ECB after being dropped from the Twenty20 team to face Pakistan in 2010, and more recently was hauled over the coals for a slur against Sky commentator Nick Knight), and now a falling out over Pietersen’s participation in Twenty20 cricket after announcing his retirement from ODI cricket it would be of little surprise if the ECB were reaching the end of their tether as far as any dealings with the middle order batsman go.

What must be remembered, though, is that Pietersen has often been in the right throughout the aforementioned confrontations. Pietersen saw first-hand that Moores was not the right man to lead England forward, taking a risk that ultimately cost him his position as captain in order to voice his concerns. Since that moment England have enjoyed unparalleled success in the Test arena. Likewise, use of social networking sites is a touchy subject amongst many in the England camp, depending on who you speak to, and whilst players would perhaps do well to censor some of their innermost thoughts on such public platforms it would be wrong to discourage its use, within limits. Pietersen may yet also be in the right with regard to his ODI retirement. The ODI schedule for England’s cricketers, indeed worldwide, is hugely excessive. As players age their priorities will change, and it appears that Pietersen’s have now done so as he approaches his 32^nd birthday. As his team-mate Jonathan Trott says, it is of little surprise.

The worry now, of course, is how the ECB will deal with any future lulls in Pietersen’s Test form. Previously, with England’s tour of the UAE being a prime example, Pietersen was able to regain form after an abject Test series in the subsequent ODI series, where he scored back to back centuries. He will no longer have such a luxury. Could the forthcoming series against South Africa be Pietersen’s last for England? Given how the ECB have treated their premier batsman in this latest episode it would come as little surprise, should Pietersen fail to perform against the country of his birth.

England fans will hope that the differences can be reconciled between Pietersen and the ECB. After all, England needs Pietersen at both Test and Twenty20 level. It is disappointing to see one of England’s greatest middle order batsmen handed such an ultimatum but, regardless of the fallout, let us hope that it doesn’t contribute toward curtailing an already magnificent Test career. It isn’t just England that needs KP, it is the sport of cricket and the entertainment business that does, too.

County Cricket: Where Should Loyalties Lie?

With news reaching the cricketing world that batsman Alviro Petersen will be joining Essex as their overseas player for the first half of the 2012 County Championship season, it is the second such announcement of late that I must admit to finding slightly baffling. The other announcement, of course, was that all-rounder Vernon Philander would be linking up with Somerset for a similar time period.

The problem with this? Petersen and Philander are both South African, and which country is visiting England this summer in what should be a crucial top of the rankings clash? That’s right, South Africa.

Home advantage, something which has become exceedingly more pronounced during the last twelve months, is undoubtedly the trump card that many a host relies upon. It may only be a sphere of cork and leather, but the cricket ball is a rather elaborate character with a tendency to act and behave in a vastly different manner dependent upon the part of the globe it happens to be visiting. To the touring side, a series can be lost before the necessary adjustments to individual techniques can be applied. England’s horror tour to the UAE of late provides rather pertinent evidence of that.

Vernon Philander - Impressive.

Alviro Petersen is of course no stranger to English conditions, having completed a past spell at Glamorgan, so in all likelihood anything that he was to learn about English conditions will already be firmly embedded. Vernon Philander, on the other hand, has had a great deal less experience. A rather unsuccessful spell with Middlesex will be Philander's abiding memory of England, and one has to question whether he should be given an opportunity to erase that.

A rookie by international standards, Philander has made a mere four Test appearances; and what an entrance in to international cricket it has been. Notching up four 5 wicket hauls and one 10 wicket haul in eight bowling innings has seen Philander average just 13.23 with the ball, somehow outperforming his habitually peerless team-mate Dale Steyn in the process. One would expect Philander’s average with the ball to rise in time, but it has been a heck of a start.

Herein lies my grievance. Philander, it would seem, is going to prove an incredibly dangerous adversary for English batsmen this summer. Combining metronomic accuracy with prodigious lateral movement, the 26 year old possesses the ideal attributes required to wreak havoc in the swing friendly conditions of England.

The problem goes beyond that, though. It may well seem that Philander is going to turn up and be at his devastating best right from the first ball he bowls, and indeed he might well have done, but whilst England is notorious for its assistance of swing bowling, it can be equally difficult for a bowler to master and control that same prodigious movement. Given only a warm-up match or two prior to being plunged straight in to the Test series could have forced Philander to ‘learn on the job’, so to speak, whereas there is no doubt that half a season of playing in such conditions for Somerset beforehand should bring him up to speed nicely.

Somerset are well within their rights to sign an overseas cricketer that will be lining up against England later in the summer, of course. With financial gain in the English domestic game remaining somewhat thin on the ground it is difficult to begrudge a county placing internal interests atop their priority list.

We are often told, though, that county cricket exists almost as a breeding and training barracks to supply the front lines; in this case England. Many at the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) will tell you so, as will numerous journalists and supporters of the game alike.

Where then should loyalties lie? Should we expect counties to forego opportunities of financial growth purely to gratify England’s requirements? And, if that is indeed the expectation of counties, will the quality of player produced by those counties reduce in time through a lack of capital to invest in the nurturing of youngsters and facilities in which to do so?

Perhaps it is time for the ECB to make clear their stance with regard to the English domestic system, because there is no doubt that at present the signings of the Petersen’s and Philander’s of this world prior to a huge home series with their home nation is doing England few favours. English counties rely upon the ECB to maximise their money making opportunities through innovation and efficient scheduling, yet the current trend of keeping their friends close, but their enemies closer, bares a hint of biting the hand that feeds them.

Perhaps I am overplaying the significance of such developments, but I certainly wouldn’t argue if the ECB were to introduce a blanket ban upon English counties signing overseas players that were due to tour England that same year. From this author’s point of view, affording upcoming adversaries an opportunity to fully acclimatise just isn’t cricket.

Why is the 'doosra' a wrong'un for English off-spinners?

With the horror of England's Abu Dhabi capitulation finally beginning to subside, a far healthier appreciation of just how impressive a display of spin bowling from both sides was afforded to the spectators has taken precedence.

It is difficult to be critical of England's spin duo of Graeme Swann and Monty Panesar, even in contrast to their Pakistani opposite numbers who, lest we forget, took 19 of the 20 England wickets that fell in Abu Dhabi.

Swann and Panesar bowled quite beautifully in restricting Pakistan to two sub-par, and what should have been losing totals, exercising exquisite control coupled with not inconsiderable purchase from a helpful if not raging turner of a pitch.

Saqlain Mushtaq - inventor of the doosra

In reply, the two frontline spinners of Pakistan - Saeed Ajmal and Abdur Rehman - wove their own web of cunning and deceit, leaving England's esteemed batsmen looking little more dangerous than the proverbial trapped fly.

Chasing small fourth innings totals is often a case of mind over matter. In this instance, it is perhaps fair to deduce that the trickery of Ajmal in particular played a key subliminal role in laying waste to the English batting order. In fact, such uncertainty can probably be narrowed down to just one delivery; the 'doosra'.

The term doosra translates to "(the) second (one)" or "(the) other (one)" in Urdu; one of crickets more mysterious deliveries reportedly invented by former Pakistan off-spinner Saqlain Mushtaq. A delivery that turns the opposite way to a conventional off-break, it is a formidable weapon within the arsenal of the modern off-spinner.

Why, then, is so little seen of this mystery delivery outside of the sub-continent?

Cricketing law states that a bowlers arm must not straighten beyond 15 degrees when bowling a delivery, a revision made in 2005 to replace the previous limit of 5 degrees which effectively outlawed the doosra in its entirety. Nevertheless, many an attempted purveyor of this enigmatic delivery has still fallen by the wayside; their actions called in to question and reputations left in tatters.

The list of those whose action has been referred to the International Cricket Council by on-field umpires is extensive. Muttiah Muralitharan of Sri Lanka, Shoaib Malik and Saeed Ajmal of Pakistan, Harbhajan Singh of India and Johan Botha of South Africa have all had accusations of 'chucking' their doosra levelled at them. Whilst Muralitharan and Ajmal have been cleared to continue bowling the delivery, the others have effectively been forbidden in its use.

Such controversy over this one delivery has led to the word doosra becoming almost taboo in many cricketing nations. Australia, for example, chose to ban the teaching of the doosra in 2009, with a summit held by Cricket Australia declaring that the delivery simply cannot be bowled legally. England has its own issues with the doosra. As recently as 2011 Maurice Holmes, a young off-spin bowler on the books of Warwickshire CCC, was suspended by the ECB after umpires reported a suspect action when Holmes utilised his own doosra. Despite weeks of remedial work leading to his action being cleared, Holmes was released by Warwickshire.

Holmes, during a recent interview with The Telegraph, says that despite his own struggles and controversy surrounding the legality of his action, he is of the belief that more English off-spinners should be encouraged and taught to bowl the doosra. “There are a lot of similar bowlers around the world and I don’t think that it should be discouraged,” says Holmes. “The doosra is a growing part of the game but I’m a rarity in England. As far as I am aware I am the only English bowler who bowls it.”

Former England off-spinner Peter Such is one advocate of incorporating the doosra in to the English game. “If someone wants to bowl the doosra you work with them,” says Such. “It’s an easy thing to coach but they have to be aware of the parameters of flex and straightening of the elbow that are permitted and they have to work within that.

It should be of little surprise that English batsmen struggle when confronted with this mystery delivery, then, given the paucity with which it is encountered at a domestic level. Former Warwickshire all-rounder Alex Loudon bowled his own version of the doosra with a less conventional but legal action, but retired somewhat prematurely to pursue other business interests.

Given Saeed Ajmal's recent torment of England’s batsmen, there is a possibility it will cause a re-think amongst the hierarchy of the ECB as far as the coaching of the doosra goes in England. Certainly, it would be a more than valuable addition to the repertoire of deliveries possessed by England's own off-break bowlers, but perhaps of greater importance is that it could go some way toward ensuring their batsmen don't read this delivery in the same manner they would a badly translated Mandarin Shakespeare script.

The doosra should no longer be deemed a wrong’un in English cricket.

Common sense bypass? Yes, another...

As news reaches my ears of the scheduling of the 2012 Friends Life English domestic Twenty20 competition, it is difficult to hide my consternation at some of the proposed start times of 7.30pm set out by the counties involved. Clearly a move in keeping with a worrying trend of affability toward corporate punters, one cannot help but think that the decision-makers are somewhat missing the point of this competition.

Ask the cricketing world what they believe to be the pinnacle of the game and the majority will tell you “Test cricket” without hesitation. On the other hand, even the most ardent of cricketing purists will, perhaps begrudgingly, admit that the longer format of the game enjoys its peaks and troughs. To the ripened cricket aficionado, the archetypal ‘thou shalt not pass’ innings from characters of a bygone era were a thing of beauty, allowing them to drink in the sure, dull thud of a perfect forward defensive. Yet, even to one so utterly in their element, there would have been passages of play involving the likes of Hanif Mohammad or Chris Tavare that promptly spurred the yawns in to action. In short, growing to admire stout defence and unbreakable concentration does not happen overnight.

Thankfully, Test cricket has evolved, inching from war of attrition toward intriguing exhibition. That, of course, is the view of this author, one that has had an affinity with Test cricket since the turn of the Millennium. Perhaps the most pertinent question, then, is whether a youngster newly introduced to the sport would share that view. No, is probably the answer. What this author sees as a fascinating contest between bat and ball, watching a bowler set up his intended victim with subtlety and cunning, a youngster would likely deem worthy of the question “why is nothing happening?”, aimed in the direction of their accompanying parent.

Cricket, like any other sport, relies on popularity amongst the younger members of society in order to prosper and safeguard its future. That means accommodating their needs. As we know, youngsters like to see action and entertainment. For those with a shorter attention span, and perhaps less of an appreciation of the finer subtleties of the game of cricket, that means two things: boundaries and wickets, which is where the inception of Twenty20 cricket really comes in to its own.

Why then the English cricketing bureaucracy have decided to commence certain domestic Twenty20 matches at 7.30pm is anyone’s guess, effectively ruling many families out of attending those games. With fixtures concluding at almost 11pm, far too late for school children, it is clear that little thought was given to the next generation of potential cricket fans and players, and such a situation stinks of pandering to corporate demands. Money, it would seem, is still very much king.

Kids prefer cricketers in pyjamas



The argument that a 5.30pm start can be too early simply doesn’t wash, particularly when you consider that the original marketing strategy for Twenty20 cricket was that the early starts and early finishes were ideal for families with children. For local corporate groups planning to attend, 5.30pm should give sufficient time to arrive at the ground and buy that first pint before a ball has been bowled. If it doesn’t then that is unfortunate, but is more than made up for by the grounds being packed with families and youngsters, thus allowing for the next generation to become engrossed with the sport in its simplest format, and sowing the seeds that will hopefully grow to see them come to appreciate the sport in its purest sense: Test cricket.

As one fellow cricket enthusiast said to me, “today’s youngsters are tomorrow’s aficionados.” By placing corporate needs above those of youngsters, the hierarchy may just be removing tomorrow from the equation. Twenty20 provides the perfect platform from which to launch a youngster’s eventual undying interest in all formats of the sport, but judging by this news it may soon be firing blanks.

It is understandable that counties will be looking to maximise income from participation in the Twenty20 competition, given that it is the most lucrative in what is a barren wasteland of monetary opportunities, and corporate entertainment is one effective way of doing so. As one Lord’s member noted, however, the 6pm starts afforded the Twenty20 competition last year were ideal both in the interests of corporate entertainment and of course departing the venue at a reasonable hour; evidence, if needed, that corporate and family entertainment can co-exist.

Regardless, there is plenty of scope to achieve a satisfactory corporate to family balance, and failure to address the situation swiftly may just have more of a destructive effect on the future of English cricket than the money men would ever have cared to envisage.

Central Contracts - Time For A Review?

The inception of the central contract system in 2000, brought in to lighten the workload of key England players and therefore reduce the chance of injuries, has coincided with a significant upturn in the fortunes of the English national side. Testament to that is their current occupation of the world number one Test rankings.

Whilst the national side has reaped the benefits afforded by central contracts, it could be argued that they have been to the detriment of the English county game. Indeed such is the rigidity of the central contract system now that a county which is home to an England regular can be considered lucky to see their charge make just a handful of appearances throughout the course of a season.

English county cricket is a tough game for the money men, with the financial structure of many counties flimsy at best. Poor attendances are just one problem to contend with, and it serves to raise the question as to whether these would be significantly improved were the star players of the counties, namely the England regulars, to turn out more often. The central contract system was introduced for this very purpose, to reduce the workload of the England stars, and for that reason there is unlikely to be a change any time soon.

Frank Keating, a sports writer at The Guardian, summed up the current situation when saying "it is now a pointless exercise, unwatched, unwanted, serviced by mostly blinkered, greedy chairman-bullied committees and played by mostly unknown foreign and second-rate mercenaries". Whilst this may be a little harsh, as anyone that watches the County Championship will know it still contains a great deal of very promising young English prospects, it does highlight the perceived fall in overall quality that will inevitably come as a result of removing the countries top players from the scene.

"For the county game it has taken a lot away in terms of the bowling quality. Years ago you had two overseas professionals, plus the England bowlers but now that has been removed by central contracts as you rarely see the England bowlers playing county cricket, which has diminished the quality somewhat," says recently retired ex-England and Leicestershire wicket-keeper Paul Nixon during a recent discussion.

Former England fast bowler Angus Fraser reinforces those sentiments. "Before, there was a different mentality: I was a Middlesex player who was released to play for England and when my Middlesex duties finished, I was straight back to Middlesex." Issues of bowlers not getting sufficient 'game time' have surfaced and as one reporter put it, "central contracts have helped most of England's cricketers, but not young bowlers who need to develop strategies from playing in matches, not in the nets."

Undeniably, the opportunity for the aforementioned prospects of the English game to regularly face Test match quality bowling from the likes of James Anderson, Stuart Broad and Graeme Swann would be a valuable learning curve and assist in their readiness to make the step up to Test level. As it stands, the first time young batsmen face such a quality of bowling is often upon their International debut.

Central contracts, it must be remembered, can also have a negative effect upon those batsmen that are bound to them and are intended to benefit from them, with Alastair Cook being a prime example. In the 2010 home Test series against Pakistan Cook's technique was exposed time and again by the prodigious swing of Mohammad Amir and Mohammad Asif. Had Cook spent time in the middle for his county side Essex in the swinging conditions of an early English summer, he may well have had chance to iron out such flaws.

It is argued in some quarters that the point of the English County Championship competition as a whole is to provide and nurture players for the national side, and this is a concept that has certainly become more prominent in recent years. This, however, is a view that I entirely disagree with. Surely we should have a national team forged upon the high quality, competitive cricket of our domestic competition, as opposed to using it as a training ground for the next generation of hopefuls? The cricket they play should be tough, uncompromising and mentally challenging in equal measures to ensure that once they do get that international call-up, they are ready.

There can be no doubting that in the decade since their introduction, central contracts have played a huge hand in providing a fit, fresh and successful England team. What we have seen, however, is a dwindling interest and reduction in quality of the domestic game as a direct consequence of that success. At present there is no cause for concern, but a question that must be asked is that in a further ten years from now, will this lower standard in the domestic game begin impacting upon the quality of player that is produced as a by-product?

The answer to such a question only time can tell, however it may be prudent of the ECB to try and strike a balance between the two going forward. An ideal scenario would be one in which centrally contracted players still give something back to the county game, increasing the quality and popularity simultaneously, whilst priming their own technique against a swinging ball.

In their infancy central contracts were the proverbial sat-nav, setting England well on course for becoming the number one side in the world. Now that they have reached their destination, it may just be time to relax the grip on some of those that hold them, for the good of the English county game and the potential harm it may be doing in the long run.