Normally, I wouldn’t comment about the first test of a series. Certainly not when the series does not involve India. However, this time I would like to write because of the happenings in the first test between England and New Zealand. There were lot of criticism heaped upon England because they did not go for win. The target was 275 in a probably 75 overs. Stiff enough but not impossible, felt some. The critics failed to take into account one major factor. The Lord’s pitch. Did I think that there was a chance for England to win? No, I did not think that. Not with that batting line up. So, for me, England’s lack of response is not startling. Let me try to explain.
Not many prefer 4th innings chase
There are only a few teams in world cricket that absolutely loves a 4th innings chase. Steve Waugh’s & Ponting’s Australians. Vivian Richard’s West Indies. Smith’s South Africans. That’s it. That is few and far between over the last 50 years. There are only a few captains who will try for a win in the 4th innings. Kohli can be added to the above four. 90% of the time, all the teams will always want to play it safe and draw the game. Especially if it is the first test and that is exactly what England did. They wanted to ensure that they start not only the series but also the season on a positive note.
The critics must note that the current England team is not loaded with explosive hitters. The team is manned at the top by 3 players who are comfortable to play time and the lower order is suspect. The middle order with the exception of Root is inexperienced. In going for a win and if they had lost few early wickets, things would have gone south. In the prevailing circumstance, they did the best they can.
David Llyod’s criticism
David ‘Bumble’ Lloyd was quite critical of the decision of not trying to win. He says that England neither had the ambition nor the appetite to respond to the challenge thrown by Williamson. Come on Bumble. I am sure you would have done the same in your playing days. If only you were honest and recount the number of times you had settled for a draw, you will agree with Root.
There is another argument that this was the first test since the pandemic that a small percentage of the population got to witness and that they deserve more than they saw. This is utter nonsense. Cricket is not played for the crowd. All the teams are happy to play in front of a massive crowd like Melbourne. However, none of team will want to be dictated by the crowd. If things go wrong, the same crowd will lambast the team.
The actual villain was the pitch
The ones who criticise England fail to call the actual villain. In this case, it was the Lord’s pitch. It was the pitch that didn’t allow a result. It wasn’t lack of ambition or lack of courage on the part of the players. Both New Zealand and England. The pitch was so placid that it did not allow for attacking batting or incisive bowling. Agreed one full day was lost because of rain. Nonetheless, more than 350 overs were bowled. It wasn’t even a high scoring game. The first innings scores for both teams were 350+ for New Zealand and 250+ for England. It must not have mattered for a Williamson declaration for a result. If Williamson had not declared, NZ could have easily played the remaining 75 overs.
Root was correct
“Having played on that wicket for a few days, we knew it wasn’t going to be as straightforward as it looked,” Root said. “If you look at the run rate throughout the game, it was hard to score above three an over even when the pitch was at its absolute best.
“We wanted to lay ourselves a foundation but, once we got through the initial phase, it just didn’t feel like there was a realistic opportunity for us to win the game. So it was about using it as an opportunity to be a bit more disciplined as a batting group. At times in the first innings we showed a little bit of ill discipline. This was a chance to put that right and take a bit of confidence going into the rest of the series.
The Ollie Robinson story
The ECB have suspended Ollie Robinson pending hearing for his racial tweets earlier in his life. I do not want to go into the merits or demerits of the decision but I will want to say this much. This happened more than 10 years ago when Robinson was a teenager. He did make mistakes but now that he has apologised, things must have been settled. This essentially means that there isn’t anything to investigate. Robinson has owned upto his mistake. However, Robinson finds himself in a uncertain future. Whether he will be allowed to play for England again is open to interpretation. The ECB instead of suspending him pending further investigation must have just banned him for a few months and must have let matters rest.
Now the British government has stepped in
Oliver Dowden, the British sports minister has texted
“Ollie Robinson’s tweets were offensive and wrong,” Dowden tweeted. “They are also a decade old and written by a teenager. The teenager is now a man and has rightly apologised. The ECB has gone over the top by suspending him and should think again.”
Michael Vaughan has tweeted
I think the ECB have dealt with the Ollie Robinson situation in a fair way .. many will disagree .. but hearing some say he should never play again is utterly ridiculous .. he will play against India & should
Will the ECB listen? All of us make mistakes and that too at the age when Robinson was. It is not fair to judge him for what he did 10 years ago. Yes, he must be taught a lesson but that must be that. Suspend him from few games and allow him to play again.
Other articles related to England