Barclay Talks Sport

Terrific game. England outplayed almost the entire match but hung on in there and in the end, battled out a draw. I know it was desperate but in times gone by, we would have crumbled and it gives us great strength to hang on and see the expressions on the Aussie players' faces. Moral victory in the end and amazingly, we take momentum into 2nd Test at Lord's.

BUT. This does not disguise our shortcomings and they were many. I'll do a player by player summary cos that does it best. Oh, before that, one for the Aussie team: Excellent performance and deserved to win (snork!). Demonstrated how to bat in a test match and how to captain and declare with imagination. Bowling was OK but that's all it had to be because... see below:

Strauss - Captain but not in the same league as Ponting. Ponting is experienced but he is also very clever. Strauss should look there for lessons. Strauss got stuck too often not knowing what to do in the field and was not smart enough to try field changes to inspire pressure, or to bowl people like Pietersen and Bopara. Took him an age to go to Collingwood and the other two might have worked for him too. He has a lot to learn. As for his batting. Bounced out in the 1st inns and that's no shame, happens to all. 2nd inns, gave it away. Cutting the spinner very dangerous. Yes, we needed to score but we had all day. Poor shot choice. Retain.

Cook - His batting flaws exposed. Follows wide balls outside off stump and gets trapped in front because of where he plants his left leg. Needs to improve or be dropped, possibly even for Bell as opener. Keep him in for Lord's. He likes playing at Lord's. A lot.

Bopara - Such promise but got out-thought in the 1st Inns. Needs to remember he's not in a one day game. Not everything needs hitting for four. Unlucky to be LBW in 2nd. Ball too high. Retain.

Pietersen - sigh. Look. I get it that he's our best batter. He is incredibly exciting. But see above. This was a test match. Look at how the Aussies went about compiling centuries. His out shot in the 1st inns was utterly stupid and I don't care that 'that's the way he plays'. He's playing in a team. He is there to score big runs and sometimes, he needs to look further ahead than the next flash shot. Pietersen playing sensibly need never get out and would still score at four an over. 2nd inns... could have happened to anyone. Retain but remind about responsibilities to team as well as entertainment and celebrity.

Collingwood - Our best batter this test match. Should have made 100+ in 1st inns but was brilliant in 2nd inns and was the man who effectively saved us the match. Retain with a big pat on the back.

Prior - His keeping was pretty solid. Again, should have made 100+ in 1st inns. Out to a good ball but should have been defending with end of play so close. 2nd inns a stupid, stupid shot. Cutting a ball that was too close. Cutting... we're trying to save a game. Anyone heard of the leave and the straight bat? Retain.

Flintoff - He batted pretty well but got himself out both times. And his first spell of bowling was wonderful. But no other spell matched that pace or intensity. Questions have to be asked whether his body can take test match cricket anymore. I hate to say that his best days are behind him but he just was not the threat of 2005 and the news he's tweaked a knee was somehow no surprise. Retain (if genuinely fit) but we cannot rely on him the same way anymore.

Broad - Heart still rules head too much. A brilliant young cricketer and could be a genuine all-rounder. Batting was average for him and I think the Aussies know how to work him over. His bowling lacked penetration and his attempts to mix up length, line and pace didn't fool them. Needs to work on disguise. Retain because his runs are valuable and he will get better and better as a bowler.

Swann - Batting just excellent. Second only to Collingwood in that department. Obdurate and aggressive by turn. Many specialist batters in our team could learn a thing or two. Bowling was right off by his standards. Too many loose deliveries meant he got no pressure on their batters and hence no wickets to speak of. He can do much better. Retain as sole spinner for Lord's.

Anderson - As our premier bowler, he suffered from a lack of swing and, given that, a lack of variety. He was accurate enough but when the ball was straight, he had no proper variety. Nor did he go round the wicket enough. Needs to work on Yorkers, Slowers and Bouncers so he has a plan 'B'. batting was perfect for a number 10. He with Monty were brilliant in the final overs but let's remember, he should not have been put in that position. Stirring stuff nonetheless. Retain because he is our best fast bowler and still improving.

Panesar - He is predicatable because he is so one-paced. He needs to insert these variations we are told he has. Actually, he needed to do it in Cardiff. His only wicket was down to a mistake by Ponting who had already got to 150. He is not living up to his potential. 2nd inns batting was wonderful. Solid defence and real mental strength. But he is not in the team to bat. Sorry Monty. You need to sit the next one out. Drop for Harmison (though I fear it may be Onions even though we want pace and bounce at Lord's and Harmison can deliver that in spades).

Hmm interesting one this. Click here.

for the full article. In summary, Ponting was sour graping about England sending on physio and 12th man close to the end of play. I thought it was not the best move but all the overs were bowled and getting messages on to the pitch is utterly legit and the Aussies do it too.

What gets me is Ponting whining on about them playing within the rules. This is the same Ponting who practically exploded when his claim to have cuaght Collingwood bat pad was turned down. The ball missed the bat by inches. It was not even close. He would have known that. he watched the ball all the way from Collingwood's pad into his hand. Greenhouses and stones, Ponting.

Ever wondered why the English fail so often at the highest level? It's because fans and the media cannot see the upside to any change whatever. The latest one is the appointment of Kevin Pietersen as captain of all Englands cricket sides - test, one day, 20/20.

Sure it's a risk. Every captaincy appointment is a risk. But surely it's one worth taking. What grates with me is that so few pundits and fans are applauding the decision and getting behind him. I mean, he must have been delighted to wake the next morning to see and hear the whining worriers bothered about everything from his ego to his experience.

Yes, yes, he is inexperienced but he has players with huge experience all round him. Sorted.

Team play? Well perhaps he hasn't always done the best thing for the team while at the crease but now he will have to. Or be sacked. Sorted.

Batting to go into decline? Look. It may have happened to Botham and Vaughan but why does that mean KP will inevitably suffer? It doesn't. At all. If there is one thing of which we can be certain, it is that his confidence in his ability as a batsman will not suffer one iota. He has proved his ability to play the great innings when under the most enormous pressure as well as the ability to forget everything, including the match situation (!!) and do something daft. It sounds odd but even this latter point suggests he can put his cares aside when he bats.

Why are we so incapable of supporting decisions and getting behind our best talents? Sniping away before he's even taken the field as skipper is ridiculous.

So, whingers. Keep your Botham and Vaughan fears. I'll stick to my examples of why he will succeed. R Ponting (who became no 1 batsman while skipper of the Aussies). And G Smith. I note he got 150 not out in the innings that beat England last week to precipitate all this. Lack of confidence? Don't think so.

Shame on you De Villiers. Shame on every South African player who saw De V drop a slip catch, scoop it up and claim it as good. That means you, Mark Boucher and you, Graham Smith, the South African captain.

For those not in the know, I have just this minute witnessed Andrew Strauss edge to slips. The ball carried, was dropped and then claimed. This is cheating. It is low and it should result in an apology from the South Africans and a ban for De V. This sort of behavious has to be stamped out or cricket will go the same way as football and plumb the depths of unsporting behaviour in the pursuit of victory.

We all understand genuine errors but this incident was simply indefensible. I repeat. Cheating. Leaves a nasty taste in the mouth.

De V, look at yourself. Smith, think about how you skipper your side.

Today brings the announcement that Pakistan's Inzamam-ul-Haq is to retire from test cricket after the Lahore test match versus South Africa next week. Having already quit the one day game, Inzamam's retirement brings to a close, the career of one of the world's best batsmen of all time.

He has always been an uncomplicated cricketer and in many respects a genuine throw back to what could be termed more relaxed times. Fitness was never at the top of his agenda. He fielded in the slips and was one of the safest pairs of hands you'll ever see. Running in the field was a rare enough sight. And when batting, he was a stranger to the quick single, preferring to deal in boundaries or gentle ones and twos if necessary. Mind you, after 16 years at the very top and scoring bucket loads of runs, why wouldn't he play the way he wants and not bow to modern pressures?

It sounds a bit like I'm having a go at him for being, well, a little large, and I'm not. I will always remember him striding to the wicket and praying that we could remove him early whe neven the best are vulnerable. Too often though, I have sat and watched the bitter-sweet sight of him scoring heavily against England. His grace at the wicket was a joy to watch. He kept it simple, always appeared to have time and his range of shots was unsurpassed. A magnificent batsman. One, unless you are Pakistani, that you are delighted to see the back of. And that is perhaps the biggest compliment you can give him.

He'll be missed on the international stage but one hopes he stays on to coach the new generation. The game can always do with more Inzys.

The Twenty/20 World Cup has already had plenty of tension, unless you're an England fan, and has spawned a couple of great matches. Pakistan's victory over Australia was one and last night's victory for India over South Africa was the other. The Proteas defeat means their world cup is over and if there is one team deserving of exit for being arrogant and complacent, it is South Africa. Actually, England run them a close second although our exit was more down to stupidity and carelessness than arrogance.

Sport is a wonderful and cruel thing. When South Africa restricted (if that is the right word) India to 153, they clearly assumed that ambling out and batting would do the job. However, the Indian bowling attack was, barring Sreesanth, quite superb. RP Singh and my favourite angry off-spinner, Harbajhan Singh bowled beautifully. Even without the injured Dhoni behind the stumps, two wafting SA batters were stumped. And the fielding backed them up too, not often you can say that about India. On the SA bench, the dawning realisation that they were first, under prssure and later, about to go out, was a joy to watch. That's where square-jawed, gum chewing, chippy chat gets you, Graham Smith. Absolutely nowhere.

So, I snigger at the host's exit while very much looking forward to two excellent semi finals... Pakistan, India, Australia, New Zealand. Impossible to choose a winner and that is the great thing about 20/20. Played hard and focused (England take note) 20/20 matches can go either way and it is a game in which a single over can turn a match. Great entertainment.

England's defeat to New Zealand in their latest 20/20 World Cup game means almost certain elimination from the tournament. Three defeats out of four is a poor return for a team that looked very well balanced on paper. But there's the rub. Packed with 20/20 specialists, England have misfired badly. New caps have not shone as hoped and old heads have made daft mistakes at crucial times. Against South Africa and again today against NZ, England forged a very strong position with good new ball bowling only to leak buckets of runs in the final ten overs to turn easy targets into challenging ones.

Still, neither total we faced was huge. But what we haven't learned is that the loss of a couple of wickets means little. NZ went from 34-4 to 163-8 with a little patience linked to well-picked big six hitting. By contrast, having gone serenely to 60 odd without loss, England lost their heads yet again, losing wickets to stupid shots (KP... trying to reverse sweep perhaps THE cleverest spin bowler in world cricket and getting bowled through his legs) and comical run outs.

So what lessons can be learned from this poor display? Well, that Atherton was right (sorry, Athers). Domestic 20/20 specialists do not necessarily make good on the international stage. Luke Wright is a great talent but young and naive. Chris Schofield looked lost as soon as the pressure was on his bowling. Maddy scored runs today but has had a very average tournament besides. So. Pick your best batters and bowlers and ask them to do what they do best in every form of the game. Don't get cute with your shots. Straight hitting brings runs. Funky pick ups over fine leg and reverse sweeps only work half the time. Don't play across the line of straight deliveries. When you've been hit for six, perhaps don't bowl the same ball in the same spot. Oh... just like normal cricket then.

Ah ha.

It is a rare day indeed when England win three important games in a single afternoon. But such a day was Saturday 8th September. We won important matches in Rugby, cricket and football... but how to score them in terms of quality?

As a fan, wishing to see all three matches and not being omnipresent was a problem. All three ought to have clashed at around 5pm. And because they did not, performance of the day has to go to England's cricketers. Beating India in the decider of a seven match series was a terrific achievement. it really does look like brighter days are ahead for our one day side. We outplayed India throughout the day and won deservedly by seven wickets with 12 odd overs to spare. That is a resounding win against very good opposition. Great to see Freddy back but I worry about his long term fitness. Great to see KP score runs and keep concentration under pressure. And great to see Luke Wright opening the batting. I don't care that it didn't pay off this time. What the selectors did was make a brave decision based on form and that is the right way to go. Critically, the emphatic nature of the victory against a strong and passionate Indian team meant the game was done before 5pm... kick off time at Wembley and in France. Luvverly.

In second place, England's beleagured footballers. Too often we've scratched out results against crap opposition. This time, against a very average Israel side, we went at them for 90 minutes, scored three, could have scored six and came away with poitives in every department. Special mention to Gareth Barry who was excellent in the centre of midfield. To Shaun Wright-Phillips who just gets better and better. To Micah Richards who is a mountain in defence and a genuine threat coming forward. And Michael Owen who looked sharp and scored a lovely goal. As for Heskey, well actually, he played well, spent less time on his arse than usual and gave the forward line balance. Oh, and Joe Cole. Great player, end of story. If I was the England coach, who cares who else is fit for Wednesday against Russia, you have to start with the same 11. Anything else is a betrayal of all the work, energy and belief. As for speculation making this the end of Beckham's international career, well I doubt it. If SWP isn't fit or doesn't perform, who else would you play? Serious answers only.

Which leaves England's rugby players. I saw bits and pieces of this match and it was a turgid affair. The US were all muscle and no style and England tried to be fancy and dropped the ball a lot. Yes, we won 28-10 but scored no bonus points while other sides playing the weaker teams in their groups have run up big scores. In the end, the win was everything, of course, but the manner was very disappointing. All we had to do was stick to a single game plan (probabaly sucking players in to rucks and mauls before using our wing pace to score tries would have done it. It's simple after all) and we'd have scored 60 points. I just don't think we gave the US enough respect for being organised and tough tacklers. We tried terribly clever moves which are unnecessary against lesser opposition and screwed them all up, more or less. Must try harder. Or we'll get a sreous beating by South Africa next weekend.

Roll on Wednesday, the 20-20 World Cup and, sort of, the South African challenge.

India levelled the One Day series yesterday in a magnificent encounter that saw some extraordinary power hitting in a day dominated by the bat. This is the sort of match that cricket haters should be made to watch and then attached to a lie dectector afterwards when asked if they enjoyed it or not. From the second ball of the day which Cook edged to Dhoni, to the third last ball which went to the boundary for victory to India, there was no knowing who would win the match.

From an Indian perspective there was much to be happy about Dinesh Khartik's replacement, Robin Uthappa, played a superb, if sometimes fortunate innings to close out the game. Zaheer Khan put down further evidence of why he is probably bowler of the tour on either side, and the wonderful Tendulkar and Ganguly set up the victory with an opening stand of 150 scored at almost seven an over.

From the England perspective, the future is surely bright. Luke Wright's fearless 50 got us back on track. Shah's maiden ODI century was a joy and Mascarenas' five consecutive sixes off the last five balls of the innings were breathtaking. But, and there are still big buts. I worry about Kevin Pietersen. He is a great batsman and looked as though he was returning to form with his 50 but he seems to lose concentration and focus at critical moments. For me he was responsible for both Collingwood's and his own run outs. Bad calls or ignoring calls, neither is pretty. And in the field, he cost us eight runs. Once with a lazy dive early on, which got ganguly going and later, letting a ball through his body at long on. In a close match, this is very costly.

Any of you who've read the previous entry know I went on about Indians chirping and abusing English batsmen. Well, tables turned this time. And the lesson today is, pick your target carefully. Chris Broad is a fine young player, a very promising bowler who could well turn into a genuine all-rounder. But yesterday, he chose to have a go at Suarav Ganguly in the midst of the Indian opener flaying the ball to all parts. This is dim. Not only will it cost him some of his match fee but it got Ganguly going, if he wasn't already. What Broad needed to take into account was that Ganguly has scored over 10,000 (count them) one day runs and is an exceptional batsman. So, after their exchange, Ganguly slapped a few more fours just to show Broad what he can do. Again, tight game, very expensive error if you ask me. So, Chris, when you're a bit miffed, make sure you pick on the guy on debut, not one of the more experienced of world ODI players.

I'm loving this series. Lords for the decider on Saturday and surely a must watch match. Never mind the football at 5pm. A bad time to change channels, what with the climax of the cricket at around that time. And anyway, we already know what happens in the first half at Wembley. Bright start by England, frustration sets in after 20 mins. 0-0 after 45 mins. Ray Wilkins on as second half substitute to pas the ball square. There you go.

This was an intensely satisfying victory for England. Yes, because we bowled very well yet again after losing the toss on a good batting track. Yes, because after playing ourselves into a huge hole with some very dim batting, our 8th wicket pair of Bopara and Broad demonstrated how it should be done - seeing us home with a magnificent 99 run partnership. Yes, because 10 matches ago, I'd have bet my house we'd have lost the game by sixty runs. But mostly because, after the abuse suffered particularly by Ian Bell and Keven Pietersen, the very best answer was to inflict a demoralising defeat.

I've got a couple of pieces of advice for the main culprits. First, Dinesh Karthik. One of the key elements of a man able to chirp and sledge is to be any good at all. I note your scores in this series so far have been, 44no, 1, 0 and 4. Pretty poor really. Yet you felt able to level a volley of abuse at Ian Bell. His scores, by comparison have been, 125no, 64, 79 and 24. Pretty bloody impressive. And at Pietersen too. He'll be one of the world's best one day batsmen and although he's had a quiet series, he has still amassed more runs than you. So. Get a decent run of scores, get a bit humble and respectful of players who are way better than you at the moment and avoid looking like a total pratt with zero credibility as a result.

Second, Zaheer Khan. You need to pick and choose when to do your long follow through and insulting comments. Doing it every ball makes you look like a petulant eight year old doing a poor parody. It becomes like punctuation and is dull and easy to ignore. Watch a quality bowler do it. Glen McGrath for instance. He mostly let the ball do the talking and when he came down the pitch to deal out a few well chosen words, that was the time to get really scared. And you're a good bowler too. No need for all the other crap all the time. And get a shave too. Scruff. Freddie, Gooch and Warny can carry it off, your chin ain't the right shape.

I also note generally that once things started to go a little astray, it went terribly quiet out there during the England innnings. The song beginning 'Sing when you're winning...' does tend to spring to mind. We all love to see aggression. But you're mistaking aggression for abuse and I'm afraid when you lose, like tonight, you just look stupid.

As regular reader will know, I don't go in for triumphalism on this blog. Very dangerous. But England are looking good at 3-1 up in the seven match series. That's right Zaheer and Dinesh. 3-1. To England. Chirp about that, why don't you? The game we lost was tight too. We've unearthed a sound opening bowling partnership and have batting right down to number nine. I just hope the development goes on and we manage to stick to a steady line-up.

That's better.

I am irritable aboutEngland's test series loss to India. Not because we lost, actually, but the manner of the series defeat. Set 500 to win the third test and square the series, it was quickly clear that England had no intention of trying to chase down the target. Fair enough, it was a hugely tough ask and very unlikely to succeed... but not to try?.

Atherton, among others, says there is a difference between losing 1-0 and 2-0. Sorry, but unless 'goal' difference is important, no there isn't. England, apparently, have to learn not to lose. Yes, we do. But only in games where it matters even one jot. Losing this match while trying to win it would have been brave and shown the sort of aggression that we need if we are ever to frighten the Australians again.

I don't buy the fact that India deserved to win 1-0. And I don't buy why England didn't put up a show and try to get the runs on the final day at the Oval. We have the players to do it. As a fan of cricket, I would much rather have seen us take on the total and give it a go. Losing in a blaze of glory is infinitely preferable to eking out a turgid and meaningless draw. One thing we have seen is that when under pressure, the Indian bowlers are apt to lose it. But if you invite pressure on, they are capable of exploiting you.

The fact is, we didn't try so we'll never know. What we do know is that England settled for a 1-0 series defeat and announced themselves happy to have forced a draw in the final test. Is it just me or is that a loser mentality? Can you ever imagine the Aussies settling for defeat in that way? I can't. Think about it. It's like being 1-0 down at half time in a cup game, going on to lose 1-0 and then being pleased you drew the second half 0-0. Makes no sense. You still lost. Where is the pride and accomplishment in that?

The announcement yesterday of the England cricket squads for the upcoming one-day series against India and the 20/20 World Cup have come in for a bit of stick from many experts. They feel that picking specialists for 20/20 who are not included in the One Day squad is an error. That 'a good cricketer is good in any form of the game'. Actually, I don't wholly agree with that and in any case, have we not always wanted England to pick the men in form? Well, I have at least. And it makes such good sense.

Atherton complained yesterday that Ian Bell, among others, is a victim of 20/20 selection because he has not played much 20/20 domestic cricket. For me, this means he needs to be released to play some, not be stuck on the world stage with no experience whatever. Athers also questioned whether the in-form domestic players would translate to a World Cup. We'll find out but one of the things we've learned this summer is that getting our test players to play county cricket has hugely improved their test match games - the bowlers and Vaughan in particular have all found their touch.

I feel that the 20/20 Squad in particular is brave and inspired selection. It introduces good young players to international cricket in a short and informal (relatively) style of the game. It gives them touring experience, big game pressure and access to other top world players in what is, let's face it, a less important contest than a test match or One Day world cup. I think we might be in for a surprise too. Watching Luke Wright devastate the Gloucestershire attack in a Pro 40 match last night tells me that if our other specialists fire, we can look forward to a succcessful campaign. That doesn't mean winning it necessarily, but showing the world of cricket we are more than a test match nation. And whatever happens, it will surely be exciting.

Never mind your highly paid professionals, this is what the pursuit of sport is really all about. At the back end of a soggy June, the Old Debonians (Deben High School Felixstowe, Old Boys Cricket Team) gathered to play the traditional opposition from the local Trades & Labour Club. Old Debonians has been going since we all left school back in 1983. Tender 18 year olds then. Wizened 42 year olds now.

Now when people talk of dedication, unless they speak of the lengths some go to in order to play in this annual event, they are missing the point entirely. Seamus flew in from Khazakstan. Paul from St Andrews. Tim from Leeds. I could go on. Myself, I travelled merely from Teddington to the wilds of Suffolk. And the bloody match was rained off to be replaced for some by a pool and darts tournament.

The point is this. In this world of sporting greed and hyped celebrity, there are those who still want to get together for a game that is more about friendship than the match itself. Where sport brings people back together and the game is played hard but always viewed in true perspective. From Steve who does all the work organising the venue, to all those who take the time out to keep the flame burning, to those who entertain on email and only rarely show their faces (yes, JBW, I’m talking about you) I salute you.

Same time next year, chaps?

Allan Donald has indicated he'd love the opportunity to work with England's fast bowlers. I trust the extremely generous contract is already being couriered to his door. Or perhaps he is being invited to write his own. One of the very, very best fast bowlers of recent generations would be a huge bonus to England's crop of talented but under-performing pace men. To miss out on him would be a crime.

So, the ICC World Cup drew to a close on Saturday evening in almost complete darkness. It is somehow fitting in a hugely disappointing tournament, that the showpiece should be shrouded in murk as it reached its... well, actually, climax is too grand a term. How about, erm, last three overs. I mean, really. The Sri Lankans went off for bad light (Bad?? That's like calling the Sahara 'dry') with three overs to go. Aussies celebrate a victory only to be told the final 18 balls must be bowled, perhaps tomorrow. Unbelievable. After much ado about farce, the Sri Lankan batsmen reappeared all but carrying miners' helmets and carried on, prodding a pointless few runs. Really daft. I cannot see the governing body of any other sport allowing their grand finale to be so utterly shambolic as it finishes.

One good thing, though, at least it won't have turned any more people off cricket. They all switched channels a long time before...

So did he fall or was he pushed? I guess it doesn't really matter in the end. I'm trying to work out if this is a good or bad thing. It was certainly inevitable. With the sad demise of Bob Woolmer, who would have been a great replacement, the candidates are thin on the ground. I've heard Tom Moody being bandied about. That would be just fine. And the academy coach too. No, no and thrice no. If you're going to change, change, don't promote from within.

I thought Fletcher was a fine coach. He took England from the test wasteland and made us no.2 in the world and Ashes winners, beating all-comers on the way and drawing series in the sub-continent. No mean feat. Things have gone astray in the last few months. If he made a mistake or two it's all in not thinking far enough ahead, resting when he should have been pushing, allowing the players to think they'd 'made it'. And in the one day arena, he/ECB clearly don't understand the way the game is going. I think there is an argument for two coaches, and two teams. There will be overlap but what is obvious is that the two sides of the game are racing apart from one another very quickly. In the One Day arena, you just have to have players suited to the particular conditions of the day. You don't have a fifth day when spin will be important. You have 100 overs on a pitch. Pick on that basis. Pick accuracy, not speed. Pick accumulators, not prodders.

And get Ian Botham to play some part. That man knows what he is talking about. Just don't make him leave Sky's team. That would be a big loss.

So, we got thrashed by South Africa. Well and truly buried. Our capacity for mediocrity matched by an avalanche of aggression by the Proteas. Well done them. I'd like every England player to be forced to watch their approach to batting in particular. Ours was pitiful, there's quite exhilarating. So how did the England tactical conversation go?

Fletcher: Remember lads, prod around lamely for a good ten overs. See off the new ball and score off the bad balls.
Bell: But boss, what if there aren't any bad balls?
Fletcher: Piffle. Haven't you seen Saj Mahmood? There are always bad balls. Often several an over. Trust me on this one. Play yourself in.
Vaughan: But i've got no form whatever. What if I get a bad ball and get out after scratching about for ages?
Fletcher: That's a given, Mike. That's why we've got KP. he'll take up the slack when you are dismissed tamely.
KP: But what if I get out cheaply, because the run rate is so abysmal that I have to try and force things?
Fletcher: And what chance is there of that? I've got a laptop here, y'know. It does stat and everything. Haven't you seen your average?
Freddie: Can't I go in at 1 or 2, boss? I hate going in at six, it's killing my game.
Fletcher: Poppycock. You're the man to blast us out of trouble when everyone but KP has been dismissed for less than 20. It's always been the way and it always will be. Your last twenty innings hardly indicate a trend do they? I've got a laptop here, y'know. It does stats and everything. You'll come good when it matters. That's the way it happens. Now is there anything anyone doesn't understand?
Saj: Why do I have no idea where the ball is going when I bowl?
Fletcher: Because you aren't all that good when the pressure's on. But hey, if you don't know, neither will the South Africans. And they'll get out to your worst slow, wide deliveries. I've got a laptop here, y'know...

How many times do you try a tactic that blatantly fails before you admit such? There has been severely stubborn Ostrich-like behaviour here and it has really cost us. Because actually, England look a pretty talented side, with one or two exceptions (and I'm talking about Vaughan, who hasn't ever performed at ODI level, and Mahmood who has too little control to be effective when playing the top nations). GOing forward, every England batsman needs to target a personal run rate of at least 3 in the first 20 overs (and that means we are aiming to go at 6 an over) and then up it every ten overs. Then we are targetting big scores. And if we lose a couple of wickets, only then do we dig in. Digging in as the inninge opens does one thing really well; it lets the oppo bowleers settle. And this is something we absolutely cannot afford.

Sack Fletcher? Not necessarily. He's a great test match coach. But something is seriously wrong with our one day prep and tactics. It cannot be that hard to work it out.

There was a chance to arrive at the ICC World Cup yesterday. A chance to demonstrate intent and belief. To really put down a marker and make other teams a little nervous of playing us. And having reducing Bangladesh to 65-6, I made the fatal mistake of thinking we might actually do so. How stupid of me. From that moment on, we were treated to the most turgid, dull and frankly depressing display I have ever seen by an England one-day side in victory (I use the term merely for definition purposes because it felt like defeat).

Firstly, rather than roll the Bangladeshis over for 80-odd by applying maximum pressure, we relaxed, got sloppy and let them get to 143. Still a poor score but far more than they should have accumulated. But that wasn't the really terrible thing. Oh no. The batting, now that was truly miserable. Now the Bangladesh attack is neat and tidy. A couple of accurate medium-fasts and a trio of left arm spinners. But there was no spin in this pitch, and no movement off the seam. Just a bit of bounce. Nothing to bother England's finest. Ahem.

From the first ball, my gloom developed. Instead of tinkering with the order, sending in Freddie to do real damage against the pacemen, Bell and Vaughan prodded and poked around. At 7-0 all the runs were extras. I stifled my first yawn. What the hell were we doing? I'll tell you...we were gently accumulating runs while keeping wickets intact. What for? Good grief, even at a gentle five an over, the game would have been done in less than thirty overs. I couldn't believe my eyes. And then the wickets started to fall. I suspect our players were so bored they began falling asleep at the crease. It's the only explanation for the pathetic display they put up.

And so we batted our way into deeper and deeper trouble. Bangladesh could even have won. I fail to understand our tactics. Flintoff clearly hates coming in against spin bowling. So don't let him. Put him in at 2. Pietersen is an aggressive and splendid batsman. Put him in at 3, not 4. Show some guts, for god's sake. And if you lose a couple of wickets for 70 after eight overs, so what? Job done already because your dogged accumulators can come in and clean up, can't they?

This was not entertainment. This was death by a thousand feeble prods. I didn't even watch the end. It was too excruciating. A rerun of Location, Location, Location provided more guile, surprise and excitement. The case for the prosecution rests.

England lost to Australia in the World Cup of cricket (or, given how the indigents pronounce it, Ustraya) which in itself is hardly a surprise. What is most disappointing is that the manner of the defeat is depressingly familiar. England's batting tactics appear to be ismply these: 'Don't worry about it, lads, KP, maybe Bell and certainly Collingwood will bail us out when we're two down for almost nothing.' And that kind of happened. KP got a fine century. Bell got 77. Trouble is, only three players got into double figures. Flintoff never looks like he wants to bat these days and every time one of our players decides to 'cut loose' they inevitably pick the wrong ball to do so. So, we got thirty runs too few.

Then in come the Aussies to bat. And they are very, very good at it. And we had them in some big trouble. That's because england are pretty good in the field. But we have a huge weakness at the moment and it is most demonstrated by Sajid Mahmood. This is the inability to bowl at, or just outside, off stump for six balls an over. The art of winning one day matches is to strangle runs so much that batsmen are forced into risky shots and get themselves out. Take a look at England's innings to see how this is brought about. We, Flintoff aside in terms of pace, are flatly unable to do this.

I am sick of hearing how Mahmood is a great talent but you get the odd bad ball every over. I'm sorry but at this level, that simply isn't good enough. Ustraya took him to the cleaners and we lost the game because of it. I know he's quick and that's terribly nice but until he can bowl in the right spot at this great speed, he needs to slow down. I don't think even he has any idea where the ball is going half the time. Just be accurate. No room = no runs. Simple equation. He and Vaughan/Joyce/Strauss are weakening us fatally at the moment. Too many weak links. Too many repeats of the same problems

My advice; drop Mahmood and bring in Plunkett (who is handy with the bat too). Stick Freddie at the top of the order (like Botham said) and let him flay away. If he's out for three, it's no worse than his efforts at number 6, is it? Drop Vaughan down the order to 4. Keep Bell opening. Just try it out. What do we really have to lose?

Amazingly, we can still qualify for the semis because the fabulous Bangladesh side beat the arrogant South Africans (who do not look like winners to me). And we may do so. But unless we do the simple things right, there'll be no point, will there?

I am already sick and tired of the pious bleating accompanying the far-too-public shaming of Andrew Flintoff. OK, he had a few too many and did something daft. But not 'got into a scrap and broke his bowling hand daft'. No. he fell off a pedalo. All sounds pretty funny to me. Thing is this. Yes, he broke team rules and he probably should have known better. He's a senior member of the team and all that. But I've heard calls for him to be sent home. WHAT? And while we're at it, why don't we have Panesar shot for that misfield in the warm up, have Pietersen garroted for dropping a catch and perhaps bring home Collingwood for being too damn consistent. We do want to progress in this tournament don't we? Flintoff hasn't shamed his nation. Such talk is bollocks, frankly. He's been a bit of a burke is all. Hands up who hasn't been in their lives? Thought not.

Why do we insist that our sports stars wear concrete cloaks following a defeat, the better to bear their loss? What I want is for them to get over a bad game the best way they can so they're up for slaughtering the next oppo. If that means getting pissed and falling off pedalos, so be it. So long as whatever they do doesn't affect their performance, I couldn't care less.

Leave Freddie alone, he's already blushing. Give him back the vice-captaincy and let's try and win this tournament if we possibly can.

FOOTNOTE: Cricket lost a great man yesterday. Bob Woolmer's death was untimely and premature. Every fan of cricket knows what he brought to the game as player and then coach. the sport will feel his loss.

I really didn't think I'd be speculating on this. Not so long ago, with the Aussies pulping England in the Ashes series and then destroying both England and New Zealand in the tri-nations one day series league games, it would have been a ridiculous question to ask. But now, with the World Cup just around the corner, there are serious cracks appearing in the armour of the invincibles.

First, from nowhere, England beat them three times; and did so reasonably comfortably to win the tri-nations tournament. And in the last six days, New Zealand have pulled off a quite stunning 3-0 whitewash. They condemned the Aussies to their first ten wicket defeat in a one day international and followed that up by chasing down 336 and then 346. Extraordinary stuff. And those last two defeats must really damage morale. Any side that scores 300+ must surely expect to win.

Perhaps that is the problem. Perhaps Australia's unshakeable belief in their ability has led them into complacency. I won't accept injuries and players resting as reasons either. Every team suffers injuries. England were not at full strength their whole tour and in the last ODI, New Zealand had no Vettori, Oram or Bond. Key players. The team that takes the field must be the best available and be expected to perform. Anything else is unprofessional.

Here's a match report of the last ODI NZ vs Aus

So will the Aussies still win the World Cup? They are a formidable team. At full strength a fantastic side. But they are coming off a run where no one was injured and no one out of form and are discovering they do not have the strength in depth they might have imagined. I'm not sure I'd make them out and out favourites now. For so long, their assumption that they would win was infectious and oppositions had beaten themselves before a ball was bowled. But now England and New Zealand have punctured the balloon.

Don't get me wrong. Any side taking it easy against the Aussies will get slapped badly. But teams can now go against them knowing they are prone to pressure and are beatable. That blunts their most powerful weapon. I think the great thing is, it leaves the World Cup wide open. South Africa, New Zealand, Australia, Pakistan. All can win it. England, West Indies and India? Not so sure but a run of form can take you a long way. They are dangerous sides with match winning players. And never discount Sri Lanka.

The Australian captain, Ricky Ponting has been talking big about his side scoring 400 in a one day international. He may get his wish. My question to him is: But will that be enough to win you the match, Ricky?

Welcome!

Here it is, the first post in a new blog. And it's just to tell you what's coming up because if you want to know why I've popped up here, then you need to click on 'About This Blog'.

Football

Christmas and early new year is a perennially busy time in sport. For footie fans, the Christmas and New Year programme is swiftly followed by the FA Cup 3rd Round... surely the best day in the English football calendar (unless you're Bury and have just been chuckled out, of course. Don't get me started about excessive punishments for minor administration issues).

Football, though, is in danger of eating itself. Never mind the wages and all that mullarky (though they are plainly obscene) worry much more about the on and off field behaviour of players and managers and begin to wonder when people will start saying 'enough' in big numbers and turn away. It would be a tragedy.

Football is a peerless spectacle when played with skill and spirit. But it is nauseating when played with no respect for players or officials; and where the most common sight is an incandescent player practically vomiting his rage at an official despite being guilty, and very often when in no position to have an opinion. Grow up. Be men (in men's football). Have some dignity. Some pride in your performance. Take responsibility for your actions and those of your team mates.

Cricket

This year we've been treated to why the Aussies are still the world's number one cricket team and why it is that the job only just begins when you win something big. Like the Ashes.

Still, two tests to come and despite the fact that the urn is lost, pride and revenge are massive motivators. This time, there will be no such thing as a dead rubber, I can assure you. But is it time to be able to appeal desicions as a batsman in the same way you can in some tennis events? Now this wouldn't necessarily have saved England losing the ashes but Andrew Strauss's last three dismissals were all not out. I think we'd be looking at 2-0, not 3-0 if he hadn't been out so early on the last day of the second test.

Darts

The PDC World Championship of Darts kicked off this week and it is simply marvellous to watch from the players walking through the crowd to the final dart that is sunk in double top. And to all those who think it merely a pub game. Try it. Really try it. From the right distance away too. See how small that treble twenty bed looks? Now get all three of your darts in it. Regularly. And even if you don't, get them very, very close. Still laughing?

Tennis

Early next year we have the start of the tennis season from Australia. Henman is still there and still dangerous (and let me get one thing straight, anyone who gets to number 4 in the world and stays in the top ten for five years plus is a player of extraordinary talent who should be respected utterly) but I do expect great things from Andy Murray. He has the game, the aggression and the coach. It'll be his head that determines his place among the greats should he attain such status.

Rugby

Six nations rugby union is coming early in 2007. What can England hope for? Well, with Brian Ashton in charge, perhaps the light at the end of the tunnel has been turned on. He has spoken of the need to get the enjoyment back into the players and that is a laudable if challenging goal. If he can do it, England are up there with the best. And if he can maintain it in the face of top class opposition, if the players still play with freedom and lack of fear, we can yet come close to retaining the world cup. But it's hard. Remember Sven Goran Eriksson talked about much the same things when he took over England football. Didn't last did it? We can hope, though, and that is the essence of supporting any sport.

Well, plenty of issues raised there. I'll tackle them all in the coming weeks. If you want something discussed sooner rather than later, post a comment and I'll get on to it. But bear with me... baby Barclay is due on 14th January. Let chaos reign.