ENGLAND'S CRICKETERS - HOW MUCH LOWER CAN THEY SINK ?

The final humiliation for England's cricket team was reserved for the fifth match of their series against Australia, played in Hobart, Tasmania, probably the antipodean location most similar to that with which they should be accustomed and comfortable playing in.

But no such luck. How can one adequately describe their abysmal performance in this Ashes series ? Humiliating ? Embarrassing ? Shocking ? Disgraceful ?  These and many other words could be applied, and yet neither the coach nor captain seem to believe that they should be sacked. How can this be ?

Anyone with an ounce of pride would surely have offered their resignation on the back of leading their national team in such a series of shameful performances, or been sacked, but not this lot it seems. Captain Joe Root says that he's still the man to put things right while coach Chris Silverwood is strangely silent about his own future. My God !

Is it possible to contemplate an England football manager surviving a year of results like those achieved by this rag bag of coach, captain and players ? Of course not. Would those at the Football Association responsible for the national team still be procrastinating ? Not a chance ! So why are the bureaucrats who run English cricket so inactive ?

English cricket is a mess. The national team relies on Root and Stokes, who seems to be injured more often than not, Broad and Anderson, while the rest come and go through a revolving door. Yes, these four are fine players but a team needs more than one top batsman, a frequently unfit all-rounder and two ageing bowlers if they are to compete. Broad will be 36 in June and Anderson 40 in July - it's well past time that they had been replaced by up and coming competition, but where is that competition ? Where are the new young batsmen and spin bowlers, pushing for places in the national team ?

The answer is that there aren't any. The decimation of real cricket, the County Championship, and its replacement by a mish mash of limited overs knockabouts has effectively removed the development pathway for the next generation of Test Match players. While responsibility for the appalling performance of the England team in recent times lies fairly and squarely with Silverwood and Root, ultimate responsibility for the mess rests with those who run the England and Wales Cricket Board, the ECB.

Once again they will say that lessons must be learnt and changes will be made. There'll  be yet another review conducted by the same tired old hacks which will achieve nothing. What is needed is a genuine clear out and a genuinely different approach. Fat chance !

MORE WOE FOR ENGLAND'S HAPLESS CRICKETERS

England's pathetic performance in the current Ashes series continued apace in the traditional Boxing Day test match in Melbourne. Once again, their batting crumbled in the face of the Australian attack with only captain Joe Root and Jonny Bairstow scoring more than 30; the rest did little to trouble the bowlers, let alone the scorer.

England had made an attempt to refresh their side, dropping the failing Burns and Pope, and bringing in Wood and Leach for Woakes and Broad; the result was the same old mess. Of the replacements, only Bairstow proved to be of any use. Zak Crawley, whose batting average in 15 matches is not even 20, excluding one major innings, was restored to the line up to no effect while the return of Wood and Leach has yet to produce any benefit.

Let's face it. England's selection, coaching and captaincy are all in need of serious attention. Ray Illingworth, who sadly died on Christmas Day, would have been appalled by the pathetic efforts of this current England team. In his day, players put in a full shift of county matches as well as tests in a domestic season, while on tour in Australia and New Zealand in 1970/71 they played the state sides as well as tests and no one complained about being tired or needing a rest, despite playing 16 first class matches and 13 others. Added to this, the appointment of Illingworth as captain was controversial but ultimately his leadership resulted in the winning of the Ashes despite his team being not dissimilar to that which Joe Root is leading; something of a mish-mash with few genuine stars. The difference was that Illingworth was a Captain and led his side by example, creating a winning mentality despite it all.

England now seem to be on an inexorable path to a 5-0 whitewash, with only the weather likely to save them this humiliation. Root's recent comments about his own desire to record a century highlight his own failure as a captain - his focus should be on his team, not himself. Sack the coach, find a proper captain and change the whole pattern of English domestic cricket. Only then will there be any hope of ever regaining the Ashes against a far more organised and determined Australia.

ENGLISH CRICKET ON THE ROPES

Former Australian cricket captain Ricky Ponting has taken a pot shot at England's current skipper, Joe Root, posing the question as to why he is captain.

Thus far, the performance of the England team in the Ashes series taking place in Australia has been abysmal. Apart from a couple of decent innings from Root and Dawid Malan, England have been utterly outplayed in all departments - batsmen like rabbits in the headlights, dropped catches, poor bowling strategy, inexplicable selection - all issues which a truly involved and competent captain would be addressing. But not, it seems, Joe Root.

Comparing Root's demeanour and behaviour on the field with that of Mike Brearley, even if Brearley was around 40 years ago, is educational. While Brearley was involved with his players, moving around the field at speed, talking at length with his bowlers as they walked back to their marks and racing back to his own position before they delivered, Root seems, literally, rooted to the spot. He stands at slip looking miserable and constantly bemused; rather than exhibiting confidence and energy, he looks fearful and worn out. Compared with Brearley and others of his predecessors, Ray Illingworth and Michael Vaughan spring immediately to mind, Root is nowhere in sight. 

Yes, he is a fine batsman, but being a fine batsman does not make him a good captain. In truth, he is  not a captain although this is only one of England's problems. Geriatric fast bowlers, poor fielding and a weak batting lineup don't help either. Some have complained that the England player's had too little preparation for this series, but whose fault is that ? Not the players themselves, for sure, but a system which tries to shoe horn far too many test matches, ODIs and 20-20s into too short a period, while having abandoned the once traditional round of games against local sides, in the case of a tour of Australia, 3 or 4-day matches against the various states and an assortment of other preparatory games. In that system, the touring players had every chance to become acclimatised, but no more. Today's players are simply thrown into test matches with little more than net practice.

The consequence of this, added to the astonishing mess that is English domestic cricket, is what we've seen in Australia in the last 2 or 3 weeks - the utter humiliation of England by a dominant and confident Australian team. England's problems go deep and a 5-0 whitewash is surely on the cards, unless the weather, or COVID, intervene. Maybe that will stir something amongst the moribund mob that make up the ECB, though I doubt it. 

NASSER HUSSAIN'S BIG CONK IS FAIR GAME.

When John Inverdale made a rather uncalled for remark about tennis player Marion Bartoli, people were up in arms. The feminists complained about Inverdale's sexism and a Government minister has asked the BBC to explain itself. Inverdale has been obliged to make a cowering apology and will, no doubt, next appear presenting something with an audience in the tens rather than the tens of millions.

 

Today, while watching coverage of the second Ashes test match, I was rather taken aback when Ian Botham made an entirely and very personal comment about Nasser Hussain's 'huge conk', referring to his nose, and also made a remark about his receding hairline. Botham followed this up with a further remark aimed at former England captain, Michael Vaughan. During the same period of coverage I also noticed, not for the first time, that the camera regularly pans around the ground seeking out people whose appearance may be different from the usual. Some of those focused upon are clearly desirous of such attention but others seem to be selected more for the amusement of the commentators and viewers. People, almost always men, with unusual attire or unusual appearance, rather than those with deliberately silly costumes, seem to be the butt of the commentators jokes and sometimes rather offensive remarks. No one seems to care or even think there is anything wrong with this.

 

In wondering why there seems to be a different attitude between these 2 situations, the answer appears obvious. Marion Bartoli is a woman and it's forbidden to make personal remarks about women; this is sexist, chauvinist and probably a dozen other adjectives favoured by the vociferous feminist and equality brigades. Nasser Hussain and the group who are targeted at cricket matches are male; they deserve whatever they get because they've been so nasty to women for so long. They also have no one to protect them in the way that women have.

 

Bartoli isn't a 'looker' and Hussain does have a big conk; both statements are true but only one is considered unsayable. That this is hypocrisy is obvious, as is the fact that it's time the men fought back, stopped being expected to bite their tongues and stopped apologising for being men.