Runners? – The ICC are currently looking at implementing a policy that runners are not allowed in all forms of international cricket. I can see why they are thinking of such a change; there has been for some time misuse of this rule, especially in ODI cricket. On numerous occasions batsmen who are simply tired or have cramp have been allowed to have a runner. This is simply wrong – if their body is not conditioned sufficiently enough to last an innings that that is entirely their own fault.
A proposal that would get rid of this misuse of the rule was if you banned runners in ODI and T20 cricket but continued to allow it in test cricket. If someone is properly injured in ODI cricket this is unfortunate but the game only lasts at most 100 overs and teams should be able to recover from the loss of one batsman if they only have to bat 50 overs. Test cricket is entirely different; there is far less chance of a batsmen calling for a runner when tired because simply you’re rarely doing enough constant running between the wickets to be tired, for this reason the rule in test cricket is rarely if ever misused. So why get rid of the rule in test cricket? Whereas in ODI cricket losing a player injured is not an insurmountable position in test cricket it can be critical especially early in the match so why hinder them more by not allowing a runner for a genuine injury.
Edgbaston Wicket - The wicket at Edgbaston this past week has come under considerable scrutiny and the belief is that if there had been a bowling attack of quality rather than the injury hit Warwickshire attack and the ageing Worcestershire attack then the game would have been over after two days. Erratic bounce and the two paced wicket has led to a folly of injured and disgruntled batsmen and as a result Warwickshire been deducted 8 points (they are in the process of a spurious appeal, apparently not happy with the investigation rather than the result – they should just be happy not to have gained the full 24 point deduction for an unfit pitch to my mind).
Jonathan Trott and Ian Bell haven’t exactly been enjoying the return to county cricket and I assume it’s been a bit of a culture shock playing back to back games at Edgbaston after their ashes proliferation of runs. I just hope by the time I go to Edgbaston for the eagerly awaited England V India test match in August the wicket has settled down and the ground restructuring finished, otherwise the game may not last long and the ECB bigwigs may not be so keen to return to Edgbaston in the future which will be a shame.
Stuart Broad – I have to admit I have a mancrush on Stuart Broad. I adore his cricket skills and his attitude on the cricket pitch and to now I have never questioned his place in the England team but now with the first test fast approaching I am beginning to have a few concerns. In fact Broad’s test career is entirely ordinary averaging 35 with the ball and has been the least successful of the bowlers in the last year.
His last year has been stop start; rested from the Bangladesh home tests, injured early in the ashes and world cup and has never had an extended spell in the team. He also came into the test team early and as such has had little time to develop his bowling skills. In his absence in the ashes, England found more than capable replacements and possibly more talented bowlers at present. Chris Tremlett seems to be in the form of his life and seems to be a better model of Broad; aware of what length to bowl at different times, able to take wickets with the new ball and scare batsmen with the lift he gets from the pitch. Tim Bresnan took his chance just as well showing good skills moving the ball just enough to dismiss batsmen with new and old ball and showing exemplary control. Potentially both are better bowlers at current than Broad and deserve on the back of their ashes performances to start the summer ahead of Broad.
The problem for Broad is he doesn’t swing the new ball and isn’t a prominent swinger of the old ball which especially in English conditions really narrows down his options for taking wickets. Unlike Tremlett he is not quite sure of the exact role he should be playing, pulled one way by the captain and the opposite by others.
Broad akin to Andrew Flintoff is so much more than the averages he possesses. He is the snarl at the opposing batsmen after a four through the slips; the growl at his own fielder after a lapse in the field; and the unrelenting sprint to the crease regardless of the in match situation. Broad is the guy England go to when in trouble, willing to bowl to the exact instructions of the captain and put his body on the line for the good of the team. He is also a more than fine batsman with a test match hundred to his name made in tough match conditions. More than anything he is a competitor, ready for the battle and ready to shed blood for his country.
One out of Bresnan, Broad or Tremlett is likely going to miss out on the first test of the summer and in honesty none of them deserve that fate given how they have performed and I am glad I am not the one telling the unlucky one the news. It will probably be Bresnan to miss out, but Broad will be sure to feel a good deal of pressure this summer from the troop of quality seamers rallying behind him and with the added pressure of T20 captaincy this could be a big summer for Stuart Broad.
No comments:
Post a Comment