Essex County Cricket Club; Where 2016 didn't feel cursed

Embed from Getty Images

Chelmsford, April the 10^th 2016, an 11am start. Essex without a front line spinner at the ground most recently famed for green pitches and Jesse Ryder-inspired collapses. For the first time away captain’s were given the option to bowl first without contesting the toss, surely Gareth Roderick would bowl first..? Nope.

The toss was contested; Gloucestershire won it and took first use. Despite the lack of an Essex twirler, we were about to find out just how much the new toss rule was going to shape the Division Two title challenge of Ryan Ten Doeschate’s nearly men.

262 all out, and the early wicket of Nick Browne before the close, looked to represent a reasonable effort on the first day at the ECG, where first innings runs have been at a premium for some time. However the England captain, and the man Essex members are adamant should be playing alongside him with the Three Lions on his chest, Tom Westley, had other ideas. A century apiece and a lead of more than a hundred, maybe the ECB directives have reached CM2, I wondered aloud…

Embed from Getty Images

Before lunch on the final day the West Countrymen were heading back to Bristol on the wrong end of a 10-wicket defeat with Essex only one short of a maximum-points win, and the tone was set.

So adept at finishing third when the top two were being promoted, something changed in 2016, however loudly the Essex members could be heard predicting a tunnel at the end of the light.

There was of course still time in a 16-game season to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, providing Gloucestershire with their revenge in Cheltenham in July, but with only one team going up, Essex were far too good for their division two rivals.

Whether it was the end of Paul Grayson’s frequently promising, but then ultimately frustrating, tenure that had overseen eight trophy-less seasons since the day Grant Flower led them to Friends Provident Trophy success on the day that Usain Bolt announced himself to the World in 2008, or the new toss rule, something changed Essex’s approach. With the change in approach came a dramatic change of fortune.

For years the East-Coast County decided the way forward was low scoring games on devilish pitches to encourage David Masters and Ryder to put the ball on a length where the surface did the rest. This led to hugely important tosses and batting bonus points being as sporadic as an Alastair Cook six.

After the 385 posted against Gloucestershire, Essex added 441/8, 537/7, 268, 569, 358, 601/5 and 319 in the first innings’ of their remaining home games, belying their reputation for flaky batting displays and creating seamer-friendly surfaces.

Westley, Ten Doeschate and Browne all passed 1000 runs and Cook averaged nearly 92 in the seven games he played, and the bowling attack still thrived despite having the work harder for their wickets.

Graham Napier signed off his one-club county career with a personal best 63-wicket haul, with Jamie Porter taking 55 and David Masters adding 40 as the curtain came down on his career too.

Embed from Getty Images

Spin only accounted for 13 opposition wickets, so it could be argued that Essex’s new approach still ignored the directive of encouraging the production of international-class spin bowling, but having been so unorthodox in finding ways to not get promoted or challenge for one-day glory, it would’ve been very un-Essex to achieve success in the way expected.

Anybody wondering if this was a new leaf being turned over will continue to wonder though as two quarterfinal exists in the one-day competitions meant an extension of what has become a dreadful record in knockout matches, both home and away.

That continued state of wonder, along with the sprinkling of success, some interesting overseas acquisitions in the shape of Neil Wagner and Mohammed Amir, and the prospect of more things to moan and cheer about make 2017 look like an unmissable year at Fortress Chelmsford.

Alastair Cook on opinions and opinions on Alastair Cook

When, earlier this month, England captain Alastair Cook said: “Opinions are like arseholes, everyone’s got one.” I smiled at the slightly out of character response, but certainly didn’t expect to be quoting him in the near future.

It’s not my favourite turn of phrase, but seems particularly appropriate considering his use of it and the response to his refusal to enforce the follow-on at Old Trafford yesterday.

As England motored through the Pakistan batting lineup it became clear that they wouldn’t reach the target of 390 runs that would force England to bat again. Fairly early on there were whispers from pundits and the like suggesting he might not enforce it to give his bowlers a break, but there seemed to be a consensus that having rattled through the Pakstanis for only 198, they’d be fine to go again.

In the social media age everybody does have an opinion, and they speak with great authority on a range of subjects that they feel they are far more in-tune with than experts, and those employed to actually carry out decisions. I’m sure it only feels like society is getting more arrogant, because of how readily these views can be shared, but it grows tiresome.

Regularly I will hear or read people saying how stupid decision X or Y was and handing out a barrage of criticism for the person who made it, even though nobody knows for sure how it would’ve turned out if another option was taken, and crucially, that the decision was almost certainly made in good faith at the time.

Furthermore, even if the other decision had been taken, if that had gone somewhat awry, somebody else, or the same people would have criticised that too. In essence, you’re damned if you do, and damned if you don’t, and you’re damn-well damned if you take too long to make a decision at all.

The perfect example of this is Alastair Cook’s decision to bat again with half the Test Match left and a 391-run lead to build on. It has been variously mocked, described as dull or defensive and most ludicrously, described as one of the most glaring instances of cowardice in cricketing history. Brilliant.

While the knives were being sharpened, a bearded member at Essex, Alastair Cook’s county, was enjoying a day at the ECG moaning about everything from the campaigning in the lead up to the EU Referendum to Ravi Bopara’s bowling changes. Despite not bothering to look at the score from the Test, bearded-gent confidently proclaimed that there would be an argument for not enforcing the follow-on, but that Cook wouldn’t have the imagination to do that.

Without even considering the physiological and pyschological elements on the decision Cook made, quite incredibly, though sadly not uniquely, the England captain has been criticised for not enforcing and for enforcing a follow-on that he chose not to enforce. All of this gives a pretty strong indictment of where we’re at as a society and the attitudes towards people in a position of any sort of authority.

…and while I think of it; the result of the Test? - England won by 330 runs with more than a day to spare. I’m starting to think Alastair Cook used the right word to describe people and their opinions.

#CricketWorldCupdates: England out, but there are bigger lessons to learn

Winning the toss was just about the highlight of Eoin Morgan's day. 

Statistically speaking, he chose wrong though...

Moments ago, England crashed out of the 2015 Cricket World Cup. It has been a long time coming, but with the format as it is, until this morning they still looked set to make the quarterfinals. But they didn’t.

A hugely frustrating run chase that saw a steady start, a stuttering middle, a Jos Buttler-inspired rally and a tame end saw the Three Lions come up 15 runs short of Bangladesh's 275-7. This leaves them on two points after only one win in their first five games, unable to make the top four.

Rather than carry out the same post-mortem as everyone else, lambasting and lamenting the effort of the 15 professionals sent Down Under to do a job, I’ll simply say what England’s World Cup efforts have taught me.

This is the first global tournament to feature the key rule changes to ODI cricket that have seen different balls used at each end and a reduction in fielders allowed outside the circle. The experiment hasn't worked, and English trials and tribulations have only served to emphasise the point.

When the new playing conditions were introduced it was with the aim of making the game more exciting, compared to its little brother, T20. More runs were to be scored, with the aim of keeping the interest of fans for 100 overs of cricket.

After a while my observation was that it didn’t necessarily mean it would be easier to score every time. I thought the new rules served to emphasise and exaggerate the other factors on display. If it’s a good batting pitch, even more runs will come. But if conditions are favouring bowlers and the fielding side is on top, forcing the captain to bring an extra fielder up can make scoring even harder in the middle overs too.

During this World Cup, and particularly in England matches, I have seen more areas where match factors are exaggerated. Simply put, the conditions make the better side even better. Weaker bowlers are given a smaller margin for error and stronger batsmen are given more room and opportunity to score their runs, which inevitably makes the gap between sides even bigger.

Two examples of this are the way England’s bowlers have gone to all parts in the latter overs of the innings, and the results of the Irish team. Most teams have struggled to contain batsmen in these overs, but the England attack, lacking a clear plan or any semblance of confidence, has suffered more than most.

Ireland have beaten West Indies, UAE and Zimbabwe in this tournament and been one of the bright sparks of the whole event, but when they faced South Africa they didn’t have a prayer. I’m sure that a side full of confidence and with some very useful cricketers would have given the South African’s a much better game had they not been faced with the current fielding regulations that saw the last 15 overs they bowled disappear for 200 runs.

The other thing that the new rules has exaggerated and intensified is the importance and affect of runs on the board. In good batting conditions 300 is no longer enough but even if 350 is a ‘par score’, chasing it is some challenge. There have been 18 scores of 300 or more in the first innings showing the opportunity to go big is there, but only two of these have been chased successfully.

More tellingly though none of the scores over 310, let alone the scores upwards of 350 or 400, have been successfully chased. The opportunity to score 100 or more in the last ten overs is undoubtedly there, but doing that to set a score has proven immeasurably easier than doing it because you need to when chasing one down.

It’s not the battle between bat and ball that has reached an untenable level, but the battle between batting first and second. The experiment hasn’t worked.

Archive: Shinji Kagawa's Rooney Conundrum

Kagawa in his first spell at Borussia Dortmund

Shinji Kagawa’s role at Manchester United remains unclear. The club’s retention of Wayne Rooney this summer has widely been described as the most important bit of business conducted in David Moyes’ short period in charge. However, the Japanese international may be the one figure at Old Trafford who would have seen a potential departure for Rooney in a different light.

Keeping the best players is always as important as investing in new talent; the Arsenal fan’s response to the sales of Fabregas, Nasri and Van Persie in the last few years prove this. Therefore keeping Wayne Rooney, and at the same time ensuring that Chelsea were unable to significantly improve their squad, is generally accepted as a victory for David Moyes in an otherwise turbulent first summer in charge at the Theatre of Dreams.

You only have to look back as far as October 2010 to see the potential unrest within a side that is seen to be stagnating or declining after the sale of a key player. On that occasion it was Rooney himself who stated a ‘lack of ambition’ when indicating that he would not sign a new contract, the season after United had sold Cristiano Ronaldo to Real Madrid. On that occasion, whether Rooney finally received the assurances he requested or not, a new contract was eventually signed.

Fast forward to 2013, with Rooney in dispute with outgoing manager Sir Alex Ferguson and later incoming manager Moyes, Chelsea signalled their intent to sign the ‘angered and confused’ player. However, Moyes continued to rebuff suggestions that the Liverpudlian would be leaving, and as the window closed and Rooney remained in red, positive messages began to pour from the club with encouraging words regarding the retention of the player and his role within the team.

However, one man who may not be so enamoured with United keeping Rooney is Shinji Kagawa. The Japanese international has cut a frustrated figure for much of his first year in Manchester, and during a first season curtailed by form and fitness issues, Kagawa also found himself in unfamiliar roles when selected. His second season at Old Trafford, under a new manager, could be seen to be another opportunity to establish himself in the side, but with Rooney remaining a key player, Kagawa may find himself marginalised once more.

During the 2011/12 season, Kagawa’s performances for Borussia Dortmund caught the eye of an international audience, and saw him voted the inaugural Bundesliga Football Player of the Year, and he was included in the league’s team of the year. Dortmund manager Jurgen Klopp was at pains to attribute his considerable success to his central position, a key role he has not yet been afforded at United.

With 13 goals and 8 assists from his 31 Dortmund appearances in 2011/12, Kagawa’s importance to that team is clear, and the advanced role there saw him create 134 chances for teammates, whilst completing 55 key passes in the final third. Much of Kagawa’s frustration at United stems from the lack of responsibility afforded to him, and his selection on the left hand side. The statistics from his first season at Old Trafford show him taking a back seat to Rooney, the man denying him his preferred central position.

In his first season in Manchester, Kagawa was only able to complete an average of one key pass for each of his 20 matches, and only created 19 chances, making him a shadow of the creative force that terrorised Bundesliga defences the year before. Most revealingly though, Kagawa was only able to provide 3 assists during the 2012/13 season, a figure dwarfed by Wayne Rooney’s 10. The only statistical area of Kagawa’s game to see an improvement after his move to United is his percentage of completed passes, which rose from 83% to more than 89%, but this reflects his deeper role in the side and the back seat he has had to take to Rooney.

Having managed to retain Rooney’s services, David Moyes appears set to continue the trend of playing Rooney as the deeper of two forwards, in a ‘number 10’ role, and this means using Kagawa sparingly. During United’s recent Champions League fixture against Bayer Leverkusen the relative roles of Rooney and Kagawa were typified. Rooney shone in a central role, whilst Kagawa, selected on the left hand side, continued to drift inside as he struggled to impact the game from wide areas. It is this turn of events, and the impact on the Japanese international’s form and role, that may see him as the one man not to see Manchester United’s keeping of Rooney as a positive. 

This article was written for Sports Gazette in October 2013.

Kevin Pietersen: The World's most wronged man?

A man this cheerful cannot possibly have read the book...

The regular accusation of anyone who rubbishes Kevin Pietersen’s version of events, or indeed his book, is that they are part of the conspiracy against him.

Journalists have been accused of colluding with the ECB, with the BBC’s Jonathan Agnew taking the full brunt of the criticism, and anybody else has simply been accused of falling for the plot to find a scapegoat or finding it a convenient narrative.

I wouldn’t want to pretend to be party to the inner workings of an England dressing room, I can only base my conclusions on Kevin Pietersen based on word of mouth and what I saw when I watched him play for England.

After the Ashes humiliation I was critical of Pietersen, but would have had him in my team going forward, as I noted in my review of the campaign but that was based on what he was capable of on the pitch and not what he was like off it.

Whether you believe his version of events, or the alternative viewpoint of everyone else within the dressing room environment, the reality now is that Pietersen can never play for England again. The book makes sure of that.

Some books are referred to colloquially as unputdownable, KP’s was very nearly unpickupable.

After reading three chapters, and finding myself emotionally exhausted by the outpouring from his so obviously wounded soul, it felt almost cruel to go on. For me and for him.

I persevered though, and dived deeper into the thoughts and feelings of a truly distressed man; if nothing else, I hope getting this all out of his system and putting it on paper might help him find a bit of happiness.

Nobody has won in Pietersen’s on-going battle with the ECB, but he has definitely lost, though he achieved so much before the outcome was settled.

At an attempt at a deeper review, I’ll begin with the positives.

Rarely, when reading this book are you left wanting more. Some sports autobiographies feel guarded or too metronomic in style, but this one was similar to Bradley Wiggins’ in that it was almost repetitive in its attempt to tell the full story.

Not an author by trade, it seems natural that the sportsman might repeat himself or lose track of the story they are telling occasionally. It feels authentic.

A friend of mine regularly declares that his integrity is unquestionable, and I usually respond immediately by questioning, or ridiculing his integrity.

Fortunately Kevin Pietersen hasn’t gone down the Mike Tyson route of calling the truth in his book undisputed, because like my friends integrity, his truth has been questioned and analysed with almost forensic detailing, but unfortunately that’s about as positive as I’m able to get about this book.

As alluded to earlier, it is a very tough read. There are no positives, without the aim of including them being to take a swipe at something else.

Some of the things he discusses and the points that he gropes for are difficult to follow, particularly when discussing the IPL and the county game. He gallantly defends the former from an attack I’m not convinced it is facing, while highlighting the second as part of the ECBs systemic failing.

The most repetitive feature of the book is a man who can’t see where he might be in the wrong, and even when he acknowledges he might be, it just isn’t ever his fault.

While all the off-pitch chaos was going on, Kevin Pietersen was scoring thousands of international runs, but they don’t feel central to his story, and they really ought to be.

If you achieve what Pietersen has, and at the end of it your book doesn’t celebrate that, then it isn’t just those around you that need to take a long hard look at themselves. He also manages to cram meeting, and marrying, his wife into less than two rushed pages.

Would I recommend this book? Probably not.

Do I think everyone would hate it? No.

It’s a difficult read, particularly if you are trying to make your mind up about who is telling the truth, but as this is the truth from Kevin Pietersen’s point of view, it is a story worth telling.

I would like to make one final point, the criticisms and borderline character assassination above is based purely on the book. While Kevin Pietersen has always led a controversial existence he is not all bad. He is as generous with his time as he is hard working, and he often speaks well. Unfortunately the voice in the book is not the personable Kevin Pietersen, but a man on a point-making mission.

Counting Chickens, Abrasive Spice and why I don’t miss regular rail commutes

Kei Nishikori: Andy Murray's misfortune was to this man's delight

I’m a great believer in, and regular user of, the phrase “if I didn’t have bad luck, I wouldn’t have any luck at all.”

This rather neatly sums up my cup half-empty view of the world and my expectations that things are never far from taking a turn for the worse.

However, it turns out I can be lulled into a false sense of security, because last week I thought I’d had a stroke of luck.

About nine months ago I bought tickets for the ATP World Tour Finals tennis at the O2, not knowing who had qualified or which of the top eight players I would then get to see.

It isn’t a complete shot in the dark though; whatever happens you get to see two of the top eight ranked players, and you can usually take for granted the appearance of four or five certainties.

This year though, the race to London was a particularly topsy-turvy affair with two surprise Grand Slam winners and other players emerging as real threats, while top five stalwarts, David Ferrer and Britain’s Andy Murray, struggled to hold on to their rankings.

For a while it didn’t look like Murray would make The O2, but a great six-week run, that saw him capture three titles, made sure he got the job done.

Not only did Murray make it to London, he just happened to get drawn to play in the match I had tickets for… a real stroke of luck?

For a few days leading up to the game I thought so, but as soon as Murray dropped serve with two double faults in the first set, I started to have my doubts.

As it turned out, we were treated to the Brit’s worst performance in about three months as he had no answer to Kei Nishikori’s dynamic game, and as it turned out, I had counted that particular ‘lucky’ chicken before the egg had hatched. Nishikori was good though…

On this Saturday’s X Factor show Louis Walsh called Mel B Old Spice, quick-witted humour that I didn’t expect from the man who claps like a giddy seal and recycles his comments and critiques with an intense environmental enthusiasm.

That name served its purpose on Saturday, but I think a more suitable alteration from Scary Spice would be Abrasive Spice.

Added to the judging panel this year, she must have been given the task of shaking things up a bit and being the mean judge now Simon Cowell has been ‘mellowed’ by parenthood.

This has essentially resulted in the most detestable behaviour being dressed up as straight, blunt, or worst of all, ‘real’ talking.

This rudeness culminated in her reaction after the sing-off Sunday night.

Her act Paul out-sung Simon’s act Jay, but compared to some of the sing-offs in the series, they were both very impressive.

When electing to save his own act, Simon praised both singers and said it boiled down to backing his act, as it always does.

Rather than doing the same, yet again Mel decided to be rude.

“Based on that it’s an absolute no brainer… it’s obvious, the person I’m sending home is Jay.”

Praise for her act, but nothing at all for the other contestant, who was by no means the weakest left in the competition, nor was he poor in the sing-off.

The reaction of Mel and her act Paul once it had been sent to deadlock, and the public vote sent him home, was also hard to watch.

In that position you can’t expect him not to be disappointed, but his reaction was not disappointment, it was disgust and disbelief, and that’s unacceptably arrogant.

However good a singer you are, you need more to win that show, and I can’t be the only person who thinks he lacks that bit more, because he came bottom of the public vote.

A small aside from tennis and talent shows, I also had the unpleasant experience of travelling on a busy train over the weekend, one I don’t miss tackling regularly.

The standard gripe of the commuter is people refusing to move down the carriage, but on top of that I had to combat two of the lesser discussed, but equally annoying issues: people who sit in the doorway, and people who can’t stand still.

Getting on to a busy train is enough of a struggle without people setting up camp in the door way and making no effort to not be in the way.

Similarly, while you have to accept your personal space is going to be invaded on a busy train, it’s 1000 times worse if that person is continually fidgeting and brushing against you trying to see out of the window into the darkness.

You couldn’t see anything when you looked out 15 seconds ago, what makes you think you will this time..?