A crushing victory over Pakistan gave England plenty to be pleased about but familiar concerns remain over the make-up of the side
Just as nobody wanted to ask Usain
Bolt how much quicker he might have gone had he not slowed down before the line
in the 2008 Olympics, so it seems churlish to pick holes in England's
performance at Old Trafford.
England have, after all, just completed the fifth-largest
victory - in terms of runs - in their Test history. Joe Root showed that he is continuing to
develop as a batsman and has the skill and intelligence to adapt his game to
the situation. Alastair Cook, whose decision not to enforce the follow-on
was vindicated, continues to produce at the top of the order and Chris Woakes' emergence
as an international-quality bowler provides the strength in depth that England
have been searching for in the seam department.
This is a more than respectable Pakistan team and they were
hammered. It is 1-1 with two to play and the Edgbaston pitch may well suit
England better than any other in the series.
But the fact is that England came into the summer with
questions to answer about several areas in their side. Notably, they were
unclear over the identity of the most suitable partner for Cook at the top of
the order, unclear about at least one of the middle-order positions, unsure
about their keeper, their spinner and their first-change bowler.
So, five Tests later, how much progress have they made?
The answer is a little. But whether they are improving as a
side or being dragged along by the improvement in their best young player is
open to debate. It remains entirely possible that England will go to India
later this year with a new opening batsman, a new first-choice spinner and a
new face in the middle order.
To some extent, this is positive. If England can win against
decent sides despite performing at something around 75% of potential, they
clearly have the scope to develop into a fine side.
And there have been positives. Woakes seems to have come of
age at this level and might, before the year is out, give the selectors some
interesting decisions to make if they decided to go into Tests in Asia with
fewer seamers. While he does not quite ease the pain of losing Ben Stokes for Edgbaston, he does reduce it. The
last time England had two such fine allrounders was arguably in the brief
period in the late 1970s in which Ian Botham and Tony Grieg played together.
In this match, too, Jonny Bairstow produced an admirable
performance with the gloves. There were only two catches, but there were no
drops, few fumbles and only two byes in total. He still has questions to
answer, but this was a step in the right direction.
Most of all, there was the performance of Root. If, in the
first innings, he demonstrated the discipline and restraint required to succeed
at No. 3, in the second he demonstrated the strokeplay and selflessness to
prove he can adapt as his side requires. Afterwards Cook referred to his
double-century as "a great innings" and one of the best he had ever
seen while Misbah-ul-Haq described it as "amazing". It was hard to
disagree. Root really does look as if he is developing into a special player.
So it is probably inevitable that England should rely upon
him and Cook. Just as Sri Lanka once relied upon Kumar Sangakkara and Mahela
Jayawardene, Australia relied upon Allan Border and South Africa now rely on
Hashim Amla and AB de Villiers. To some extent, that is the inevitable burden
of excellence.
In the end, that was the difference between this Test and the
first. While at Lord's, Root top-edged an overly aggressive slog-sweep, here he
made sure he took advantage and, as Cook put it, "ground Pakistan
down". England took advantage of winning the toss, they weren't in a rush
with the bat or their tactics and they still won with more than a day to spare.
There is a lesson there.
The concern - or perhaps it is just a gripe - is that Root
and Cook's success is masking some pretty modest returns from the rest of the
top order. Root's move to No. 3 has opened a hole at No. 4, with Alex Hales,
Gary Ballance and James Vince all
struggling to supply contributions so far this series.
 |
| James Vince's woes deepened with another unconvincing innings |
It is Vince's form that is most
concerning. He is not just falling for low scores - he is averaging 18.57 after
seven Test innings - but failing in predictable ways. His first-innings failure
here, edging a drive at a ball angled across him, came in spite of a life
earlier in the innings attempting the same stroke. The failure to learn does
not bode well.
If Vince is dropped - and Stokes' injury may save him - it
does not mean the end for him. Many players have found their first taste of
international cricket tough but have returned to county cricket with more
knowledge of the standards required to succeed at this level. He has the talent
to come again.
Ballance has only had three innings in this series - one of
them quite impressive - so probably deserves a longer run to prove himself,
while Hales surely did enough in the Sri Lanka games to earn a place for the
rest of this series. He is not at the stage, though, where he can be said to
have secured the opening position and is clearly struggling against the swing
of Mohammad Amir. How he overcomes that very specific challenge in the next two
Tests may define his career in this format.
Moeen Ali's form is a worry, too. While
he has the third-best strike rate of any English spinner (with more than five
Test wickets) since the war, he also has the worst average of
any England bowler with more than 20 Test wickets this century.
He took five wickets at Old Trafford - a reflection of
Pakistan's policy of trying to destroy him as much as any particularly
wonderful bowling - but seems to have developed a worrying habit of delivering
a head-high full toss an innings, which betrays a man struggling for form and
confidence. England deserve credit for sticking with him - Cook has developed
as a captain in that regard - but Adil Rashid continues to push hard for
inclusion. It could well be that both men play on an Edgbaston track that tends
to turn as the game progresses.
The truth is, England rather got away with their errors in
Manchester. They got away with Cook's missed slip chance on the fourth day -
had Younis Khan been at a different stage of his career, he may have punished
them - and they got away with a top order that offered contributions from two
players. So dominant were England's seamers and two of their top three that it
made little difference that Hales, Ballance and Vince struggled.
"There's still work to do," Cook said.
"There's still inexperience in that batting line-up. Three of the top five
are pretty inexperienced. We still have a couple of years to go as a
side."
But that presupposes that experience will improve players. It
might, of course. But it might also show they are not quite up to the standard
required. It remains a bit early to draw conclusions about a couple of this top
order. As a result, it is a bit early to gauge how much improvement England
have made.
Selection for the next Test will be intriguing. As well as
trying to find a replacement for Stokes - there is surely no way he will be fit
for next Wednesday - England must also reflect on Vince's form and decide if
Moeen did enough here. Had Stokes not been injured, there was a chance that
England could have picked Rashid in place of Vince for Edgbaston. But now they
must decide if they also want a replacement seamer and how much batting is
required. For a side who have just achieved a huge win, they have quite a lot
of thinking to do.
Comments
Post a Comment