Test Cricket England v New Zealand 2013

[aeolium]

Thanks CdJ; and for those who missed it, a transcript of Aggers' "prickly" post match interview with Flower. How long before Flower says enough is enough?

Well, Flower may want sycophantic interviews in which the interviewer feeds generous questions and avoids all hint of criticism but they'd be pretty dull for the rest of us. FWIW every journalist in the lunchtime TMS discussion was critical of both Trott's batting on the Sunday evening and the late declaration. Flower and Cook were perhaps half an hour and two generous umpires away from having egg on their faces, but neither wanted to admit that things had nearly gone wrong as a result of their tactics.

[Sir Velo]

Well, Flower may want sycophantic interviews in which the interviewer feeds generous questions and avoids all hint of criticism but they'd be pretty dull for the rest of us. FWIW every journalist in the lunchtime TMS discussion was critical of both Trott's batting on the Sunday evening and the late declaration. Flower and Cook were perhaps half an hour and two generous umpires away from having egg on their faces, but neither wanted to admit that things had nearly gone wrong as a result of their tactics.

I don't disagree but the warning signs are there that Flower may be about to chuck it all in. We've seen this before, and not just in cricket; when managers start getting this sensitive it's a sure sign the pressure's getting to them.

My own recommendation: leaven the criticism with well deserved praise. They have just won a series 2-0, and by considerable margins in both tests.

[anotherbob]

FWIW every journalist in the lunchtime TMS discussion was critical of both Trott's batting on the Sunday evening and the late declaration. Flower and Cook were perhaps half an hour and two generous umpires away from having egg on their faces, but neither wanted to admit that things had nearly gone wrong as a result of their tactics.

The overwhelming majority of comments on the BBC Sport website following a critical article by Tom Fordyce were in support of Cook's tactics. There was a (slight) chance that enforcing the follow-on could have backfired and we could have finished with a tied series. As I said in an earlier post, the captain's first priority is a series win. Flower and Cook could have had eggy faces after enforcing the follow on too, there was no certainty of a win or draw (Headingly '81 anyone?)

[aeolium]

[QUOTE]There was a (slight) chance that enforcing the follow-on could have backfired and we could have finished with a tied series.[QUOTE]

I agree, and I would not be critical of Cook for batting again. As I recall, there was disagreement in the lunchtime discussion about this, with some supporting Cook. It was just the approach taken, and batting on well beyond the point at which NZ could have even sniffed at a victory. And, once he had a huge total to play with, why Cook employed such negative field placings, with edges from several batsmen going through vacant third slip. I don't buy that argument about a series win either - yes with Australia or South Africa, but not with 8th-ranked New Zealand who had just been bowled out for 68 in the last test.

[amateur51]

I agree, and I would not be critical of Cook for batting again. As I recall, there was disagreement in the lunchtime discussion about this, with some supporting Cook. It was just the approach taken, and batting on well beyond the point at which NZ could have even sniffed at a victory. And, once he had a huge total to play with, why Cook employed such negative field placings, with edges from several batsmen going through vacant third slip. I don't buy that argument about a series win either - yes with Australia or South Africa, but not with 8th-ranked New Zealand who had just been bowled out for 68 in the last test.

I agree with you aeolium, the failure to apply pressure with field placings in NZ's second innings revealed Cook's inexperience and Flower's safety-first approach. The result was what was wanted but the manner of its achievement left a bit to be desired. I'm sure Border's Australia or current RSA would have crushed NZ and gone for an early lunch, thus sending a very stern message to their next opponents.

But what do I know? - I was just the finest left-arm donkey-drop bowler of my generation

[anotherbob]

I don't buy that argument about a series win either - yes with Australia or South Africa, but not with 8th-ranked New Zealand who had just been bowled out for 68 in the last test.

NZ didn't look like 8th. ranked in their home series. They have some serious players with an antipodean mindset. And speaking of antipodean mindset, have a look at Steve Waugh's record as test captain and see how many times he gave the opposition "a sniff".

[aeolium]

NZ didn't look like 8th. ranked in their home series. They have some serious players with an antipodean mindset. And speaking of antipodean mindset, have a look at Steve Waugh's record as test captain and see how many times he gave the opposition "a sniff".

Just the once, India v Australia, Calcutta, 2001

But Waugh was an utterly different captain from Cook. His whole approach, including field placings, was attack and ruthless demolition from the start. His team would certainly have finished the game on the Monday.

[amateur51]

Just the once, India v Australia, Calcutta, 2001

But Waugh was an utterly different captain from Cook. His whole approach, including field placings, was attack and ruthless demolition from the start. His team would certainly have finished the game on the Monday.

Cook has learned all his Test captaincy in the field from Andrew Strauss who was also a careful captain. Who in the side might have felt that England should attack more and press on, and would Cook have listened to them? And was it really Cook's decision or Flower's? Listening to that interview with Aggers, I think you'd need some pretty well thought-out arguments to contradict or even just persuade Flower to listen. But a little assertion might help

[Sir Velo]

But Waugh was an utterly different captain from Cook. His whole approach, including field placings, was attack and ruthless demolition from the start. His team would certainly have finished the game on the Monday.

Fair point, but let's not forget that Monday was de facto the third day. Cook & co wrapped the game up early on the 4th afternoon, and would have been earlier but for the rain delays. The one negative about batting again (i.e. not enforcing the follow on) is the fact that you inevitably score more runs than you need, and at a slower rate, thereby prolonging the game unnecessarily. Like you, I doubt whether New Zealand following on would have got close to making England bat again. Even if they had succeeded in that, England should have had no trouble knocking off a few runs for the win. It's a fair decision to bat again when the bowlers are tired, but England's bowlers have barely had to bowl more overs than they would in an ODI in this series.

[amateur51]

Fair point, but let's not forget that Monday was de facto the third day. Cook & co wrapped the game up early on the 4th afternoon, and would have been earlier but for the rain delays. The one negative about batting again (i.e. not enforcing the follow on) is the fact that you inevitably score more runs than you need, and at a slower rate, thereby prolonging the game unnecessarily. Like you, I doubt whether New Zealand following on would have got close to making England bat again. Even if they had succeeded in that, England should have had no trouble knocking off a few runs for the win. It's a fair decision to bat again when the bowlers are tired, but England's bowlers have barely had to bowl more overs than they would in an ODI in this series.

Just a thought - when did Broad's 'twinge' occur?

[Sir Velo]

Just a thought - when did Broad's 'twinge' occur?

That may well have played a part in their thinking. Personally, I think the "instruction" was simply to bat normally (i.e. 3-4 runs per over). Unfortunately, neither Flower nor Cook realised that Trott would take this as carte blanche to drop anchor.

[aeolium]

Just a thought - when did Broad's 'twinge' occur?

I think this was when he caught and bowled McCullum, so NZ were already 7 down - he grazed and cut his knee on the ground. I don't think he was injured before this, so it was not a factor in England's tactics.

[anotherbob]

neither Flower nor Cook realised that Trott would take this as carte blanche to weigh anchor.

I believe you meant "drop anchor"

[Sir Velo]

Quite right. Knew it didn't sound right but couldn't put my finger on it!

[amateur51]

I think this was when he caught and bowled McCullum, so NZ were already 7 down - he grazed and cut his knee on the ground. I don't think he was injured before this, so it was not a factor in England's tactics.

Thanks aeolium