NEWS
SCHEDULES
COLUMNS
PREVIOUS TOURS
OTHER SPORTS
STATISTICS
INTERVIEWS
SLIDE SHOW
ARCHIVES

Getting it right

Ninety pages. That's the length of a six month England contract these days, now that the players have actually accepted them. It makes you wonder what would happen if England raises it's performance to the level of Australia. Though perhaps they should aim to rise one step at a time. The players of course are completely undaunted by this. In fact, it took the elite twelve several weeks to actually put pen to paper. Gone are the days when playing for your country was a matter of honour and pride. To be fair, those of us who pine for those days would do well to take in a dose of reality - the world has changed, and the game has changed with it. It would be nice though, if it didn't so often look like a chore to be out there on the field. I am certain I am not alone in being willing to give anything for that particular opportunity.

Enough of the meandering philosophy however - of far more interest is the England twelve itself. What many people may not fully appreciate is that this is the twelve which will do battle in the opening Test of the summer, and barring injury, most likely the first few amongst those following it. The only question which remains is who will carry the drinks. Schofield, I suspect, his career-best start to the season at Fenners' notwithstanding. Never in history, even on an Indian away tour, can a Test match side have been picked two months in advance.

The selectors have left themselves little option - should some of the players show abysmal early season form, they can hardly be left out of the side now. And what happens if Michael Vaughan is injured for the first Test, and Graham Thorpe comes in and scores back to back centuries? Does the contracted player stay out of the side? Or does the twin centurion return to the grind of county cricket? A lot of people must be hoping that these questions will not arise.

What of the twelve itself? There are notable omissions, and notable inclusions, but none stands out more than the case of Graham Thorpe. It isn't often that I agree with a group of selectors, but to their eternal credit, they have got this one absolutely right. If only all cricketing nations would take heed of this example. No player should be able to pick and choose when he plays for his country. It doesn't matter whether he is Jack Hobbs, or Ben Hollioake. Not only is it an insult to the honour of representing your nation, it is just not acceptable in any profession. I cannot pick and choose when I want to go into work, and I suspect most of my readers cannot either. It should be no different for cricketing superstars.

Second only to the exclusion of Thorpe is the umpteenth re-instatement of both Mark Ramprakash and Graeme Hick to the side. England have made some terrible mistakes with their middle order in the last decade, and have continually paid the price for them. In Nasser Hussain, Thorpe, Hick and Ramprakash, they had available what could have been one of the top middle orders in international cricket. We'll never know if it could or would have worked, but when you consider all the alternatives which have been tried and condemned in the interim, it's hard to bet against it.

Hick is constantly pilloried as a flat track bully - a destroyer of nondescript medium pace bowling, but found wanting at the highest level. Certainly, nobody can argue that he is without weaknesses - but then, how many modern day batsmen are? Hick has, unfortunately, paid the price for the working over he received from the West Indians and Pakistanis in the early nineties. One of the most talented players of our generation went missing as a result, and cricket is the poorer for it. One only has to look at some of his innings in India, on tracks turning square, and others in South Africa, where pace and bounce reigned supreme, to see what might have been.

As for Ramprakash, perhaps nobody knows. He should have been England's Rahul Dravid - he had, and still has, everything in his game. In the last two years, he has seriously threatened to come through, leading the England averages over the period with consistent batting displays. His reward was to be dropped from the winter tour - although rumour has it that that decision owed more to off-field concerns than his on-field performance. What is going through his mind now is anybody's guess. More so, because of all things, he has been recalled as an opener. Obviously the selectors feel that his temperament and technique make him ideally suited to the role. Equally obviously, the selectors have never been in attendance when they have seen him in that role for county. Still, he has the unquestioned ability, and if Hussain and Fletcher can bring the best out of him, then England, and Test match viewers around the world, will benefit.

Most of the rest of the selections explain themselves, although question marks must surely remain over the inclusion of Craig White. Apparently the team management was impressed with his attitude and spirit in South Africa. Unfortunately, attitude and spirit do not a Test cricketer make. Just ask Ajay Jadeja of India. Michael Vaughan is well worth his place, though he has much to prove, and Atherton and Stewart must have been the first names on the list after Hussain. Andrew Flintoff too has shown signs of promise, though I suspect that, for the moment at least, he is closer to Adam Hollioake than to Ian Botham.

Amongst the bowlers, Gough and Caddick are obvious choices, and the end of Alan Mullally's up and down career was perhaps expected as well. For all his improvement in recent times, Mullally's impressive figures owe more to bowling too short and wide for batsmen to be bothered, than to any particular skill with the ball. The one bowler who can feel aggrieved is young Chris Silverwood, whose place went to Dean Headley - a game trier, but not exactly the future of English cricket.

Chris Schofield, as the lone spinner, is an interesting choice. An investment in the future some have called it, but to my mind he is there largely because the selectors felt obliged to pick a leg spinner. They are all the rage these days, what with one of them being named a cricketer of the century. He certainly is a talent with some potential, but we have to bear in mind that this squad represents the twelve players who will do Test match duty for England, not twelve "ones to watch."

That leads me to perhaps the only major criticism of this squad, which is that it is an ageing one. A larger squad, with some younger faces, would have sent out a lot more positive signals, both within the English game, and to those watching with interest from the outside.

This is what we have for the next six months though, and all in all, one can really have little argument with it. Bring on the West Indies and Zimbabwe, and let the games begin!

The Fourth Umpire