England seal the deal with a kiss.

By “kiss” I mean a convincing victory, not that, you perv. In perhaps the most boring match of the series so far, England’s fiery bowlers skittled the Indian batsmen for not-much, and half-centuries from Kevin Pietersen and Paul Collingwood saw England home comfortably.

To be honest, this match didn’t really interest me much. I was left rather exhausted by the seven-match series, which has produced some spectacular performances from both sides. But as I was painting doors in the garden, whilst vaguely listening to the absent-minded TMS commentary, I briefly consider ed tuning in to the Afternoon Play.

Rest assured that the moment of madness quickly dissipated, but it is saying a lot when an obsessive and slightly sad cricket fan like myself is getting tired of the great game. But it was a bit deflating, really.

Don’t get me wrong, it wasn’t a walk over. India tried hard. But a combination of tour fatigue and general lethargy ensured the defeat in the game, and ultimately the series. Gautam Gambhir looked good with the bat and in the field, but his name was too much like a country for him to hold much influence in the game.

Cricketers whose names sound like countries:

Gautam Gambhir.
John Holland.
Malcolm Marshall Islands.
Bruce French.
Monty Panama.

India tie the series

In possibly the best match of the series so far, India dramatically clinched the NatWest series in a last-over thriller. Thanks mainly to the efforts of Robin Uthappa, who was just brought in as an extra batsman, won the match with a blinding 47 off 33.

Let us remember that the match wouldn’t have even been close if it wasn’t for Dimitri Mascarenhas’ freakish 30-run over at the end. Luke White also gave an impressive performance with a confident fifty on his debut, with a strike rate of 128. Owais Shah also proved his class, with his first ODI century.

Nonetheless, the day belonged to the Indians. With a 150 opening partnership and a 90 for man-of-the-match Sachin Tendulkar, India always looked in control with this difficult run-chase.

In fairness, with over ten-an-over required at one point, this should have been England’s game. And with the loss of MS Dhoni, India’s defeat looked imminent. But with Uthappa’s steady hand, India somehow managed an unlikely victory. Perhaps there was some naïve bowling, and ball-chasing by the captain, but it was the bravery of the Indians that saw this game through.

Let us also remember the brave little tail-enders, Ajit Agarkar and Zaheer Khan, who scarified their wickets, so that India may live on.

Really, it was the rabbits that won this game. If only it could have been so in my career.

England, one by one, die

If people must persist in talking foreign, why must they do so loudly? Why the hell won’t Diana get the hell out of my face? Why can't the England players buy a packet of cigarettes without getting a side strain?

These are some the questions that constitute the mysteries of Sod. These are the questions that will never be answered, but they will continue to piss the crap out of you.

Sorry about the absence, by the by, I have been a little busy. And quite frankly, bringing the Ayalac little ray of bloody sunshine into your indolent and pathetic lives is at the bottom of my life’s "to do" list.

England lost a match yesterday. They lost because the other team is AMAZING, and we are A BUNCH OF USELESS DUFFERS. Their batsmen put the England bowling unit to the slaughters, all top four scoring half-centuries. Yuvraj Singh was particularly brutal, plundering 72 off 57.

The change of bowling strategy had much to do with this. First mistake was picking Jon Lewis, who failed to swing the ball, or prevent the batsman from swinging the bat. Bizarrely, the bowlers decided to eschew the previously successful strategy of bowling back-of-a-length in the hope that it would swing. It really didn’t. Not even on the tenth time Sachin Tendulkar drove you for four.

England’s batting hope lay mainly with Ulbator Choobleton, their chief Rain Dancing coach. Sadly, he, as well as everyone else, failed. Paul Collingwood put on a good show (91 off 71). And when Matt “The Pratt” Prior and Ian Bell were sharing a 90-run partnership, England may have thought they had a hope.

But they didn’t.

Now they are either (a) injured or (b) dead. Winning a single match may be a tough ask given the present state of disorder.

Can’t finished today’s post without mentioning Ravi Bopara and Stuart Broad’s incredible innings together at Bristol. It was probably the best partnership in England’s ODI history. I really thought they were finished when Colly ran himself out.

I even stopped listening to TMS. But I eventually tuned in again and it was clear something special was happening. It was a tremendous, thoughtful and composed performance. Better than I have seen from England since I saw Sydney Barnes and Pip Fielder contribute 39 matching winning runs in a brave last-wicket stand at the MCG.

Team England beat Indian galacticos

England strangled India by 42 runs in Edgbaston last night. (Edgbaston is the posh bit of Birmingham, in case you didn’t know.)

Ian Bell top-scored for England again for England – third time in a row. A lot of people have been muttering about the England clique, that the same people are selected despite strong performers at the county level. Bell’s recent success is surely due to the selectors backing his ability over the long term. Long live the exclusive England club!

Anyway, England won principally because they were the stronger team. Bell aside, England’s batsmen contributed small, punchy innings in a selfless contribution to the England effort. Moreover, their reasonably high score was only enabled through having batters well down the order – look at Chris Tremlett’s 19 off 9.

India lacked the same cohesion. England took this attitude onto the field, bowling and fielding as a tightly organised unit. Monty Panesar stunned us all with another run out, without even looking.

Sourav Ganguly (72) and Rahul Dravid (56) looked especially dangerous. And Yuvraj Singh (45 off 35) looked ominous towards the end of the Indian innings. But no one else chipped in. Although there were flashes of individual brilliance, it seemed the Indians struggled with the sharp England fielding and the restrictive formations that surrounded them.

Dougie Brown on TMS made an interesting comment. In his opinion England’s superior fielding earned them 30-40 run difference between the two sides. More or less the difference in runs. A genuine case of fielding winning the match?

India’s efforts on the field still look shoddy, but they also missed many run opportunities of turning singles into twos. It seems as though India lack the commitment.

However, in the true Ayalac spirit of taking negatives out of victory, there are still apparent weaknesses in the England set-up. They still lack the ability for sustained slogging. Both at the start and death of the innings, the 8-, 9-, or 10-run overs were wanting. England are still using the “playing is slow” tactic that was such a failure at the World Cup. Bell is building an innings, which is fine, but you need a few biffers around him.

India squeak home, despite being not as good

Well, the rubbisher side managed to get home by the narrowest of margins: half a run.

Controversy broke out when the referee decided that India had 0.5 run advantage over England. Despite obvious cheating and bribing of the umpires, India’s victory never looked certain.

Scoring a mere 329 ½ on a feather bed, India struggled to contain the superior England batsman. Paul Collingwood knocked up a massive 27 and Kevin Pietersen contributed a weighty 25.

The sneaky Asian Russian Dimitri Mascarenhas smote five sixes in his 52 off 39. Although he’s still rubbish. Matthew Prior fluked some runs too. Most interestingly was Stuart Broad’s 25 (20 of which came from the last over). He is certainly proving his worth as a genuine all-rounder, and, on current form, seems more reliable than Andrew Flintoff with the bat.

Cheating aside, England lost for two reasons: first, none of the batsman converted a good start into a significant innings. I suspect that this was principally due to the frenetic nature of the run-chase. They were not afforded the luxury of time as they were in the first ODI and batsman could not “build an innings” in a classical style. Perhaps the sustained unconstrained hitting-out is a skill that our boys have yet to acquire?

Secondly, England’s middle order was pinned down by India’s slow bowlers, particularly by my hero Piyush Chawla. Who is great. Whereas England decided to drop Monty Panesar, our best bowler. They didn’t even picked a part-time spinner, who, on a turning track, was badly missed. Monty may have increased the number of wickets taken, but we’ll never know. Spinners are great.

In all, you could say that this tactical error threw away their lead. Another instance of them Trying To Be Too Clever. Why change a winning formula? Why? No, don’t answer that question. Just blame the Indians. It’s their fault.

England like rampant rhinos

From the depths of the Sargasso Slow News Seas comes an unexpected England win. A victory of many noteworthy achievements. Let bloggers rejoice.

Firstly, it’s England’s first win over a proper side since February. That’s a long time for an England cricket fan. A very long time.

The win was made possible by two superb innings, both by young’uns, whose place is less than secure.

A partnership of 178 by Alistair Cook and Ian Bell really dominated the Indians. Both scoring a maiden century, and both looking like wonderful prospects for England’s ODI future.

Another good omen is the return of Andrew Flintoff. His bowling looked fast, fiery and accurate. He had a few niggling problems with no-balls, but anyone who passes Rahul Dravid’s outside edge gets the nod from me.

James Anderson proved his class, by taking 4-23 and becoming England’s fifth highest ODI wicket taker. The rest also looked good, except for Monty Panesar, who had an indifferent day. I suspect that he was upset by distracting news of international importance.

India, by comparison, looked rubbish. This makes me laugh. Look: Ha Ha Ha. That’s me laughing dementedly in the picture.

Their bowling lacked any real sort of threat. Their running between the wickets was hilarious. Worst still, they didn’t even seem to try. When Dravid and MS Dhoni were together, instead of chasing down their seven-an-over target, they just tapped it around for three-an-over. Why? What are you thinking? Possible twos were left unconverted, they seemed content with singles.

Rubbish. Derisory rubbish.

If India want to win these series, and one strongly suspects they do, then I suppose they’ll have to make a bit of an effort. But, there’s still six more matches. Perhaps they’re hoping that England will just get bored and start playing ping-pong?

India versus England

So, the series that was too short ended in an Indian victory, and deservedly so.

They bowled better, the batted better and they tossed better. All qualities, in my mind, that a just world rewards with success.

You rather feel that India were a bit timid in the last test, and should have pressed for a second win. Not enforcing the follow-on was, in George III’s terms, madness. There would have been no way in South London that England could have chased down and surpassed a first innings lead of a jillion.

You could compare this move with Australia. Australians play Total Cricket (because they’re Total Prats) and push for victory at all points. Sadly, and inexplicably, they have publicly dropped enforcing follow-ons. Nevertheless, it would have been the aggressive approach. If not Australian…never mind…you know what I’m saying.

Michael Vaughan said there are a lot of positives to take from the loss. Like, him not looking like a muppet. And Paul Collingwood turning into a dangerous bowler.

So, I’m going to take some negatives from India’s win. Only one player got a hundred. They kept on bowling Sachin Tendulkar, when they have loads of perfectly good bowlers. Their middle order is old. Their fielding is at times a bit shaky – I think they dropped at least four catachable catches. They have, on the whole, crap hair.

Feel free to sort that list out, analyse it and perhaps publish it in a blog. I, along with the rest of the world, won’t read it.

Now, it’s on to the ODIs. And don’t we all look forward to another England pasting with glee? Oh bloody joy.

England not bad, but incredibly stupid

I think more or less every person in England wants to hunt down Andrew Strauss and beat him to death with the MCC manual. Well, perhaps not to death – he wouldn’t be much good in the second innings. Although I doubt whether the scorers would notice the difference.

Why are you playing a hook shot? WHY?

Anyway, that was yesterday’s rubbish. We have yet to look at today’s beauties: Consider Ian Bell’s flailing willow, Ryan Sidebottom’s moment of monkey fuck and Matthew Prior’s decent into Geraint Jonesdom.

All balls.

So, it’s left to Monty Panesar and Chris Tremlett to put on a 700-run partnership to put the game safe for England and win the game. You think this is not possible? You think that there is something that Monty can’t do? Duncan Fletcher thought that, and he’s fat. Do you want to be fat? Do you? Do you? Well then.

I would say “well done India”. But I’m not going to.

I will say: ANIL KUMBLE HAVE MY BABIES. I have long championed the skills of this hardy warrior. Just look how tough he is. Anil Kumble is the God. Yes, that’s right, we have a new GOD here at Ayalac.

Almost Monty amazing. But not quite. Monty’s going to double Kumble’s score. Just you wait.

More incredible things

As I was walking from Tower Hill Station, where I met Paul Collingwood, towards Fenchurch Street Station, you would never guess what happened to me.

There standing, alone and resolute, was the England Chairman of Selectors, David Gravney. Weirdly, he was standing in the middle of the street. Holding firm, like a proud rock in the rapids, against the tide of City commuters.

I didn’t have the nerve to talk to a man that sort of looks like a sports administrator. I decided to share his street space as I walked past him – hoping that his abilities of selection would rub off on me. Sadly, they did not.

I went into the shop to buy a banana and a snack. The fruit wasn’t ripe yet and the crisps had passed its sell-by date. But that wasn’t my fault. The food looked alright in the net…the food net…where you keep…never mind.

Gravney also looked grumpy. Perhaps he’s able to look forward into time and saw the England cricket team getting battered in the Oval.

What is wrong with the world? The English cricket fan has had bugger all to cheer about since 2005. Oh wait, we beat Pakistan in dubious circumstances last year. You remember, when Daryl Hair threw a wobbly, and gave England the game because he’s a racist. Other than that, we’ve had little applaud. Maybe we should bring back racism? To improve the standard of international cricket.

Jelly bean bastards

A jelly bean is the centre of the cricketing world today.

Zaheer Khan claims that Kevin Pietersen threw a wee sweetie at him whilst batting. Presumably, this is after the stump-microphone picked up the “that’s a shit shot” wittism.

England claim no such action took place. Michael Vaughan said:

"The guys promised me they weren't throwing them. They were just left there at a drinks interval."

It may have indeed been a joke. By in the context of a barrage of abuse, it would be difficult to interpret this joking-but-not-joking incident as anything other than part of the pathetic intimidatory tactics that England were reduced to. I’m not surprised that Zaheer felt “insulted”.

In an obvious tit-for-tat remark, David Gravney, the English Chairman of Selectors said:

"There were some issues on both sides. You've got people bowling beamers, you've got people going across the crease."

No, not both sides: our side. Besides, these comments are a blatant attack on Sree Santh who, along with receiving a fine of 50% of his match fee for barging into Michael Vaughan, also accidentally bowled a beamer and deliberately ran over the crease.

As far as I’m concerned, this is an isolated action by one hot-headed quick. The more troubling aspect of this debacle comes from the English camp. Their organised and nasty abuse of batsmen was constant.

I’m really annoyed at England. If they were a political party, I would definitely never vote for them ever again. However, I am English, and I’m buggered if I know what to do. Maybe reclaim my Irish roots?

Anyway, this sledging business is really pissing me off. Why can’t they just bloody play cricket for Christ’s sake? Here’s Geoff Boycott:

"With verbals, I ask myself why do people carry on abusing players when they're batting. I never had it in my day and I faced some of the greatest bowlers there has ever been."

For once I agree with Geoff. Sledging hasn’t always been “part of the game”. Being “tough” does not mean tolerating abuse. It means playing hard cricket; not swearing at opponents.

What am I going to do? The England team are a collection of vindictive bastards. Support India, I suppose? They do appreciate spin bowling more…

England get a bit nasty

I criticised Australians heavily a while ago for being prats. I argued that their no-holds-barred approach to the game lay outside the spirit of the game. Whether it was effective was irrelevant, people had paid good money to see people play high quality cricket, and if a batsman’s concentration was disturbed by a verbal harassment then you are denying the public the full spectacle of test match cricket. It’s akin to cheating.

England’s behaviour on the field in this test match has been a disgrace. The conduct of Kevin Pietersen and James Anderson in particular was embarrassing and pathetic.

In the prats league, they are running neck-and-neck with the Aussies at the moment. However, unlike the Aussies, the strategy is proving ineffective.

Matt Prior attempted to defend England appalling display:

“It’s international cricket. It’s a hard game, we all want to win, so you’re going to have your banter.”

If you want to win, why don’t you just brain the opposition batsmen in the changing room? That would guarantee success. Oh no, there is some invisible threshold of acceptability defined not in the rules, but in England’s head.

Prior then reveals the truth of the matter:

“I do enjoy [sledging]. It’s part of the game and if you don’t enjoy it then you’re going to struggle. It’s never nice when it’s you batting and there’s 11 blokes around you giving you a barrage. It can be uncomfortable, obviously, but having known that as a batter as well it can definitely be used as an advantage.”

Matthew Prior is a prat.

Cricket is a sport, whereby winning and losing is determined by skill. These flaky arguments in favour of verbal abuse and mental attacks are affront to morality as much as the spirit of the game. And, as Christopher Martin-Jenkins pointed out, they are also illegal.

Indian have traditionally been seen as a “soft touch” on the field. Their batsmen are liable to be intimidated and riled easily. Probably because Indians, as people, are so polite, diplomatic, diffident and generally some of the best human beings in the world. Sadly, they’ve had to toughen up to combat this onslaught. And they did just that. Deflating the lary England bowlers with a solid batting performance.

India thoroughly deserve to win this match, just as much as England deserve to lose it.

KP and England look ok

I’m loathed to appoint Kevin Pietersen as God - mainly because I had a go at him for whining the other day. Nevertheless, the bloke is amazing. I’m talking Alistair Cook amazing.

He dug England out of another awkward situation, by firing off 134 against India today. Only Matt Prior gave him serious support, contributing 42 to a partnership of 119.

But of course, you know all this. You also know that KP is an incredibly talented chap, if a little annoying.

I was going to start the next sentence with “but what you don’t know is”. But then I released that you probably did know it.

Anyway. KP played well, but I think that he’s batting with the tail needs a little more thought. He had a very incoherent strategy: refusing to run a three on the fifth ball, and yet taking a single on the fourth.

So what’s the key with batting with the tail? Common sense would back “farming the strike”. This involves the proper batsman whacking it around for the first half of the over, and picking up a single towards the end, thus minimising the tail-ender’s exposure.

Steve Waugh developed another approach, in which he played a single off the first ball, showing confidence in the rabbit, and hoping enhancing his pluck. However, this does increase the chances of another wicket.

Which is best? Well, I think it depends on the situation. If you are on the end of a rubbishy, low-scoring innings, with days left in the game, I would elect the former. But in a context where time is an issue, and you need to score quickly, then Waugh’s approach is probably more appropriate.

In all honesty, KP made a mess of batting with the tail – mixing the two approaches with no real end. On the other hand, he made a mess of the bowlers’ figures.

Lets type something about the test match and see what happens

Before the series started, I thought that India were going to win it. Then I saw the seamers, and changed my mind. Although they had a good series in South Africa, they mostly bowled rubbish. England racked up a solid foundation, and looked like getting well over 400.

Then everything went to poop. The Indian quicks remembered how to be good, and bowled us out for bugger all. We lost eight wickets for about a fiver. I feared another England thrashing.

Devine Pity intervened, and the ball beginth to swing. The “Let’s Just Pick Swing Bowlers” strategy paid off and England are picking up millions of wickets for bugger all.

And what about that Chris Tremlett, eh? I thought he bowled very impressively. Nothing like the Sri Lanka fodder he has a few years back. Now he's "Centre fo(l)dder". Ho ho.

Although, he does look like a serial killer. There is definitely something of the Christopher Walken about him. Scarier still: he shaves his body hair. Or so I'm told.

India: at a glance

India? Not as good as they should be. Never have been, really. Tendulkar? Over-rated. Dravid? Under-rated. The new pace attack? Potentially, bloody amazing.

These are my views on India. They are also right.

I have always liked the Indian test team; more than any other (England aside). Traditionally, their bowling attack has centred around Delphic-like spinners and their batting focuses on the boring arts of batting: patience and judgement. Spin bowling and boring batting are my two favourite things in cricket. India exemplify both these virtues.

In recent years, however, the character of Indian cricket has changed. The batting line-up, although the statistically most intimidating for many years, is strangely fragile. In the recent tour to South Africa, although the batsmen were capable of putting the team into a strong position, they were liable to collapse.

Whereas, during the same tour, the seam bowlers flourished. Sri Sreesanth became a match-winner. Zaheer Khan re-discovered his old devastating self. And, additional to this dangerous new-ball partnership, India has found itself with a host of young up-and-coming quicks pushing through the ranks. They should all do well in English conditions.

Although, saying that, so should Steve Harmison.

I’ll write another post about the batters later. You know, when I can be bothered.

Sussex: better than India?

Sussex (population 1.2 million) is giving India (population 1.2 billion) a run for its rupee in a warm-up match at Hove.

After recording 388-7 for the first innings, India had the local boys reeling on 144-5. Only a brilliant rear-guard ton by Andy Hodd saw Sussex declare on 300, and the fight-back continued on the field as India was reduced to 21-2 at stumps.

Let’s look at Andy Hodd. From his picture, you can safely assume that he is boring, and isn’t worth writing much about. Unless he scores a hundred. You can write about that, if you want.

It would foolish to announce that Sussex is a better team that India. For a start, consider the population disparities. If a small English county started claiming its superiority, the Indian army could quickly crush the upstart.

Let us no forget, India is a nuclear power. I have lived in Sussex. The respective local authorities scattered about the county are useless. They couldn’t even get the bins collected, never mind organise a collective nuclear counter-strike.

We might say that this game was even a fluke: A freak outcome produced by overseas batsmen struggling to acquaint themselves to usually dodgy English conditions. But that would be dull.

Sod it. Let Chichester be damned: the Sussex County Cricket Club is better than every man in India.

I never liked it anyway.

India's squad to England

Here’s a nice picture of sunny Headingley my roving reporter sent me. Nice, isn’t it?

Anyway, did you see the news about Virender Sehwag and Harbhajan Singh? They have been left out of India’s summer tour to England.

This is rather unfortunate for Sehwag, as he had a reasonable Afro-Asia Cup, hitting a 30-ball fifty. He also looked liked he was easing back into form, he got some runs against someone I can’t remember recently, and hit a World Cup century. Seems odd, therefore, that our Virender can represent his continent but not his country.

This is because the BCCI's frustration with his unfulfilled potential. He had a rotten series in South Africa, scoring 89 from six innings. And before that World Cup ton, he last got into triple figures in 2005 in an ODI. May this is the end for the old war horse? It seems sad, but, knowing Indian administration, he’ll be in and out of the side for a few years yet.

Dropping Harbhajan Singh is a bit more of a straight-forward cock-up. In the last test match he played, he managed a five-for, and another one in the test before that. In the Afro-Asia series, he took four wickets in his two matches, at 25 a piece. He is a quality player and England are rubbish at playing him.

Weirdly, Ramesh Powar has been given the nod. He too is an off-spinner. Only he’s old and not very good. Even young Piyush Chawla was left out.

All these things annoy me.