Doing good the English way

The performance of England over the course of this surprising ODI series against Sri Lanka has been unremarkable. If we were to point for a couple of “key players” who performed at “key moments”, we may be left stumped.

Perhaps Owais Shah’s crucial 80 on the second match genuinely won the match, but other than that, English players have been quietly successful. Even Kevin Pietersen didn’t play any booming centuries. No one bowler ran through the Lankan line-up. They were hushed, but still had a force – like a girl’s burp.

England’s success has come from solid team performances. Rather like how England crushed the Australians in the rugby World Cup and knocked them out of the tournament, England’s bowling “pack” have been well organised, disciplined and good. This is a huge change from normal.

They have succeeded in a reserved way. No one wants to show off too much, they all just stuck in and did their bit. And quite right.

Most of the press seem convinced that this “resurgence” is solely down to Otis Gibson, the new bowling coach. Alan Donald and a year of improving performances account for nothing when there’s a chance for a badly researched but plausible article to write.

I put their success down to this: no Steve Harmison. I’m no statistician (although I tried, once) but I reckon England’s overall success rate has improved about a jillion percent since he decided to injure his cleavage or something. We need accurate bowlers that get wickets now. This is 21st century cricket, after all.

Sri Lanka meekly crumble

Apparently, therefore, they should inherent the Earth. So perhaps this is a crafty trick to win the next World Cup? I doubt it, though.

In a deflating performance, Sri Lanka lost the match and the series to the inferior and more rubbisher England side.

The Lankans got off to a dreadful start, with the first three wickets falling for just twenty runs. Although Kumar Sangakkara and Chamara Silva put on a defiant 126-run stand, the England seamers dominated their innings.

In reply, Alastair Cook dug in for a characteristically dogged 80 off 123 balls, and KP looked similarly gritty before unleashing a flurry of boundaries to bring England home and record his first fifty in literally donkies.

The Sri Lankan’s lack of application has rather deflated the meaning of this series. It is as if the relentlessness of international cricket has worn their desire down to the size of my weekly pay-cheque.

This is understandable, if even predictable. Perhaps England played a master-stroke by brining in previous outsiders, untainted by the endurances of past defeats. They arrive, fresh-faced, keen and surprised as heck to be there and clean up.

Just look at Graeme Swann. Carefully crafted by the great dibbly-dobbly factories of no-where in particular, like a customised, pimped-up Jamie Dalrymple, and yet he dominants one of the best teams in ODIs in all areas of the game.

How on Earth is an honest, if bitter, blogger supposed to respond to such things?

By swearing, that’s how. Bollocks.

Wait, England won! I suppose I should be pleased. I am, in a way. Mainly because I have a lovely glass of wine in front of me, and my boss is away for the next fortnight. But anyway, well done boys. You clearly know a lot more about cricket than I do, which hasn’t always been the case.

Tyin’ in Notts

Graeme Swann is infuriatingly good. Match-winningly good, in fact. It’s not for these reasons that I don’t like him. No. My problem with Graeme Swann is that he is not Monty Panesar.

Worse still, England won a match. This reinforces the misconception that Monty should not be played in all matches, and be given the ball at every opportunity. The more Swann plays, the less likely it is that Panesar will open the batting.

Swann complements well with his Nottingham shire team-mates, Stuart Broad and Ryan Hairybottom. The mid-lands trio took nine wickets and scored 52 runs.

However, the chief reason for England’s victory was Sri Lanka looking out of sorts. Sure, the pitch was hopeless and the ball moved around like a dysfunctional gypsy family, but they’re a quality outfit. They should be able to see off difficult patches.

I suspect some anti-Monty match-fixing was going on. It can be the only explanation for England’s success. Heck, they certainly don’t have the talent. It’s just not natural that they win.

An England victory always makes me feel a bit dirty. No. Not that kind of dirty.

Thankfully, my mood improves with the knowledge that Fiji lasted longer than Australia in the Rugby World Cup. It was a good job that a rubbish team knocked out those Ausslers.

Snakes and dogs attack England

In a week of biblical plagues, the heathen Englanders managed a win despite the wrath of a vengeful god. The England captain, Paul Collingwood, was bitten and killed by a poisonous cobra during nets.

Fortunately, although dead, England selected his cadaver as a fifth bowler, and his body was supernaturally re-enliven by the slobber of local stray dogs. It is thought that they were attracted to a Colly on heat.

In other news, England won a cricket match. Well done them.

They won by boring the batsman out of their wickets. Annoyingly, Graeme Swann bowled with maturity and batted sensibly. His irritatingly competent performance is likely to keep Monty out of the series.

People are also saying a lot about Owais Shah. Mainly because his match-winning century against India is still fresh in the memory, and when people score big in a handful of games it means they’re the next Don Bradman. Or, in ODI parlance, “the new Michael Beavan”.

I think that Shah is the new Kevin Pietersen, in that he gets runs where as most of his colleagues cock up. Whereas KP is the new Shah of Iran, despite having plenty of support, he is over-thrown by fundamentalist zealots and exiled to foreign country cosseted by Western indulgences.

Mustard also looked good. I’d still like to see Jack Russell in the position.

England fall to pieces

The one-day trick still isn’t working for England. They have fielded more than forty players since 2005 (apparently) in their limited overs set-up, and decided to use some more in Phil Mustard and Graeme Swann. Neither proved particularly incompetent, nor were they match-winning.

Mustard was chosen out of necessity more than anything, and Swann was preferred over Monty Panesar because He Bats A Bit, and England can’t understand spinners that don’t bat. Lordy Lordy Lordy, I HATE YOU ENGLAND CRICKET TEAM.

Not really. It’s more that they really piss me off. It’s like the people who hand you out free papers in the morning, although you don’t mind taking tit-bits off them occasionally, you just want to batter them to death with their own product sometimes.

Anyway, lets cut to the pain. England lost again. They lost to a better team, that was better. Also, our team can’t cope with the warmth; England players just turn bright red in the heat and collectively transform into a drugged-out geriatric women.

In fairness, Mustard looked…the mustard. Ryan Hairybottom looked useless. Others failed as well, we all know who they are. Don’t we?

On the other hand, Sri Lanka looked excellent. Mahela Jayawardene struck an impressive 66 and Sanath Jayasuriya still keeps going. Where were they during the World Cup, though, eh? What’s the point of being good if no one can get any decent bet-money out of them?

All in all, Ayalac says: rubbish.