Jump to content

Too much talk from England - Geoff Boycott column


King

Recommended Posts

England lost the game with their first-innings batting. They could rightly say that whoever won the toss was a bit lucky but that's not an excuse for the way some of them got out, writes Geoffrey Boycott. More... t.gif Too much talk from England By Geoffrey Boycott Last Updated: 1:49am BST 01/08/2007 form.gifHave your say comments.gifRead comments In pics: Indian batsmen in buoyant mood Audio: Derek Pringle on jelly beans and sledging Derek Pringle: India outclass England | Trent Bridge scorecard England lost the game with their first-innings batting. They could rightly say that whoever won the toss was a bit lucky because the pitch was at its freshest for bowling. But that's not an excuse for the way some of them got out. Careless batting: Andrew Strauss played a disappointing shotWhen you're put in to bat, and you know the pitch is receptive to seam and swing, you have to adapt your game accordingly. You have to make the bowlers bowl you out with good balls, but most of our top seven contributed to their own downfall with some sloppy batting. Andrew Strauss went driving at a ball with no feet, as if he was a hundred not out, not new at the crease. Alastair Cook, Kevin Pietersen and Ian Bell were all lbw, and they were all playing across the line. Paul Collingwood got out driving on the up, with his bat miles in front of his pad. As for Matt Prior, he played a wishy-washy waft at a leg-spinner that didn't turn. I wouldn't have minded if he had tried to hit it for six but it was a nothing shot. England just didn't adapt to the conditions. In Test cricket, if you fail in the first innings you can't expect the bowlers to get you out of jail every time. The partnership that killed England was the one between Sachin Tendulkar and Sourav Ganguly. They batted slowly and sensibly, just waiting for the bad ball. Even when Ryan Sidebottom made Tendulkar play and miss in a fantastic spell from the Pavilion End, he still kept on, using all his experience to make England bowl him out. In the end, he was umpired out instead. Michael Vaughan showed in the second innings what could be done on that pitch if you grafted and worked and adapted to the conditions. He played one of his best innings for England, but there weren't enough other players getting their heads down. I was always taught at Yorkshire that a thinking cricketer is a better cricketer, and far too many of our batsmen didn't use their brains. This has been a harsh lesson to learn. A week ago they were winning a Test match comfortably and now they have lost one comfortably. The best things that came out of the game for England were Sidebottom's first-innings bowling and Chris Tremlett's second-innings bowling. Tremlett looked unbelievably good yesterday. He has all the equipment - the height, the pace, the away-swing - but has he got the desire? You get the impression that Tremlett is a gentle giant, at the stage of his career when someone has to be pushing him all he time. To progress, he has to push himself. Bowling in Test cricket is bloody hard work, and he's got to want it bad. He has to supply that intensity himself without needing anyone to kick him up the bum. Simon Hughes: Zaheer's guile gives England a headache Alastair Cook: Sweet revenge is wide of the mark Martin Johnson: Jelly bean pranksters suffer sticky end The great bowlers don't need anyone else to tell them because they want wickets more than food or sleep. If he can show that kind of heart, he will be a fantastic bowler for England. Otherwise he might be a spasmodic bowler, who leaves everybody wanting more all the time. It's up to him. The jelly bean incident was a non-event. It was just a bit of horseplay between a couple of the England fielders, which caused some hilarity in the slips cordon. Zaheer Khan thought they were laughing at him, but it wasn't meant to offend him. The business of Shantha Sreesanth giving Vaughan a nudge with his shoulder is unacceptable and he got fined for it. Players often get in a tangle when they are going for a single and someone's trying to make his ground but there is no place for a peevish little nudge when you are just walking back to your mark. What concerns me more is that a lot of modern players feel it's acceptable - or perhaps that it's the norm - to take the mickey out of the opposition, to be crude, or to sledge. You've got youngsters now who do it automatically. Why do they need to shout their mouths off like that? The great talkers like Fred Trueman were funny, they never abused the opposition or umpires. I always felt that the best way was to beat the opposition, not to talk him out. Win - that does the talking for you. I faced all the great quick bowlers, and not one of them ever swore at me, sledged me or behaved crudely. That's what made Clive Lloyd's team champion winners and champion men. They just beat you. They didn't have to sledge. After the way England got beaten in this Test match, maybe they should talk less and bat better at the Oval.

Link to comment
Guest dada_rocks

it's understandable just a week back they were writing obituary for indian attack and suddenly are grappling with a scoreline of 1-0

Link to comment

I don't see anything wrong in a bit of a chat particularly from Indian cricketers. This is not the age and time for just going back to your bowling mark ball after ball. The likes of Aussies and the Saffies do it all time time. This Indian team I guess has some of the rough blokes ever and it will only work in India's favour. You don't need to please anyone and give it as hard as you get. In fact I would say don't wait for others to get chirpy but get struck in right away.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...