This is a blog post from
Going into the series against India as one of the most dominant teams in recent times, the number one One-Day-International side in the world began their march to the World Cup next year. After an early ouster in 2015, the English team revamped their approach towards limited-overs cricket by assembling together a group of dangerous hard-hitters who have the potential to smash the ball out of the park at will. Cricketers like Jonny Bairstow, Eoin Morgan, Jason Roy, Alex Hales and Jos Buttler together form one of the most intimidating batting units in the world at present and together they have the ability to race away with the game in any situation.
Over the last two years England have participated in 44 ODIs (leading up to the 2018 home series against India) and have won a whopping 75% of their games, with the Indian team coming in at a close second, having won 72.5% of their matches in the same interim. Morgan’s team has paved the way with its innovative batting — and the result is that the squad has managed to score more than 300 runs in 20 games, of which they have won 15. The severity of this can be gauged from the fact that India, the second-most dominant team in this interim, have scaled 300 eleven times. The wins achieved by the Men in Blue have come about due to a balanced mix of batting dominance and bowling proficiency, unlike the English team’s successes, which have been one-dimensional.
Although England’s prowess with the bat has been exceptional, they have been equally abysmal on the bowling front — they have conceded scores above 300 on 12 occasions in the ODI format. The difference between the number of times 300 has been breached and conceded shows the imbalance that exists in the English side, which, when compared to the other teams, remains a cause of worry.
How ODI sides have performed since July 2016
Team
| No. of times
300+ scored
| No. of times
300+ conceded
|
England | 20 | 12 |
India | 11 | 7 |
Australia | 9 | 10 |
New Zealand | 6 | 5 |
South Africa | 10 | 5 |
Pakistan | 7 | 7 |
While the above table shows how the English batting line-up has risen to the occasion in almost half of the games that they have played, the inability of the quicks and the slower bowlers to make a mark in the ODIs shows how the team is largely dependent on their skills with the willow to achieve success. The presence of a number of big-hitters could have allowed a sense of complacency to creep into the bowling unit as well.
While bowling first, the English bowlers have conceded more than 300 runs five times and such is the strength of the batting unit that they have been able to overhaul such a target on three occasions. Twice, despite scoring 366 and 365, they failed to get over the line. Batting first, the Englishmen have crossed 300 on 15 instances, with scores of 481 and 444 in the last few years as well. A score between 330 and 400 has been set 6 times and in such a scenario, with a heap of runs ahead of them, it is natural to have the bowlers relax, even if a wee bit.
England have won 12 of the 15 games in which they crossed 300 while batting first but a deeper analysis shows that while the wins are commendable, they have not exactly been convincing. Of the 12 matches that they have won, the rival team breached 265 seven times and 300 on three occasions. India, on the other hand, has allowed the opponent to get to 255 or more only three times when the target they set has been more than 300 (they have made 300 batting first 8 times).
Another interesting observation is that England has lost only ten games in the last 24 months, and most of them were aided by the inaccuracy of their bowlers. 4 out of the 10 games saw the rival camp chase down the 300-plus target with ease, 330 being chased down with ease three times. In two other games, despite the valiant efforts of their batsmen, the side was unable to register a triumph despite having 366 and 365 to defend respectively, while chasing. In the first of these games, India had set them a total of 381 in Cuttack last year, while it was Scotland that sprung a surprise on them to chase down 365 last month. Hence, 6 of the 10 defeats can be blamed solely on the bowlers.
Now, it can be argued that while the rest of the sides play on pitches that aid the bowlers, England’s woes stem from the fact that they take to playing on placid tracks that end up being belters. While this can be considered true to an extent, blaming the wicket alone would be naÏve. Tracks all over the world are now being defined by smaller boundaries so that they assist strokeplay in a bid to attract more spectators. New Zealand, a land where swing bowling was the norm, has become so docile that the recent T20I tri-series between England, New Zealand and Australia in February saw scores of 200 being scripted and chased down with ease.
So what ails the English bowling unit?
The lack of variety in the line-up cannot be ignored, for one. The success of the Indian bowling unit in recent times has been driven by bowlers who have relied more on their skills than on the wicket to succeed. In Jasprit Bumrah, they have a player who can bowl menacing yorkers. And alongside him, Bhuvneshwar Kumar provides the option of swing. Pace is provided by the likes of Umesh Yadav and the two spinners, Kuldeep Yadav and Yuzvendra Chahal, by virtue of being wrist-spinners, can scalp important wickets even if the pitch is a flat one.
The English bowlers have been undone by the lack of variety and variation in their attack. The one way to succeed on a flat wicket where there is no seam or swing is to bowl slower balls, which is a tactic that Hardik Pandya employed in the first T20I against England. The result was that he bowled economically, especially in his first two overs, even as Bhuvi was being carted around all over the park.
The England pacers on the other hand are often guilty of skimping on the slower deliveries, content instead to vary their lengths, which can hardly be an effective move on such tracks.
If you think England can win the world cup with Mark Wood bowling you are utterly delusional
— AT (@AwfulTrader) July 12, 2018
Liam Plunkett often struggles with his lengths — bowling beamers and full tosses along with half-volleys and even though his lines are considerably accurate, he has the habit of bowling a predictable length. Ben Stokes, Chris Woakes, Plunkett, and Chris Jordan — all right-arm seamers of a similar bent (shows you how one-dimensional their pace bowling attack is, if you don’t count the left-armer David Willey) — do not move the ball much and do not have express pace, which again underscores how they tend to be ineffective at times. In frequently bowling too short and switching towards the leg-side, they demonstrate again that they lack the skills to perform on flatter surfaces.
Even a side like Scotland exhibited maturity at Edinburgh, understanding what lines work and do not work. After England had taken 9.69 runs per over off the 37% shorter balls that the Scottish bowled in the first 10 overs, Scotland shifted to bowling fuller. In the next 10 overs, they bowled only 17% short balls and the result was that the run-rates plummeted.
Plunkett’s inconsistent lines can be gauged from the fact that in 31 games that he has played since July 2016, he has bowled out batsmen only 7 times and has earned an LBW wicket only once, as against the 47 wickets that have been abetted by the fielders in the outfield. Willey, who provides some variety to the unit, has struck timber only thrice and won LBW appeals twice. The fact that Bumrah has 14 bowled and 7 LBWs to his name in the same interim speaks of how the English bowlers have been errant, especially with their lines.
While the flat tracks have only intensified their problems, the fact that such wickets are here to stay now should give the English bowlers impetus to improve. Else, even with a strong batting cohort, they can risk an early ouster from next year’s World Cup.
(The statistics in this piece were gathered before the start pf the ODI leg of India’s tour of England, 2018)
