Email Us Forum Mail Article Print Article

A Widening Chasm?

Monday, September 1 2003

Michael Vaughan has this week been heavily criticised by many in the English county game over his criticisms of the “bread and butter game” on these shores. Yet, in a summer that has also shown just how broad the divide is between the Championship and Test Cricket, maybe his critics should acknowledge that he might have a valid point?

Vaughan commented about the lack of “mental strength” and “opportunities for training” that are provided - or more to the point, aren’t provided - in the county game. Having seen some of the dismissals of England rookies, several of them that would have shamed tailenders, then if Vaughan’s suggestions aren’t on the mark, they’re not far away from it either. Ed Smith has scored bucketloads of runs and more centuries than anyone else in the County Championship this season, yet when put up against a solid Test attack he became as uncomfortable as Mike Gatting on a sponsored famine.

It seems a given that there’s not enough chance to train in the county game as nearly 40 top-level matches in all competitions is too many to provide adequate opportunities for “personal development”, and there are too many “journeymen” in the county game. Yet the purpose of this article is not to suggest a radical overhaul of county cricket - it’s a topic that’s been covered too many times before - nor, believe it or not, to set a record for most inverted commas in one piece of writing, but to look at the idea of the mentality behind the game that the Lancastrian also raised.

The number five position in England’s batting order - in both forms of the game - has been an excellent example of the divisions between the two, ostensibly similar, forms of the game. The list of candidates runs to Jim Troughton, Robert Key, Anthony McGrath and Smith. Whilst all have shown glimpses - albeit brief - of their talents, all have found the step up into the three lions a bridge too far at the present stage in their careers.

The inept bowling display in the fourth test at Headingley told its own story - an attack consisting of county cricket’s biggest wicket takers in recent times, Trent Bridge hero James Kirtley of Sussex, Kabir Ali of Worcestershire - the man with two 8-fors in the Championship already this year - and Surrey’s Martin Bicknell, recalled after ten years since the Ashes series of the Gatting ball. It was an attack with one strength, and one strength only - that of the traditional virtue of line and length seam bowling. For two short sessions it seemed to have worked as all three combined to reduced the visitors to 21/4 and then 142/7, yet when Kirsten, Zondeki and Ntini brought South Africa back into it, the bowlers went rapidly in the other direction.

It’s not a problem that’s isolated to cricket and not one that the county structure is entirely to blame for. English popular culture, inexplicably, loves nothing more than a plucky loser and hates nothing more than an unwavering winner. I often wonder whether more praise would be forthcoming were England to lose the Ashes by one run in the final Test chasing 492 after a last wicket stand of 83, than if they were to win the whole thing 5-0 with each victory coming by an innings.

Yet the county structure cannot permanently be absolved from responsibility. It’s too easy for teams and players just to go through the motions rather than laying every bone of their body on and beyond the line for all six months of the season. So much of the National Cricket League is met by apathy from spectators, players and clubs alike. The attitude of Somerset in using NCL games as trial runs for younger players and the second string, and Sussex’s use of the one-dayers to rest their “big guns” for their Championship Challenge, are examples of this. The combination of fixture congestion and the structure of the county game that allows teams to play games that do not matter for them in the grand scheme of things is only detrimental to our progress.

It’s not a coincidence that many of England’s better players have spent winters overseas, and the Australian attitude of personal development, improving oneself and always, always playing 110% to win has many things that the English psyche can learn from.

Cricket is not alone in its lack of cutting edge at the top level. Many traditionally “upper-class” or “public school” sports - tennis and rugby union in particular - have shown a disturbing lack in the ability to turn positions and talent into results (and before you mention it, we haven’t won the Rugby World Cup yet. If we do in October, I will change my mind - but I’ll be putting money on the All Blacks).

A contrasting case study on this subject is that of Argentine tennis players. The country has been in turmoil yet in a recent tournament all four semi-finalists were Argentine. There is the desire and fight inside these people to perform because it really does make a difference to them - it’s a similar story for East African distance runners - yet for the English too often it’s just a pursuit, and the lack of grit instilled upon them in their formative years leaves them behind their opponents.

So, was Vaughan right? The further I got into this, the more I felt that he was - yet it’s not just the fault of the county game, rather that of an endemic malaise present in sport in this country. Until this is done away with, it’s difficult to believe that England can become pre-eminent again.

Please email your thoughts and comments to me, using the link below. Thank you.

Posted by Neil