The Hindu : Sport : England can't afford to hold back

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Thursday, Aug 04, 2005

Sport

Sport

England can't afford to hold back

Australia will be eager to polish off a wounded opponent

PETER ROEBUCK

As far as the Poms are concerned it is now or never. If England loses this second Test the series will have all the staying power of a footprint in sand. It won't be easy for Michael Vaughan and his merry men. After a shaky start the Australians have found their hard heads and accordingly are poised to win again. Although scarcely a surprise, their victory at Lord's steadied their nerves. Now, England must prove it deserves to be taken seriously as a contender.

Extraordinary affair

Even in hindsight the first Test match was an extraordinary affair. Close as cloves for two days, it ended with an abject capitulation by the home side. Although the lack of gumption was lamentable, the last chapter was not the entire story. England played well in patches. Of course, it is not enough. A critic who recommends part of a symphony is damning with faint praise. Nevertheless, promising signs were detected. Steve Harmison was a handful, Kevin Pietersen batted fearlessly and the second innings partnership between the England openers contained some of the best batting of the match. Improvements can be made. Andrew Flintoff was over-bowled and at the crease resembled Hercules at a sewing machine.

Although England cannot match the Australians man for man, nor can they hold back. It has been fifteen years since any Australian cricketer has hesitated. Hamlet would not have lasted long in grade cricket. Lady Macbeth would have been dismissed as a sook. England may lack great players but can show the mixture of conviction and cunning needed to upset the lamington tray.

Negative thinking will make defeat inevitable. Every change must be made for a positive reason. At Lord's, Vaughan held back at crucial moments. Michael Clarke and Damien Martyn ran away with the game after tea on the second day yet Steve Harmison did not bowl for 90 minutes. Unable to contain fleet-footed batsmen in his usual way, England's slow bowler moved around and was given only two men on the leg-side. The Australians were able to milk as merrily as dairy farmers at dawn. Uncertainty could also be detected in Vaughan's batting. He tried to play McGrath from the crease, which does not work.

Lacking vigour

Of course, the captain was not alone in his caution. His colleagues did not play Shane Warne with sufficient vigour. Facing an opponent who takes a quarter of his wickets leg before, the left-handers concentrated on pad play and cross bat shots. Brain Lara has demonstrated the sense in stepping down the pitch to drive down the ground.

Pietersen showed the importance of developing a plan and applying it with intent. Many wickets were lost to indecisive defensive strokes.

Australians understand the difficulties faced in overcoming a dominant side. After winning the World Cup in 1987, it took them another eight years to dethrone the West Indies. Pessimism held them back. Bruised by past defeats, Allan Border allowed "I durst not" to wait upon "I will." Generally Australia played an extra batsman, scored slowly and suffered lower order collapses.

Strongest attack

Repeatedly West Indies fielded its strongest attack, batted aggressively and had a wagging tail (322 runs in 1991 compared to 62 by their opponents). Not until a new captain was appointed was the champion toppled.

England has plenty on its mind yet needs to throw away its worries. Australia will be eager to polish off a wounded opponent. Ponting's side has greatness in its ranks and is the likely victor. Vaughan and company can only win by daring to lose. Australia will attack. England must attack. Nothing is impossible in cricket.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Sport