Panesar really is the full Monty
It should come as no surprise to anyone that I was delighted with England's performance in the second test match against Pakistan, and not just because of the margin of victory. To win by an innings and 120 runs represents a thumping in anyone's book, the kind of win you might expect over Zimbabwe or Bangladesh, but to do it against the team that had usurped England's position as the second best test team in the world (a position England will regain if they go on to win the series) must have been especially sweet.
England's performance was ruthless and clinical. The batting was outstanding, especially from the young guns competing for regular places in the team, namely Alastair Cook and Ian Bell. The former has taken to test cricket like a duck to water and the latter looks nothing like the man who struggled against the class of the Australian's last summer, a much more positive, fluent and feisty character all round.
And of course, there was Steve Harmison's first ever 10-wicket haul in a test match, and two consecutive five-fers, his first since the first Ashes test 12 months ago. He looked simply unplayable, and the key moment to me was the last ball of the match when Strauss indicated he had one over left before he made a bowling change. Harmison decided he only needed one ball to get his fifth wicket of the innings, and wrap up an outstanding victory. He knows how good he is, and I hope he can go on to become an all time great.
But there was one performance that made the match for me, and that was that of Monty Panesar.
I've been saying to people all summer, I would really like to see Monty come in and do really well, and on the basis of this performance you would have to say he can look forward to a long and glittering career with England. And if Duncan Fletcher isn't convinced of this, well I'm sorry but the rest of the country, certainly every sportswriter I know of, seems to be.
I don't know what it is about him I like so much. Maybe it's the novelty value - the first Sikh to play for England and all that. Maybe it's because he seems like such a likeable young man. Or maybe it's the underdog aspect. Most likely it's a combination of all three, but I think it's because with every match he has proved his credentials as the best spinner in the country. It seems we have finally found the match-winning spinner we've been looking for for so long.
But it seems England, and the coach in particular, may be about to look a gift horse in the mouth. Fletcher is not convinced Monty cannot offer the "full package", and is too much a one-dimensional player. Not to take Monty to Australia, or to overlook him if, as and when Giles comes back, would be a grave mistake I fear, and here's why:
First of all, is his batting all that bad, and even if it is, is it that important? He has only played a few matches so far, and people seem to have forgotten that he got 20-odd against a rampant Murali in a losing cause against Sri Lanka. So he must be able to bat a bit, and you can't expect him to come out and start scoring half centuries straight away (something I'm sure he will manage sooner or later).
No one seems to expect Hoggard or Harmison to score runs, so why the double standard? It isn't the job of the lower order to get runs (sure, it's a bonus if they do), but what you should expect them to do is hold up an end so the last specialist batsman can build an innings. This is exactly what the tail did at Old Trafford, enabling Bell to score his most fluent hundred to date, and allowing England to declare at 9 wickets down - always a psychological blow to the opposition.
Secondly, even if he is "one-dimensional", Phil Tuffnell he sure as hell ain't. No one will work harder to improve his all-round game than Monty, and sooner or later that hard work has to pay dividends. It just has to. Tuffers would be more likely to be having a few cans of lager and a cigarette than spending time in the nets after a match.
Thirdly, Monty keeps the opposition quiet and gives his captain control. He has started his career against Asian sides who are supposed to be good players of spin, and has only gone for 2.5 runs per over. If he can be that economical in one-day cricket (and it can only be a matter of time before he gets his chance) he should be a regular fixture in that form of the game as well.
But most importantly, Monty is already a proven match winner! Here we have found a spinner who is capable of bowling even the best sides out. He doesn't improve his match figures by mopping up the tail, he gets the top order players out - 3 out of the top 5, in Pakistan's second innings at Old Trafford. He doesn't even just get good players out, he gets great players out as well. I remember thinking when he celebrated his first test wicket, that of a certain Sachin Tendulkar, that had to be a good omen for the rest of his career.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of Ashley Giles, but he was never going to be one of England's best ever spinners. Panesar has given every indication that he can be that and more. And he has age on his side as well. It just needs the selectors to give him an extra confidence boost by promising a run in the team, Giles or no Giles.
As regards the rest of the side, I'm not surprised that Geraint Jones has been dropped in favour of Chris Read. At first I thought Jones could be a worthy successor to Alec Stewart, but his form with the bat of late has made me think otherwise, and with Read having improved so much in that department, it was only a matter of time until he was given another chance. Someone commented at work that you shouldn't change a winning side, but if you're going to make changes, far better to do so in a position of strength. And besides, with Harmison and Panesar looking so devastating, it's paramount that they have the best keeper to hold on to every chance offered.
On a final note, I have also read that Michael Vaughan has conceded he may never play again, such is the extent of his knee injury. I guess we can only wait and see how his rehabilitation goes. I hope to God it's a success and he is able to resume his career in the New Year. We might not be missing his batting that much - Alastair Cook is seeing to that - but it would be a travesty if such a fine batsman and captain had to end his career like this. He deserves to go on to play 100 tests (if he wants to of course) and bow out in a manner that befits the man who brought the Ashes home in 2005. Please God, not like this.
Copyright © Jonathan Weedon, August 2006
England's performance was ruthless and clinical. The batting was outstanding, especially from the young guns competing for regular places in the team, namely Alastair Cook and Ian Bell. The former has taken to test cricket like a duck to water and the latter looks nothing like the man who struggled against the class of the Australian's last summer, a much more positive, fluent and feisty character all round.
And of course, there was Steve Harmison's first ever 10-wicket haul in a test match, and two consecutive five-fers, his first since the first Ashes test 12 months ago. He looked simply unplayable, and the key moment to me was the last ball of the match when Strauss indicated he had one over left before he made a bowling change. Harmison decided he only needed one ball to get his fifth wicket of the innings, and wrap up an outstanding victory. He knows how good he is, and I hope he can go on to become an all time great.
But there was one performance that made the match for me, and that was that of Monty Panesar.
I've been saying to people all summer, I would really like to see Monty come in and do really well, and on the basis of this performance you would have to say he can look forward to a long and glittering career with England. And if Duncan Fletcher isn't convinced of this, well I'm sorry but the rest of the country, certainly every sportswriter I know of, seems to be.
I don't know what it is about him I like so much. Maybe it's the novelty value - the first Sikh to play for England and all that. Maybe it's because he seems like such a likeable young man. Or maybe it's the underdog aspect. Most likely it's a combination of all three, but I think it's because with every match he has proved his credentials as the best spinner in the country. It seems we have finally found the match-winning spinner we've been looking for for so long.
But it seems England, and the coach in particular, may be about to look a gift horse in the mouth. Fletcher is not convinced Monty cannot offer the "full package", and is too much a one-dimensional player. Not to take Monty to Australia, or to overlook him if, as and when Giles comes back, would be a grave mistake I fear, and here's why:
First of all, is his batting all that bad, and even if it is, is it that important? He has only played a few matches so far, and people seem to have forgotten that he got 20-odd against a rampant Murali in a losing cause against Sri Lanka. So he must be able to bat a bit, and you can't expect him to come out and start scoring half centuries straight away (something I'm sure he will manage sooner or later).
No one seems to expect Hoggard or Harmison to score runs, so why the double standard? It isn't the job of the lower order to get runs (sure, it's a bonus if they do), but what you should expect them to do is hold up an end so the last specialist batsman can build an innings. This is exactly what the tail did at Old Trafford, enabling Bell to score his most fluent hundred to date, and allowing England to declare at 9 wickets down - always a psychological blow to the opposition.
Secondly, even if he is "one-dimensional", Phil Tuffnell he sure as hell ain't. No one will work harder to improve his all-round game than Monty, and sooner or later that hard work has to pay dividends. It just has to. Tuffers would be more likely to be having a few cans of lager and a cigarette than spending time in the nets after a match.
Thirdly, Monty keeps the opposition quiet and gives his captain control. He has started his career against Asian sides who are supposed to be good players of spin, and has only gone for 2.5 runs per over. If he can be that economical in one-day cricket (and it can only be a matter of time before he gets his chance) he should be a regular fixture in that form of the game as well.
But most importantly, Monty is already a proven match winner! Here we have found a spinner who is capable of bowling even the best sides out. He doesn't improve his match figures by mopping up the tail, he gets the top order players out - 3 out of the top 5, in Pakistan's second innings at Old Trafford. He doesn't even just get good players out, he gets great players out as well. I remember thinking when he celebrated his first test wicket, that of a certain Sachin Tendulkar, that had to be a good omen for the rest of his career.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of Ashley Giles, but he was never going to be one of England's best ever spinners. Panesar has given every indication that he can be that and more. And he has age on his side as well. It just needs the selectors to give him an extra confidence boost by promising a run in the team, Giles or no Giles.
As regards the rest of the side, I'm not surprised that Geraint Jones has been dropped in favour of Chris Read. At first I thought Jones could be a worthy successor to Alec Stewart, but his form with the bat of late has made me think otherwise, and with Read having improved so much in that department, it was only a matter of time until he was given another chance. Someone commented at work that you shouldn't change a winning side, but if you're going to make changes, far better to do so in a position of strength. And besides, with Harmison and Panesar looking so devastating, it's paramount that they have the best keeper to hold on to every chance offered.
On a final note, I have also read that Michael Vaughan has conceded he may never play again, such is the extent of his knee injury. I guess we can only wait and see how his rehabilitation goes. I hope to God it's a success and he is able to resume his career in the New Year. We might not be missing his batting that much - Alastair Cook is seeing to that - but it would be a travesty if such a fine batsman and captain had to end his career like this. He deserves to go on to play 100 tests (if he wants to of course) and bow out in a manner that befits the man who brought the Ashes home in 2005. Please God, not like this.
Copyright © Jonathan Weedon, August 2006
posted by Jon | 9:50 pm
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home