England Tests against South Africa can be more compelling than the Ashes | Sport
This is an Ashes year so it might be tempting on the eve of the series against South Africa to conclude: “Well, this should be some handy practice for the trip to Australia.†In fact, there could not be a more patronising, provocative or illâ€'conceived way in which to view the four Tests, the first of which begins at Lord’s on Thursday.
Such an assessment would be badly misguided on so many fronts. At the moment there is no guarantee we will recognise any players in the Australia side come November. If the dispute between Cricket Australia and their players continues the logical consequence is that in Brisbane 11 baggy greens will be handed over to some startled grade cricketers in a team who would make the Kerry Packered Australia side thrashed by England in 1978-79 seem like giants of the game. The assumption remains the sides in the dispute will reach an agreement, even though Australians tend to give way no more readily than Sebastian Vettel.
Moreover, take away the hype of the Ashes and it becomes apparent that since South Africa returned to Test cricket in 1992 their contests with England have generally been closer and more compelling than the Ashes series (with the surreal exception of the summer of 2005). Last, and probably least, South Africa (No2) are ranked above Australia (No3) in the ICC rankings.
Since Mike Atherton tossed up with Kepler Wessels at Lord’s in July 1994 at the start of a match he may remember with little affection, England and South Africa have played 43 Tests in 10 series. Twelve have been won by England, 14 by South Africa. South Africa have a 5-3 lead in terms of series victories, although England hold the Basil D’Oliveira Trophy after their win in the winter of 2015-16.
There have been none of the landslides that have characterised so many Ashes series in this period, usually with Australia holding sway.
Of course there has been the odd dead rubber Test between England and South Africa but these have been riveting for a variety of reasons. There was the leather jacket match at Centurion in January 2000, which initially prompted most of us to hail Hansie Cronje’s great vision; in 2008 we witnessed Kevin Pietersen’s first game in charge at The Oval after the resignation of Michael Vaughan. In both of those contests there was enough going on to fill the blank spaces come the final day.
England v South Africa clashes tend to be taut, close-fought and, as Rob Smyth has recalled here when revisiting the Headingley Test of 1998, occasionally illâ€'tempered. Three times South Africa, with Graeme Smith at the helm, have driven England captains â€" very good ones, as it happens (Nasser Hussain, Vaughan and Andrew Strauss) â€" to their resignation. The assumption even among English pessimists is that this will not happen to Joe Root, who on Thursday morning will proudly don his England blazer and toss up with Dean Elgar, the stopgap replacement for Faf du Plessis.
South Africa will obviously miss Du Plessis for his runs as well as his captaincy. He will be replaced by Theunis de Bruyn, a forthright 24-year-old batsman whose solitary Test appearance was in South Africa’s last match against New Zealand, when he played without success as an opening batsman, not his usual position.
Vernon Philander, an oddity by modern standards â€" he bowls at no more than 80mph yet in 43 Tests he has taken 161 Test wickets at 22 apiece â€" is fit after an ankle injury and no doubt eager to keep hitting the seam more regularly than any of his peers. Kagiso Rabada and Morné Morkel provide the pace and bounce. Their orthodox left-arm spinner, Keshav Maharaj, has had a fine start as a Test cricketer; he may not feel dwarfed by the reputation of his opposite numbers.
Liam Dawson will play his second Test for England at Lord’s. Only deep misgivings about Ben Stokes’s fitness would have resulted in the inclusion of Toby Roland-Jones ahead of Dawson. The Test surface at Lord’s is usually true and friendly to batsmen and there is no reason to expect anything different. It is not a five seamers/one spinner pitch.
The retention of Dawson is understandable but it can hardly be described as cavalier. One of the perceived strengths of the England team, which was not always evident in the winter, has been the depth of the batting. Chris Woakes at No8 is somehow reassuring. In his absence and without Dawson, Stuart Broad or Roland-Jones would have had to occupy that slot. So Dawson, who scored 66 not out in his first Test innings in Chennai and who has been opening the batting for Hampshire, offers an insurance policy as well as some steady spin.
However, Dawson’s selection does not hint at a side going for the jugular. South Africa should be at their most vulnerable in the first Test. They are without their captain, who must be doing something right, since he annoyed Australians so much in the recent series down under (and he has won four series in a row); they have not had much meaningful practice, with rain intruding at Worcester last week. They may be rusty.
But the notion that overseas sides are inspired by playing at Lord’s is emphatically supported by the facts in the case of South Africa. Since their return to Test cricket they have drawn one and won four matches there (three of them by massive margins). No wonder the England selectors have been a bit wary.
0 Response to "England Tests against South Africa can be more compelling than the Ashes | Sport"
Posting Komentar