The numerous distractions around the England team finally came home to roost at Sabina Park. Make no bones about it, the second innings batting performance was utterly pathetic.
The temptation is to call for wholesale changes. When only one player makes double figures, heads must roll, many would say. I don’t agree: while there should be changes, they need to be measured ones. What this performance reinforces is something that everyone should by now be aware of: England’s batting personnel have had it too easy for too long. Since 2005, there has rarely, if ever, been the genuine threat of being dropped.
England started this series with the same top six who lost 5-0 in Australia two winters ago. These six players are, it seems, assured of their places, with only the return of Michael Vaughan posing any sort of threat to the established order. These are players in their comfort zones. While they are making the right noises about knuckling down, applying themselves, making runs for England, these are noises we have heard before.
For these donkeys, the motivation is all carrot and no stick. Well, it doesn’t work.
In the 1990s, the England team was chopped and changed to dangerous levels. Without some sort of settled line up, and with no support for individuals, the team faltered and failed despite containing such talented individuals as Graham Thorpe, Michael Atherton, Alec Stewart and Darren Gough (to name but a few). This was largely due to the inability to bring such amazing talents as Mark Ramprakash and Graeme Hick up to the levels they were capable of. I believe that this was as much to do with systematic failures in the England setup at that time as it was with the personal failings of two cricketers who, in many ways, wanted it too much.
When that England team were bowled out for 46 in Port of Spain in 1994, they made no changes for the next test. The problem with that team had been that too many changes were made too often. To keep the same team was the right decision, and they won the next Test. In 2009, though, the problem is the other way round. For too long, there have not been enough changes being made.
Having a settled line-up, and a supportive environment, has helped to bring success to England. There is a fine line, however, between being supportive and mollycoddling.
Ian Bell has been mollycoddled. He is a veteran of 46 Tests. How many of those has he won for England? How many of those has he really made the difference in? He often makes runs when conditions are easier – he has famously only scored a century when someone else has got one first in that innings – but question marks persist over his ability to dig in, to apply his undoubted talent in tough conditions. Too many good-looking 20s and 30s and not enough ugly hundreds should lead to him finally losing his place.
He is the only batsman who can be dropped, though, as there is only one reserve batsman in the squad. Owais Shah will come in at three, most likely; not his perfect position (nor was it Bell’s), but he has the temperament to give it a go. Having waited on the edges of the squad and team for years now, he has earned his chance and deserves to be given the rest of this series. If he doesn’t succeed, there is always the option of Vaughan or Key for the summer, both of whom fit a lot better as a Test Match number three.
If England are worried about the batting line-up, they could look for insurance at the bottom of the order. The best way to get this would be to make a change which I think they should have made before the first Test.
Once again, Monty Panesar was England’s most disappointing bowler. Suleiman Benn is not a top class spin bowler, rather a handy all-round cricketer. The conditions were so helpful to left arm spin that he was able to take four wickets in each innings, from a total of 58.4 overs. Panesar took one from 47. He was out-bowled by Swann in India, and Swann is a far superior batsman and fielder. He would make a fine test number nine, that’s for sure, and he can’t bowl any worse than Panesar.
Making those two changes should inject some fear into the England line up which, combined with the maintenance of the core of the team, should create the right atmosphere for England to bounce back in this series.
At least they will know that the stick is there. It needs to be.