On Saturday England’s World Cup campaign finally comes to an end. While the team has not had many answers over the past five weeks in India it is now time that the really important questions can be asked: where does their 50-over team go from here and who should be leading them?
Last week Mark Nicholas took over as the MCC president with the assertion that “we believe strongly that ODIs should be World Cups only”, and though Twenty20s seem to be taking over the world I strongly disagree. I am lucky to have seen many great World Cups, and within them many wonderful individual performances, and it is familiarity with the format and its tactics that freed players to excel in those tournaments. If there are no bilateral series it would put that in real jeopardy.
Whether it is now or in the next couple of years, England are about to replace a great generation of one-day international players. How can those coming in get to be really good at 50-over cricket if it’s sidelined domestically and barely played at international level? Is our game run only to earn as much money as possible, or can we balance the desire for commercial success with sustaining tradition, and protecting both Test and 50-over cricket? To me, real leadership from those who govern the game would involve sustaining the variety we’ve enjoyed over the past couple of generations, and ensuring the fabric of the game remains intact for those to come.
We are finally nearing the end of the World Cup’s long group stage and there has been enough entertainment to convince doubters about this format. What is clear is that this particular England team has no future in it. Against the Netherlands Dawid Malan batted in a very classy way and made the game look simple, Ben Stokes produced a classic one-day innings, playing himself in and accelerating incredibly later on, and Harry Brook looked in very good touch before misjudging one that went a big quicker than he thought, and bounced a bit higher – not a great dismissal, but not muddled like the others.
Because the rest of the top seven was again a mess. Jonny Bairstow never looked comfortable and seems to have forgotten how to pace an innings in this format, whether to go hard or be patient. Joe Root is technically England’s best batter and it looked as if he was going to take some time and get himself in, but then he pulled out his new favourite toy, the reverse ramp. He has described it as a low-risk shot but if you miss you’re out. With a third man in place it would be much more sensible to play a cover drive or an on-drive with the full face of the bat. Having got himself to 28 he had a wonderful opportunity to cash in on a good wicket against a workmanlike attack, and the best players in the world do not miss out on those. Then with 15 overs remaining Moeen Ali was caught at mid-off with a really poor shot after scoring four off 15 balls. It is as if these fantastic, proven players have forgotten how to construct an innings in this format.
England have repeatedly batted as if an ODI is just a long T20, but the successful teams in the tournament have approached it like an abbreviated Test. The best teams have a nucleus of players with strong techniques, repeatable bowling actions and adaptable batting methods, allowing them to go up and down the gears – really good Test cricketers, in other words – and one or two people with a bit of an X-factor, such as South Africa’s Heinrich Klaasen or Australia’s Glenn Maxwell. England have just added Root to their T20 side, had a muddled approach, and paid the price.
And then there’s Jos Buttler. He has been unrecognisable at this World Cup, his game racked with doubt, that wonderful, instinctive play completely missing. He captained England to victory at last year’s T20 World Cup but perhaps he was riding the crest of a wave with a group of experienced, quality players. His long-term leadership credentials have to be questioned. England need him to perform with the bat and with the gloves, and anything that makes him less likely to do that has to be stripped away. If his leadership role is impeding his batting and clouding his thinking, it should be given to someone else. He is certainly one of the best white-ball players in the world, and probably not one of the best white-ball captains.
There are similarities with Root’s captaincy of the Test side. While Root led superbly with his own form, he was not an intuitive captain and often seemed to be behind the game, and it was only his own performances and the lack of an obvious alternative that kept him in charge for so long. There is no point advocating a change of leadership unless there is a convincing argument that someone else would do the job better, and there does not seem to be a simple replacement as leader of this white-ball side. There is only Stokes, who is already dealing with an injured knee and leading the Test team, but could perhaps be considered as a short-term option until next year’s T20 World Cup, after which a new captain – and perhaps a new coach – would have to take the team forward.
At this World Cup, with England’s batters failing repeatedly but a small squad to choose from, there has not been much they could do in terms of personnel to shake up the order. But with Buttler struggling so badly, already proven as an opener in T20s, and some kind of spark so desperately needed to get the team firing, might it have helped for the captain to switch things around to change the dynamic? It seems possible, but captains and coaches are paid the big bucks to make these decisions and across the tournament Buttler and Matthew Mott have not had a good enough success rate. England’s decision-making in terms of selection, pivoting away from all-rounders and then back again, and at the toss has been neither clear nor successful. Meanwhile a lot of senior players who should know how to get themselves back into form have failed.
Buttler cannot carry the can for all of this – Mott has to have huge responsibility. Rob Key is flying out to discuss their futures and pick a squad for next month’s tour of the West Indies. Perhaps, with no obvious successors, they will stay in place for the time being, but the search for long-term replacements has to start now.
