As night follows day

It should be strange to see Jimmy Anderson coming out to bat when England are only 3 wickets down but unfortunately for us England supporters it is too common a sight. We know what's coming more often than not - another wicket and sometimes two. For this nightwatchman malarkey doesn't work - the stats confirm it doesn't work and more importantly it messes with batsman's minds.

By all accounts Andy Flower leaves it to the incoming batsman to decide if he would prefer to sit out the final overs of day if a wicket falls. What nonsense - who is charge here? What is the logic of
sending in someone whose day job is bowling to bat in, what is usually, the most demanding time of the day. And when he arrives at the crease what is the nightwatchman's job? - to keep off strike to avoid being exposed or to take all the strike to protect the other batsman? The same half baked logic should say that if another wicket falls then another nightwatchman should be sent out - so the batting order is suddenly reversed to get through a few overs.

Meanwhile the man best qualified to bat is sitting in the pavilion with his feet up watching the crazy proceedings out in the middle. This must send out all the wrong signals to the opposition and also plays mind games with the batsman. First he is asking himself if he wants a nightwatchman and whether that is a sign of weakness or fear. Next, at what stage does he call for a nightwatchman - 10 overs to go, 5 overs to go? This is the way that madness lies. If a batsman is due in next then he should go in. It should never be questioned - so the batsman is prepared whenever that wicket falls and he should back his skill and determination to bat in whatever way is the circumstances demand. Jimmy's a great cricketer but let him serve the team by bowling not by trying to do a job he is not qualified to do.

UPDATE: On the first day of the 3rd Test between Australia and South Africa, the second Australian wicket fell with six overs left in the day. Ricky Pointing, playing in his last Test, was next in. Ricky is known for his toughness as well as his talent. So I wonder who decided it was best to send in Lyon as nightwatchman for the last six overs in what was a very tough final session?

2nd UPDATE: The following morning Warner was out first ball of the day. Ponting walked in...and then was back in the pavilon again 7 balls later. Australia collapsed to 163 all out. Did the nighwatchman make a difference? It is difficult to think it could have been any worse if Ponting had gone in a toughed it out and perhaps set the tone for the following day.