Who to boo now?

Time to come clean - I have always had a love/hate relationship with Ricky Ponting (as in I love to hate him). But with Ricky's last Test innings looming it is only right to admit to some 'previous' and take you back to Edgbaston, day 4, in that fabulous Ashes winning 2009 series.

 

On 2nd August 2009 on Sky Sports TV, and again in the Times the following morning, Michael Atherton called my behaviour ‘disgraceful’. This was not a personal attack you understand, but his comment on the behaviour of the Edgbaston crowd (of which I was part – but not the Barmy Army) when we booed Ricky Ponting’s arrival at the crease. No doubt my fellow Surrey members and Valley team mates agreed with Mr Atherton’s comments as they watched TV with a beer or read their newspaper over breakfast and may be surprised to learn of my involvement. However, to coin a phrase, ‘they weren’t there’ and an explanation is therefore required.

 

Michael Atherton understandably defended a fellow professional sportsman against what he thought was a lack of respect. I am part of a group to which neither of these outstanding players belongs – the professional spectator who also deserves some respect. We not only directly fund their profession but we unreservedly support the national teams for whom they play. Some of the English section of this group risked divorce and poverty to support our team in Australia in the forgotten (but unfortunately not by ‘those who were there’) Ashes tour of 2007/8. Despite less than wonderful performances by our team I do not recall anything other than great unstinting support, with almost no bad language and plenty of black humour, from this group of professional spectators. Certainly there was no booing however deserved that might have been.

I say this to make the point that we know our cricket and we also know that our support can lift a team when it’s down as well as provide that 12^th man effect to achieve a special performance – as it certainly did at Edgbaston on this particular Sunday.

I think that the subtlety of the booing (or negative cheering as I prefer to think of it) on this day was lost on Athers – understandably as he has no supporter experience in such matters. But I have no doubt it was not lost on our favourite Australian captain. He had already heard our ironic cheers for Mitchell Johnston (‘Super, Super Mitch’) and knew our support was lifting the English team as both Broad and then Swann followed Freddie’s lead in facing up to Australia’s wonder bowler.

 

The spontaneous negative cheering of Ricky by us supporters that greeted his walk to the wicket was precisely because we do respect his wonderful batting. We know his talent can turn a match and make the difference between a win and a draw and that at this moment getting him out quickly was vital to our progress. However we also know that it is possible to get under his skin and we were doing the only thing we could to do so.

 

Ricky played his part in this theatrical performance – he was late arriving from the changing room and his walk to the wicket was slow and defiant as the booing reached the level of a howling gale. I have no doubt Ponting relished the challenge and accepted the supporters’ performance for what it was – a gauntlet being thrown down. So too, I have to say, did Swann who, always one to rise to the occasion, then bowled a magnificent set of almost unplayable balls to RP.

 

Swann may have bowled the ball that opened up Ricky’s defence but we provided the special atmosphere and partisan support that set the stage for him to do so. Ten minutes of wonderful sport and pulsating theatre later Ricky walked back to the biggest cheer of the day – English supporters 1, Australia’s captain 0 - and I was there.

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.