I have been meaning to write this article for a while now, the moment the England team was announced for the tour of Bangladesh in fact. But whilst the rest of the world has been discussing Andrew Strauss and his little holiday I was more concerned with other areas of the team selection. In fact I was horrified at the choice of backup spinners, only James Tredwell made the sheet and Adil Rashid has been sent back to his county for pre-season training. It seems my last article has proved somewhat prophetic. The BBC had only this to say:
"Surprisingly overlooked is Yorkshire leg-spinner Adil Rashid, the 21-year-old who has played five one-day internationals and five Twenty20 matches for England."
Surprising it is indeed, one could even call it a bloody travesty. The lad has been dragged around the world for the best part of three years and not once has been played in the format of the game which would most suit his talents and provide the best possible platform for him to progress, namely Test cricket. At least Adam Mountford had a marginally longer sentence on the subject:
"I feel a bit sorry for another Yorkshire player Adil Rashid, who after bowling in the nets all over the world in the past few years is not included on a tour where he may have had a real chance of playing in a Test."
Well at least he's a bit sorry. I for one am extremely sorry, I really thought that against a lesser Test country and in a spin friendly environment we would finally get to see Rashid on the big stage, bowling plenty of overs and showing us how good he could be. I was thrilled at the prospect of seeing his wares, the perfect leg break zipping from outside leg stump, seeing which other balls he selected from the whole bag of tricks only the leg spinner knows. He has a lovely googly but he never has the time to set a batsman up to use the damn thing. I was to be sorely disappointed by the England selectors. The real question is why? Naturally there has been huge expectation surrounding him as an English leg spinner, everyone gets excited at the thought we might have our own Shane Warne at long last, an unreasonable expectation at the best of times. The most obvious answer to his omission and probably both the truest and the bleakest is that his performances have simply not been good enough. As Bob Willis put it so succinctly 'they just don't fancy him'.
He was given his longest run in the 20/20 World Cup last summer but in that crash bang wallop style of the game we never had to chance to really see what his bowling is all about. More recently he got a disastrous run against South Africa (see previous article) but again it was in the shorter forms of the game. As I argued before this is asking a man to run before he can walk. Some might argue that this is the way it is done these days, other spinners manage to come through the ODI teams and make it into the Test side. But I believe that every player is different, especially in the case of spinners, and what may suit one character may not suit another.
Let us compare Rashid's fortunes with that of another young, talented leggie, Steve Smith of New South Wales and now Australia (he played his first 20/20 in the thriller against Pakistan last week). Smith is being touted as the Next Big Thing in Australian spin. God knows the Aussies love a leggie and they are really hoping this one can last longer than his predecessors. No matter how much Nathan Hauritz's reputation grows, which it has appreciably, they will always be on the hunt for a proper replacement for Shane Warne. And with that chubby face and shock of blonde hair Smith may be just that. His leg spin is classical, with an unfussy run up and a good seam position. I mention this mostly because I feel that a major fault in Rashid's bowling is his seam position, he releases the ball with a kind of gyroscopic effect. Consequently he is sacrificing drift by having a scrambled seam, you'll notice how rarely he beats a batsman through the air.
As well as having a technical advantage Smith unlike Rashid has done well in the short formats, neither sacrificing flight nor spin along the way, as reflected in his figures in his first international match 4-0-2-34. one of those overs went for 18 and it was obvious he was a little awed by the occasion but he rallied and came back well never resorting to bowling a negative line. Clearly he is a tough character. One of his wickets was a real beauty with Rana Naved totally deceived in flight and stumped cleanly by Haddin. A joy to watch, especially in 20/20 when it so rarely happens. Did I mention he is also more than handy with the bat? Perhaps a little too handy, Peter Roebuck in his article Thirteen to Watch (http://www.cricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/443682.html) thinks he will make it as an all-rounder rather than a specialist spinner. Let's hope not. I despise this focus on spinners being able to bat, if they can bat, great, but never let that overtake their bowling if they show real promise.
Roebuck also says that he 'has a sound father and a strong club and so can survive the hype' and that is what it is all about, surviving the hype and I am no longer sure that Adil Rashid can. Are England doing him a great disservice by not including him in the tour to Bangladesh? Or are they justified in their decision? Has the hype been so much hot air? I don't think so, I do think he needs to toughen up and that he needs to forget about the weight of expectation and just loosen up. Hopefully the media will forget about him and leave him alone whilst he goes off and does what every good spinner does, work on his craft and come back stronger. Just look at Graham Swann. I personally believe they should have taken a chance on him for this tour, he may have proved to be their trump card or at least picked up some genuinely valuable experience. England are happy to leave without their Captain but unwilling to take a chance with a second spinner. As always England seem to have their priorities out of whack.
0 comments:
Post a Comment