Better balance on the Murali-Warne issue

On the other side of the Murali-Warne vs oldtimers issue I have to be the first to acknowledge that 700 wickets is a tremendous achievement. Further, to maintain the standard that both have reached over so much cricket puts them in the highest category. To reverse one of my earlier questions, would O'Reilly, Lindwall, Laker, Marshall etc. have compiled such low averages if they'd had to sustain their performance over so many matches insuch a compressed time? Well, we don't know, of course. (Although with Marshall we have someone closer to era in which Murali & Warne played.) Not only have both bowleers had to fight off fairly well-publicized injuries, I can guarantee that giving the ball the "rip" that they do, they played a lot (probably most) of their matches with sore fingers. Like the great performers in any walk of life (plumbers, footballers, musicians, etc.) they love(d) what they do and that drove their deeds. So, acknowledge their greatness ...but don't be blind to the past.

Reflecting on England’s failure to qualify for Euro 2008, I admit that I’m surprised but, looking over the lineup, the realization sinks in that this was a mediocre group. Beckham is a shadow of himself now but he’s still the classiest player on the squad that lined up today. In particular, though, I’ve never seen such a weak English defence. I’ve been a fan of Campbell over his career; in his prime he was a great central defender but he’s not at that level any more. Lescott, Bridge, Richards? England players? Richards may grow into one but as a group they’re underwhelming.

I’ve overestimated the midfield. I like Gerrard, Lampard, Cole and Hargreaves; these are all legitimate international players. Gerrard is just short of the top bracket: I don’t know what it is – he seems like the real thing but I’m forced to concede that there’s some spark missing. What it illustrates yet again is the Charlton-Moore equivalency principle. Just about every European national team – except Andorra, Liechenstein, Malta and San Marino – has midfielders roughly equivalent, which is no disgrace. To be a great team that bit of class is needed. Class that England have lacked since the Two Bobbies left the scene.

Crouch continues to confound. Hats off to the lad but I still think that he’s playing over his head at the highest international level. Despite my needling, Rooney is as good a forward as any – except for the true elite, which is currently exclusively non-Europeans (i.e. Messi, E’eto, Drogba, Crespo) with the possible exceptions of Henri and van Nistelrooy (with Torres possibly coming up).

Sadly, Owen has gone. The promise he showed in ’98 never quite materialized. That kind of pace seems hard to maintain with the rigours of modern pro football. It’s a mayfly thing. Ronaldo had it for a couple of years, too. They had marvelous careers but that electrifying speed of when they broke in was never to return once they suffered serious injury. I haven’t seen enough of E’eto since his injury to judge if he’s now lost that half-step.

Where does this leave England? Nowhere. But the good thing about nowhere is that every direction is a step towards somewhere. Two years to the next World Cup means that there’s time for the next Owen to appear; then, who knows? The media pundits will rabbit on endlessly about managers and systems but that’s marginal stuff; we await the next genuine class player or players. Until then, England may as well not take part.

More bleating about Murali

I note that the recent two-match Sri Lanka series in Australia does nothing for advocates of Murali as the "greatest finger-spinner ever". Seems his two match analysis was in the order of 3-over 300. His inability to dismiss the lads from Oz, especially in their own land, is a major knock against his claims. Great bowlers have to perform against great batsmen and Murali falls short.