• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Hussain: We need a Wilko

Magrat Garlick

Global Moderator
HUSSAIN: WE NEED OUR OWN WILKINSON
Tuesday 25th November 2003
Sky Sports

English cricket needs a superstar of the calibre of Jonny Wilkinson, former captain Nasser Hussain thinks.

The Essex batsman believes that, for England to be the best in the world, England must find a matchwinner who can beat even the best teams,

Hussain led to third in both Test and one-day international ratings but they suffered an early exit in the World Cup and failed to beat Australia in the Ashes series.

"If you get a superstar in your team like Wilkinson you can make a good side into a great one," said Hussain. "So there are chances, if you get things in the right place, for cricket, football, any sport.

"Make no mistake, the one thing any England team needs in any sport is a superstar, it just turns any side around."

Though Darren Gough and Andrew Caddick each topped 200 Test wickets, Hussain believes England have suffered in comparison with countries who have proven matchwinners who have become among the most successful bowlers of all time.

"For us, in the bowling department, if we had one genius, someone who could get you 400 Test wickets, it would lift the standard of the team. That is where the rugby team is fortunate that they have got one.

"If you look at Australia without Shane Warne or Sri Lanka without Muttiah Muralitharan you can see the difference. You just need to find one genius from somewhere."

Hussain, who hopes England's rugby triumph will inspire victories in other sports, admits that Ashes defeats live longest in the memory.

He added: "The two things that stand in people's memory are World Cups and Australia; the rugby boys were very fortunate that they got them both in one afternoon!

"We didn't and haven't and that is all we will be remembered for. They are the things I didn't put right as captain and they will be things that someone else will eventually have to put right. But until certain things are in place it won't happen.

"A lot of things need to happen, like finding bowlers who can take 10 wickets in matches regularly, before we are beating Australia and winning World Cups.

"The other day when I was sat there watching the final, it was a great feeling but it made me think what a shame it was we didn't do that in our World Cup. It would have been nice.

"But every time I have played cricket for England I have felt that the country is behind us. That is the thing you feel most, that you let people down and that is what we have done in World Cups.

"Most of us that have played would do anything to have that feeling they have now, going back as heroes. Just small things like going back to England after winning in Pakistan or here in Sri Lanka in 2001 was huge so to do what the rugby boys have done would beat any feeling.

"Winning the Ashes is similar, it would beat any feeling you could have."
I can agree, but for one thing they already have Andrew Flintoff, who could be a potential match winner (OK, he's not now, but he certainly could be), same goes for James Anderson. Also he backs it up with a very strange argument about Shane Warne being the Australian equivalent. Now, I agree that Warne is a good player (though he's made some awful decisions off the pitch) but he certainly isn't the star in the same way that Jonny Wilkinson is for the English rugby team. Australia have Hayden, Punter, McGrath, Lee, who are all in the same class as Warne although a different type of players.
 

PY

International Coach
I think he was referring to the fact Shane Warne has taken 400 wickets in his Test career.

I think Freddie is our man, if he can't do it no-one can. He's got all the required attributes to become a 'Beefy' style player.
 

Magrat Garlick

Global Moderator
So has McGrath. Australia have many "Wilkinsons", not just one. Therefore, it doesn't make a difference if you take away one of them. Why point to Warne, given his not-exactly good behaviour off the pitch?
 
Last edited:

PY

International Coach
From what I can tell, Hussain is talking about England needing a bowler as Caddick and Gough are mentioned as only having 200+ wickets rather than, as you correctly point out, McGrath and Warne who have taken 400+ wickets.

Maybe he doesn't class McGrath as a genius? He may mean people who do extra special things with the ball and as brilliant a bowler as McGrath is, he doesn't do special things with the ball.

Also McGrath hasn't exactly been an angel, he's been warned who knows how many time about his behaviour on the field and there was his spat with Ramneresh Sarwan which got him into trouble as well.

Basically England haven't had a consistently world-class bowler for at least 10 years IMO, the last being Botham or Willis. (Feel free to correct me, my memory is playing up :()
 

JohnnyA

U19 12th Man
Hussain is such a bandwagon jumper ...

England need a team of players who can play together for 10 years or so. If they have that, you will have your 400 wicket takers (Anderson, Harmison, Jones ...). But remember the likes of Warne and McGrath are successful because they play together with a bunch of other star players (the Waughs, Ponting, Haydyn, Taylor, Slater, Gilchrist, McDermot, Gillespie ..............)

If England can find a few young batsmen, they have a squad bristling with star talent: Anderson, Harmison, Jones, Freddy, Tres, Vaughn ... the future hasn't looked so bright for English Cricket in 20 years. Cricket is not a one man game ... it's about a collective team effort. Nasser's always bemoaning something that they do better elsewhere. I wish he'd just shut up sometimes (although I do believe he's been Englands best captain since Brearley (spelling?))

Jon
 

badgerhair

U19 Vice-Captain
Samuel_Vimes said:
So has McGrath. Australia have many "Wilkinsons", not just one. Therefore, it doesn't make a difference if you take away one of them. Why point to Warne, given his not-exactly good behaviour off the pitch?
That he's a badly-behaved person off the pitch is pretty irrelevant to whether or not he's a match-winner.

Hussain is only echoing an opinion shared by others in the England dressing room.

"But it was not just at Old Trafford that Warne tormented us. He was the biggest single difference between England and Australia in every Ashes series I played in. That is not to say that we would automatically have won without him, but things would have been a damn sight closer." - Michael Atherton, Opening Up.

And it's not as though McGrath was exactly a bowler Atherton scored millions off.

But Hussain's main point is sound, even if he said it in his usual unfortunate way. All he's actually saying is that we need a great player or two. There is at present nobody in the England side who would be a guaranteed first-choice pick for any other country, and Hussain believes that we would be much more likely to succeed if we had such a player.

Cheers,

Mike
 

Tom Halsey

International Coach
Agreed about the Warne/McGrath thing, it is irrelevant how a player behaves off the pitch, and I personally believe that Warne is a very slightly better bowler. But it just seems to me that Hussain always has something negative to say. If England won the Ashes 3-2, instead of celebrating like everyone else, he would probably say that we should have won 5-0.
 

Langeveldt

Soutie
But couldnt any sporting outfit in the world do with a matchwinner??? Thats like the most obvious thing I have ever heard... How stupid...
 

badgerhair

U19 Vice-Captain
halsey said:
Agreed about the Warne/McGrath thing, it is irrelevant how a player behaves off the pitch, and I personally believe that Warne is a very slightly better bowler. But it just seems to me that Hussain always has something negative to say. If England won the Ashes 3-2, instead of celebrating like everyone else, he would probably say that we should have won 5-0.
I actually doubt that. If we were to win the Ashes 2.51-2.49, he'd probably explode with delight, because beating Australia is the all-consuming obsession of England captains (even if they later become ex-captains).

All of Hussain's "negative" comments over the last couple of years - that I've seen, at any rate - have been in the context of "X or Y may be all very well, but it's not going to help us beat Australia, because to beat Australia you've got to........"

And he's no different to almost any significant England captain, because they all become aware that in the end, history will judge them on their Ashes record (with the notable exception of David Gower), whether they like it or not.

Cheers,

Mike
 

anzac

International Debutant
here is a prime example of the sort of negative / defeatist mentallity that plagues many of the international teams & players when it comes to Australian cricket!

If only, but if, we need, if we had.....blah blah blah.....

When are they going to learn that nothing will change unless you make it happen - so what are they doing about it?????

Hoping that 1 world class bowler will come along and make it right is never going to be enough on several counts......

*does England have the right structure to produce / recognise such a skilled player today?
* does their current cricketing environment produce players with the determination required to succeed - not perhaps since Beefy?
*do they have the right support network to nurture the player into International cricket?
*do they recognise the need for a team effort - WI has recently had the likes of Walsh, Ambrose & Lara, Pakistan has had Akram, Younis, Inzi etc, RSA had Donald, Pollock, Kallis, Kirsten & Gibbs - all world class yet they couldn't dominate.

Australia is as much about the team as it is any individual player. Furthermore the Australian effort is not based upon the performance of any 1 individual in either discipline, and they have strength in depth for when the 'superstar' is out injured or whatever.

It would appear that Hussain has failed to grasp this, but the real tragedy is that he is not alone in this.

:P
 

The Argonaut

State Vice-Captain
England have the potential match winners already. they just need to step up to the plate. Vaughan is a great batsman and will learn to be a good skipper given time. Anderson also looks to have the goods but is still very young. Flintoff has had a good year and must continue with the form he has shown. Consistency is the key. Being able to do it for every session of every match. Play with aggression and passion, confidence is what you're doing.

Australia has the edge over most sides mentally before a ball is bowled. That's where teams must improve. Stick it back up the Aussies and don't allow them to dictate the terms. See how they like it.

The batting is coming together. Trescothick has a good average but needs to turn 50s into more 100s. Thorpe is also very good when he's there. Hussain and Butcher have averages in the mid 30s and that is not good enough. They must do better.

The bowling is improving but the lack of a quality spinner is hurting England the most. Giles is solid but that is all. Harmison is young and will improve. Johnson needs to maintain fitness.

All in all the pieces are there but I think it will be 2 years before we see whether these guys can take the next step and judge them then.
 

hourn

U19 Cricketer
England would be better served by finding a (using the same rugby analogy) "Johnson" or a "Vickery" or a "Back". The hardworking guys who do the hard work and lay the platform.

Without those guys having a "Wilkinson" is useless.
 

age_master

Hall of Fame Member
i dunno, if they stuck goalposts at each eng of the oval im sure wilkinson could slot the McGraths of teh world through at about 85% ;)
 

PY

International Coach
hourn said:
England would be better served by finding a (using the same rugby analogy) "Johnson" or a "Vickery" or a "Back". The hardworking guys who do the hard work and lay the platform.

Without those guys having a "Wilkinson" is useless.
A very good point. We haven't (in the bowling department) got someone who just keeps it tight at one end and gets people out by being accurate. We have strike bowlers everywhere but no McGrath/Pollock style player.
 

Tom Halsey

International Coach
This may sound stupid, but against Bangladesh, Harmison cut down his pace and was very accurate. I think he has the potential to be that kind of bowler
 

badgerhair

U19 Vice-Captain
anzac said:
here is a prime example of the sort of negative / defeatist mentallity that plagues many of the international teams & players when it comes to Australian cricket!

If only, but if, we need, if we had.....blah blah blah.....

When are they going to learn that nothing will change unless you make it happen - so what are they doing about it?????
And this is a prime eample of the complacent nonsense which passes for Australian comment.

What are England doing about it? Everything you suggested, as they have been doing for several years.

Obviously changes do not occur overnight: when Australia realised how ghastly their situation was and resolved to do something about it in 1985/6, it took about 10 years for things to work through. England's "Raising the Standard" programme started in about 1998 and may come to fruition in 2007, which means it will have taken about as much time as Australia did to achieve a position of dominance.

Despite the blather from complacent Australians with rocks in their heads, they have not only had a serious programme of improvement and development, but they have happened to find a couple of players of all-time greatness who have elevated what would be a very good team into an awesome one.

England will have reached the stage of having a very good team of solid, motivated individuals who are seriously competent at Test cricket by about 2006.

What is required to take us beyond being a very good team is a couple of seriously excellent players. You cannot plan for seriously excellent players, you cannnot institute programmes to discover them, you cannot invent or manufacture them. They occur, or not, as the case may be.

Stuart MacGill is a leg-spinner who passes muster as a Test-class bowler, and quite a lot of countries would happy to have such a player available. But to even think of comparing him with Warne is to compare a decently competent player like Bichel with Dennis Lillee - a comparison which will not be flattering to Bichel. That's the kind of thing which has made Australia virtually invincible rather than very tough opponents.

Australia's current legendary players are either retiring or can see that date approaching. There is no sign that Australia have acquired any new bowlers of anything like the promise and potential, let alone achievement of Warne and McGrath. They will therefore find an England team composed of good, competent players competitive. If Englad manage to discover a player or two who can elevate the team beyond the merely very good, then we can dominate the way Australia have these last few years.

But one of this is likely to make any sense to anzac, since he's obviously had his head under a rock for the last five years - or he wouldn't have asked such an ignorant set of questions about England's development programmes and structures.

However, none of the English programmes has done anything, as far as I can see, to deal with Fast Bowler Injury Virus, which leads to us playing most series with a pace bowling line-up starting with our fourth-choice. Until we can not only identify and select players but keep them fit enough to last out a series (quite a difficult task, as Australia have clearly not managed in Jason Gillespie's case), the best-laid plans and shcemes will come to naught.

Cheers,

Mike
 

Eclipse

International Debutant
badgerhair said:
And this is a prime eample of the complacent nonsense which passes for Australian comment.

What are England doing about it? Everything you suggested, as they have been doing for several years.

Obviously changes do not occur overnight: when Australia realised how ghastly their situation was and resolved to do something about it in 1985/6, it took about 10 years for things to work through. England's "Raising the Standard" programme started in about 1998 and may come to fruition in 2007, which means it will have taken about as much time as Australia did to achieve a position of dominance.

Despite the blather from complacent Australians with rocks in their heads, they have not only had a serious programme of improvement and development, but they have happened to find a couple of players of all-time greatness who have elevated what would be a very good team into an awesome one.

England will have reached the stage of having a very good team of solid, motivated individuals who are seriously competent at Test cricket by about 2006.

What is required to take us beyond being a very good team is a couple of seriously excellent players. You cannot plan for seriously excellent players, you cannnot institute programmes to discover them, you cannot invent or manufacture them. They occur, or not, as the case may be.

Stuart MacGill is a leg-spinner who passes muster as a Test-class bowler, and quite a lot of countries would happy to have such a player available. But to even think of comparing him with Warne is to compare a decently competent player like Bichel with Dennis Lillee - a comparison which will not be flattering to Bichel. That's the kind of thing which has made Australia virtually invincible rather than very tough opponents.

Australia's current legendary players are either retiring or can see that date approaching. There is no sign that Australia have acquired any new bowlers of anything like the promise and potential, let alone achievement of Warne and McGrath. They will therefore find an England team composed of good, competent players competitive. If Englad manage to discover a player or two who can elevate the team beyond the merely very good, then we can dominate the way Australia have these last few years.

But one of this is likely to make any sense to anzac, since he's obviously had his head under a rock for the last five years - or he wouldn't have asked such an ignorant set of questions about England's development programmes and structures.

However, none of the English programmes has done anything, as far as I can see, to deal with Fast Bowler Injury Virus, which leads to us playing most series with a pace bowling line-up starting with our fourth-choice. Until we can not only identify and select players but keep them fit enough to last out a series (quite a difficult task, as Australia have clearly not managed in Jason Gillespie's case), the best-laid plans and shcemes will come to naught.

Cheers,

Mike
I think that is a bit harsh on anzac there. as far as I know he aint an aussie ether.

There are still seriouse problems with English cricket that have not been addressed yet and despratly need to. It's not going to be easy for teams to catch up to Australia in regards to having souch a strong FC system.
 

luckyeddie

Cricket Web Staff Member
A major factor holding England back is complacency. A decent performance here and there heralds a 'false dawn', then once every couple of years or so we get the rude awakening which is an Ashes series - and we see just how far we have to go. Another year of encouraging or at least reasonable results (like 2003) and we're ready for the Aussies again - only we're not.

The best appointment made in the last 10 years by England is Rod Marsh IMO. Of all the team sports, cricket above all is a mental game. Nowhere else in international sport is combat so 'one on one' - bowler v batsman - and for such a duration. Mental toughness is of paramount importance - and Marsh was one of the toughest nuts in international cricket. However, the onus at the end of the day is very much on the players concerned.

Where Hussain is correct is in intimating that a great player (like Wilkinson) would be a prize asset - but Wilkinson's strength is his work ethic - hours and hours of work have made him what he is - a perfectionist - so he puts in yet more hours. Wilkinson wasn't born with the ability - he has honed and refined his skill by putting in the time.

You've got to want to be the best, not to just be good enough - and that's where we come back to complacency. More and more, it's apparent that our first-class system is in dire need of a radical overhaul - but we've been through this so many times. No first-class county is going to voluntarily lay down their lives for the sake of English cricket, so we're stuck with 18 - a far too dilute distribution of the best talent IMO.

It's comparitively easy for someone to 'make their mark' in county cricket (no names, but you know who they are) because at least half of the county players would, if playing in another country, be playing second XI or grade cricket anyway. There needs to be a gravitation of the best players to fewer clubs, it pains me to say (because my own favourites are not one of the 'big' sides) - and promoting a third of the second division every season does nothing but dilute the talent still further.
 

Langeveldt

Soutie
Good point well made eddie, however I think it has more to do with the long winters we get here, and the football culture that exists right through the summer months.. I play cricket right through the winter months.. Its what i find most enjoyable because the pressure is off and I know its making me better, but Im lucky in that ive never really played any other sport which would clog the winter months up, but i know hardly any people who would pick up a bat in the winter...

Fact is that no county would stop operating for the sake of English cricket.. You would have to turn all the counties into regions for the plan to work, and that aint gonna happen....ever.
 

Top