If you look at the number of England test wins that were hugely down to ITB - 2nd test in NZ during 1977/8, first 2 tests at home to Pakistan in 1978, Indian test in 1980, all 3 wins against Aus in 1981 - it's tempting to conclude that he was succesfully papering over the cracks in an otherwise mediocre side. However, I think there were other factors too. England's bowling when he fist came along was infinitely better than in the late 80's, and the opposition was generally weaker than it would later become.Swervy said:no way was the England team from about 83 onwards to any point when Botham retired anywhere near as good as this England team, despite some great names that played for England back then.
I often wonder whether its merely coincidence that England slumped big time when Bothams form left him
And I very much doubt whether the England team had ever believed they could win at Lord's after the SA innings. At Headingley, though, a friend of mine was drinking in a bar when Chris Old walked in on the Saturday night (after England's follow-on had started). Old said "We can win this, you know." And Botham would still have believed it when he walked into bat.FaaipDeOiad said:Fair enough. I'd suggest both were exceedingly unlikely, though perhaps when Flintoff came in victory was even less likely, given that 5 wickets had already gone down, just like in Botham's case, but the deficit was still over 300, while in Botham's case it was less than half that.
Maybe they weren't as successful - whether they were as good is anyone's guess, and fact is we'll never know.Swervy said:no way was the England team from about 83 onwards to any point when Botham retired anywhere near as good as this England team, despite some great names that played for England back then.
I often wonder whether its merely coincidence that England slumped big time when Bothams form left him
Except that they didn't. True, we got seriously hammered by WI, but we went to India and won handsomely, we won the Ashes convincingly in 85 and less convincingly again in 86-7, and Botham didn't really have all that much to do with the winning of any of them. England didn't really start to slump, as you put it, until Alec Bedser stopped picking the team and it was entrusted to Peter May.Swervy said:no way was the England team from about 83 onwards to any point when Botham retired anywhere near as good as this England team, despite some great names that played for England back then.
I often wonder whether its merely coincidence that England slumped big time when Bothams form left him
Didn't May take over in 1982, or is my memory playing tricks on me? You're right to bring his name up though. Any attempt to explain our exceptionally poor results in the second half of the 80's must take into account his habit of getting through as many players as possible during a series. Before then, he got away with it because we still had a few world class players playing doing their job performing reasonably well and he had the luxury of a few series against relatively moderate opposition.badgerhair said:Except that they didn't. True, we got seriously hammered by WI, but we went to India and won handsomely, we won the Ashes convincingly in 85 and less convincingly again in 86-7, and Botham didn't really have all that much to do with the winning of any of them. England didn't really start to slump, as you put it, until Alec Bedser stopped picking the team and it was entrusted to Peter May.
Cheers,
Mike
Since Dexter's initial contribution was to preside over the captaincy fiasco at the start of the 1989 Ashes series which then saw 29 players represent us in the six tests (going one better than May's record from the previous year), you'd have to say that he wasn't. Thereafter, results did pick up under his stewardship - for a couple of years anyway. How much that was down to him is debateable, of course. IIRC he was still in charge when we had the pig's ear of a squad that toured India in 1992/3 and then when we once again got through a sizeable proportion of the available players against Aus in 1993, so you'd struggle to conclude that he had much of a clue.Richard said:Were either Edward Dexter or Raymond Illingworth really any better?
The reason we picked out May was we were disussing the decline England's decline in the 80's! My mention of Bedser was only to make the point that May was an extreme version of what had gone before. As for Dexter, I'm pretty sure the 1989 Ashes was actually his first series in charge, not his last. I *think* the 1993 Ashes was his last series. Maybe that's what you were thinking of.Richard said:That's the point I was making - don't pick-out Bedser and\or May when the fact is most have been equally guilty. David Graveney has been a breath of fresh-air of late, however much Duncan Fletcher may or may not have helped him.
Incidentally... from memory of Atherton's autobio I'm sure Dexter's last act was the 1989 Ashes...?
Another thing - how often have injuries played the part in the pick-as-many-players-as-poss? Quite often in my time - how often down the years is less easy to tell.
Cruel but probably fair. I suppose you weren't in a position to do much about it, anyway.marc71178 said:Dexter was definitely around in the 93 series, I remember his reasoning about juxtapositions being put on the classroom noticeboard by our temporary Aussie maternity cover teacher.
Well - SA rebel tours were an extreme version of injuries. Of course, it's best, rather than just talking about injuries, to mention unavailabilities - covers everything, both injuries and suspensions.wpdavid said:The reason we picked out May was we were disussing the decline England's decline in the 80's! My mention of Bedser was only to make the point that May was an extreme version of what had gone before. As for Dexter, I'm pretty sure the 1989 Ashes was actually his first series in charge, not his last. I *think* the 1993 Ashes was his last series. Maybe that's what you were thinking of.
From memory, injuries didn't have much to do with the casts-of-thousands in the second half of the 80's. The only mitigating factor in 1989 was losing several players who signed up for Gatting's "rebel" tour of SA in the middle of the summer, but selection was already a mess by then anyway. Even in the series against WI, when one or two of our guys usually found themselves on the receiving end of something nasty, I don't remember injuries being a significant factor.
And it was a very similar story in 2002 and, to a lesser extent, 2001 as well. Injuries and other unavailabilities all over the place, and it was extremely easy to miss the relatively small number of omissions. Hoggard and Harmison, obviously, are the best examples - Harmison has only been dropped for a single Test (even that some people debate), and Hoggard's been dropped just once after his debut.You're right to mention Graveney as well as Fletcher, of course. I suppose I tend not to because selection in 1997 to some extent followed the pattern we had seen in previous Ashes series - lots of good intentions followed by some bizarre picks when we started losing. But, irrespective of who actually deserves the credit, selection under Graveney has been more consistent than at any time in the history of the game, AFAICS, and he deserves some credit. The best example was probably the 2003 SA series when we twice lost terriby and previous incumbants would have changed much of the side - and lost the series 4-0. If you see past the injuries to Hoggard, Johnson, Kirtley, & Harmison (OK, I know opinions differ on that one) and Gough's retirement, selection was incredibly consistent that summer, and we were able to save the series.
Yes, I'm near enough certain about all of that. Illingworth took control in 1994, after Atherton and Fletcher (K) had picked the squad completely for the West Indies tour. It must have been 1993 (another Ashes summer) when Dexter took his "strange" (according to Atherton) last act as a CoS. Illingworth always wanted complete control and got it after Fletcher got the brunt of the inevitable post-Ashes fallout. He had it until Bumble's appointment in 1996 (Illingworth found it intolerable after the horror winter of 1995\96), and was CoS until Graveney took over in 1997. Bumble remained as coach until the end of WC99, and of course Duncan didn't take-over until the SA tour, so there was no coach for the NZ Test-series.wpdavid said:Cruel but probably fair. I suppose you weren't in a position to do much about it, anyway.
I'm trying to remember the sequence of managers & selectors in the 90's. IIRC Dexter stood down in 1993 and was replaced by Illingworth for the 1994 home series against NZ & SA. Graveney then took over in 1997.
As for managers, I *think" Micky Stewart was replaced by Keith Fletcher for the 1992/93 tour of India. Fletcher was still around for the Aus tour in 1994/95, but probably not after then. I vaguely remember Illy wanting and having complete control for a year or two. Maybe he stood down after the 1996 home series, because Lloyd must have been manager in the subsequent "flippin murdered them" tour to Zim & NZ. Lloyd was certainly manager against SA in 1998, and, IIRC, we didn't have one against NZ in 1999.
Does that sound about right?
I think the last 2 Ashes series are good illustrations of where Graveney and/or Flecther have got things right. Both times we got thrashed hollow, but there still wasn't much doubt at the end of the series about most of the players who should still be in the team, and we were able to get on with life as normal afterwards. 2002 was a bit different as we weren't losing most of the time, so any changes were purely down to injuries to Caddick, Jones, Tudor, Tresco etc rather than kneejerk reactions.Richard said:Well - SA rebel tours were an extreme version of injuries. Of course, it's best, rather than just talking about injuries, to mention unavailabilities - covers everything, both injuries and suspensions.
And I wasn't specifically talking about the mid-80s, more the 70s and before. From what I've been able to see, England selection has near always been "a mess" as you put it, except when the going's been really good - the Fred Tate instance being probably the most glaring example, along with Syd Pardon's legendary "touched the confines of lunacy" comment about the 1909 selectors.
And it was a very similar story in 2002 and, to a lesser extent, 2001 as well. Injuries and other unavailabilities all over the place, and it was extremely easy to miss the relatively small number of omissions. Hoggard and Harmison, obviously, are the best examples - Harmison has only been dropped for a single Test (even that some people debate), and Hoggard's been dropped just once after his debut.