Morning - was born in 1982 so what I'm talking about in the second half of the 80s is from stuff I've read and heard elsewhere.
There seems to be a consensus amongst a majority of English fans that the Test team is in a state of mini-crisis and that the domestic structure, no longer fit for purpose, is in need of an overhaul. I'm not arguing with anyone who suggests that change is necessary as County cricket doesn't seem to be producing the players in sufficient volume to make the step up to the international game. What that change should be has been explored elsewhere.
But...I was illuminated somewhat by Andrew Strauss' observation that England have spent more time in the lower reaches of the test hierarchy in the last 40 years than they have with any realistic shot of competing to be the best team in the world. I remember writing a piece about the series loss to New Zealand at the end of the 20th century, where the crowd sang "we've got the worst team in the world" after the match. The 1990s were not exactly glory years for the England team, albeit there was the odd memorable performance and result. Just a year before that low point England had (albeit a tad fortunately) pipped South Africa 2-1 at home, which was their five test series win since the 1986-87 Ashes. That leads us nicely into...
While the 1990s is remembered now by many of us as bit of a golden era for the game, the 1980s and particularly the second half of it tend not to attract anything like the same kind of nostalgia (may be an age thing so please correct if the need arises). That England won the 1985 and 1986/7 Ashes against an Australian team in transition does seem to camouflage that in many ways these series were battles to not be the second worst team in the world, seeing as Sri Lanka were new to the world scene and would take until the next decade to realise their potential. England failed to win a home match against anyone other than Sri Lanka between 1986 and 1990, losing to India, New Zealand, West Indies and Pakistan before the culmination that was (an albeit not great) Australia dishing out a 4-0 hammering that could have been 6-0 but for the rain, Quite why English players were regular candidates for 'rebel tours' escapes me.
Away from home wasn't much better, with the Shakoor Rana vs Mike Gatting tour of Pakistan and another 'Blackwash' punctuating the second half of the decade.
England's match record between the 1986 Blackwash and the 1989 Ashes was:- P39 W3 D17 L19. That is truly horrific, there's no other word for it,
I've read a few of the autobiographies of players around this era and Ian Botham's was probably the most memorable one. I have mixed feelings about Botham, who for a few years at the turn of the 70s and 80s was one of the best cricketers ever to play the game but whose self-confidence had a tendency to cross over into delusion as he appeared to think he was an elite level cricketer several years after he had ceased being so. Looking back it's strange that people talked about the Gooch-Gatting-Gower-Lamb-Botham era with any kind of reverence, although David Gower strikes me as being hard done by and Gooch would become the best batsman in the world for a few years at the end of his 30s. There seemed to be be an almost negligent lack of understanding of precisely how bad this England team actually was and the 1990s, often a frustrating decade, look like a positive recovery by comparison.
I'm particularly interested in the thoughts of those who watched it unfold at the time and can remember it clearly. Was there an understanding amongst fans of the sport that the England team was pretty dreadful? To what extent did a couple of Ashes series victories paper over the cracks? Was the culture around the team as unprofessional as the likes of Graham Gooch later indicated when he changed things? Did the rebel tours provide an unwelcome distraction?
Many Thanks in advance...
There seems to be a consensus amongst a majority of English fans that the Test team is in a state of mini-crisis and that the domestic structure, no longer fit for purpose, is in need of an overhaul. I'm not arguing with anyone who suggests that change is necessary as County cricket doesn't seem to be producing the players in sufficient volume to make the step up to the international game. What that change should be has been explored elsewhere.
But...I was illuminated somewhat by Andrew Strauss' observation that England have spent more time in the lower reaches of the test hierarchy in the last 40 years than they have with any realistic shot of competing to be the best team in the world. I remember writing a piece about the series loss to New Zealand at the end of the 20th century, where the crowd sang "we've got the worst team in the world" after the match. The 1990s were not exactly glory years for the England team, albeit there was the odd memorable performance and result. Just a year before that low point England had (albeit a tad fortunately) pipped South Africa 2-1 at home, which was their five test series win since the 1986-87 Ashes. That leads us nicely into...
While the 1990s is remembered now by many of us as bit of a golden era for the game, the 1980s and particularly the second half of it tend not to attract anything like the same kind of nostalgia (may be an age thing so please correct if the need arises). That England won the 1985 and 1986/7 Ashes against an Australian team in transition does seem to camouflage that in many ways these series were battles to not be the second worst team in the world, seeing as Sri Lanka were new to the world scene and would take until the next decade to realise their potential. England failed to win a home match against anyone other than Sri Lanka between 1986 and 1990, losing to India, New Zealand, West Indies and Pakistan before the culmination that was (an albeit not great) Australia dishing out a 4-0 hammering that could have been 6-0 but for the rain, Quite why English players were regular candidates for 'rebel tours' escapes me.
Away from home wasn't much better, with the Shakoor Rana vs Mike Gatting tour of Pakistan and another 'Blackwash' punctuating the second half of the decade.
England's match record between the 1986 Blackwash and the 1989 Ashes was:- P39 W3 D17 L19. That is truly horrific, there's no other word for it,
I've read a few of the autobiographies of players around this era and Ian Botham's was probably the most memorable one. I have mixed feelings about Botham, who for a few years at the turn of the 70s and 80s was one of the best cricketers ever to play the game but whose self-confidence had a tendency to cross over into delusion as he appeared to think he was an elite level cricketer several years after he had ceased being so. Looking back it's strange that people talked about the Gooch-Gatting-Gower-Lamb-Botham era with any kind of reverence, although David Gower strikes me as being hard done by and Gooch would become the best batsman in the world for a few years at the end of his 30s. There seemed to be be an almost negligent lack of understanding of precisely how bad this England team actually was and the 1990s, often a frustrating decade, look like a positive recovery by comparison.
I'm particularly interested in the thoughts of those who watched it unfold at the time and can remember it clearly. Was there an understanding amongst fans of the sport that the England team was pretty dreadful? To what extent did a couple of Ashes series victories paper over the cracks? Was the culture around the team as unprofessional as the likes of Graham Gooch later indicated when he changed things? Did the rebel tours provide an unwelcome distraction?
Many Thanks in advance...
