Skip to main contentSkip to navigationSkip to navigation
Brian Lara
Brian Lara.
Brian Lara.

Lara questions Vaughan's top-heavy tactics

This article is more than 19 years old
at Trent Bridge

One of the few redeeming features of a comprehensive England defeat was the apparent success of their latest batting experiment. While Geraint Jones and Andrew Strauss were ensconced at No3 and No4, everything went according to plan. The only problem is that, in the opinion of Brian Lara, the victorious West Indies captain, it is the wrong plan.

Jones and Strauss rallied England with an 82-run stand for the third wicket, which represented more than half of a meagre total, but Lara hinted again yesterday that England's exposure of their best players, Michael Vaughan and Marcus Trescothick, to the new ball was a flawed policy.

"Most of England's match-winners are at the top of the order and in English conditions that is not the best away to go about it," Lara said. "Getting rid of Vaughan and Trescothick with the new ball is very important in every game."

England have been plotting obsessively for the 2007 World Cup in the Caribbean ever since their star-crossed southern Africa campaign ended with defeat against Australia in Port Elizabeth. The talk has been of allowing a promising young side time to gel but, although the personnel have stayed largely the same, uncertainty is still rampant over how best to use them.

The inclusion of Jones and Strauss in the top four is an admission that the rebuilding process has not gone smoothly. At the end of last summer, neither had made a one-day debut. Now Strauss is charged with fulfilling the Graham Thorpe nurdling role at No4 and Chris Read's flawless wicketkeeping has been discarded in the belief that Jones can bring vibrancy at three.

That experiment may yet be curtailed by doubts over the Vaughan/Trescothick opening partnership. They remain England's most potent match-winners in both formats of the game, but both have been touted at times for a drop into the middle order.

Lara, at 35, has decided that his own influence is best felt down at No5, where his unbeaten 32 from 29 balls finished off yesterday's game with alacrity. "Middle-order batting is very important in the one-day game, especially in England," he said, "and we are going to have the right players there at the right time."

Vaughan will not wel come a renewed debate about his batting position. "Jones and Strauss got us in a position where we could have got 220. They both looked comfortable at three and four. It is down to me and Marcus to give us a convincing start."

Whereas Lara is wary of the damage the new ball might inflict, England's is the more flexible policy, utilising two batsmen with great opening experience and the ability when conditions dictate to take advantage of the fielding restrictions in the first 15 overs. It did not look too clever yesterday when Ian Bradshaw, a 29-year-old Bajan of limited experience, had dismissed both Vaughan and Trescothick by his second over, but it will take only a flat pitch and a sunny day for people to be craving the adventure that they can provide.

"The one-day team is obviously lacking in experience," said Vaughan. "We lost against Zimbabwe at Trent Bridge last year and jumped to a lot of conclusions, but we went on to win the series. We just didn't play well."

The fact remains that England's progress at Test level is not matched in the one-day format, and the rain that bedevilled them throughout the winter means that the ability of such as Anthony McGrath, Ian Blackwell and Rikki Clarke has still to be satisfactorily gauged. England know little more than they did a year ago. In that time, who bats at No3 and No4 has been a constant source of debate. Vaughan spent last summer at No3, with Warwickshire's Jim Troughton, McGrath and, on one occasion, Kent's Rob Key to follow.

Over the winter, Vaughan remained at three, with Paul Collingwood this time to follow. But the failure of Vikram Solanki as an opener forced Vaughan back up the order in the Caribbean and paved the way for Strauss's inclusion at No3. And now the latest theory: Jones, a catalyst at No3, a batsman encouraged to play high-risk and get the innings off to a flyer.

Jones and Strauss almost achieved it. The debate may soon switch instead to the quality of the players who follow them in the order.

Explore more on these topics

Most viewed

Most viewed