LIKE any other tournament where individual and group rivalries are never far below the surface, the Cricket World Cup builds a macho environment.
In the early rounds, coaches, teams and players watch each other like hawks, trying to gauge their prospects against their rivals for the biggest prize in one-day cricket.
It is no surprise, therefore, that the tournament has become a breeding ground for innovation. With every side trying to find ways of setting themselves apart from the rest, teams are more likely to try tactics designed to shock and pressurise the opposition.
In 1992, the use of reverse swing by Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis ensured victory against England in the final; in 1996, Sri Lanka emerged as champions after ushering in the era of the pinch hitter, with Sanath Jayasuriya and Romesh Kaluwitharana hitting out from the start; and in the last World Cup in India, early experiments with spinners opening the bowling had become the norm by the end of the tournament.
The 2015 version, aided by fielding captains having to keep five men inside the ring, has seen the most dramatic shift of all. In short, 400 is the new 300. Batsmen who are used to playing outrageous shots in Twenty20 cricket are now unafraid to bring what they’ve learnt into the longer form.
Advertisement
While it may seem like a high-risk strategy to many onlookers, the likes of AB de Villiers, Brendon McCullum, Chris Gayle and David Warner know that by pressurising the opposition, the odds shift more firmly into their favour than by attempting to play conservatively. If you are hitting a bowler’s best ball for six, he has nothing to come back at you with. He is, in effect, neutered — Steve Finn against McCullum being an excellent example.
There is, of course, a danger to the naked aggression shown by some teams so far. Overdone and in the wrong conditions, you run the risk of gifting wickets. Australia and New Zealand were overzealous in their group match in Auckland, although both captains showed that the best way to counter brutality with the bat is by replicating it with the ball and field settings.
What can be taken for granted is that the team that wins this World Cup will play in the manner that the top teams have so far, but also do it smartly, picking their moments, identifying the bowlers to attack.
Which brings me to the England team. It is often said that generals tend to fight the last war when faced with a new conflict. From what we have seen so far in the tournament, England are doing the same. They arrived, after six months of solid ODI cricket, not knowing their best side (and having recently ditched their captain of three years’ standing), which is a failure in itself. They then proceeded to compound the problem by picking Gary Ballance to add solidity to a flaky batting line-up. A good tactic in a bygone age, but not in the era of the Indian Premier League.
After being bowled out for 123 by New Zealand a week before, perhaps the team were entitled to feel satisfied when they posted 309 against Sri Lanka last weekend. Watching the batsmen nudge and nurdle in the middle overs, however, when the England run rate was a paltry 3.9, brought a sense of frustration and an uneasy feeling that Sri Lanka would not be tied down in the same way. That is how it played out.
Advertisement
If England are to turn around their fortunes, they desperately need to start playing the same game as everyone else. The batsmen have to shed their inhibitions, knowing that the way they have been playing will only ensure an early flight home, and start pressurising the opposition.
With that in mind, Alex Hales needs to be given the opportunity and the licence to transfer his Twenty20 game into the 50-over format. Having played no cricket on the tour so far, it is a risk to pick him, but it is a risk that England cannot afford not to take.
More worrying for England, their bowlers have looked completely one-paced and ineffective. England’s strategy of using James Anderson and Stuart Broad to strike with the new ball, and then turn to Finn to blast people out in the middle overs has not worked.
Finn lacks rhythm, is short of confidence and, most crucially, is short of pace. He should make way for either Chris Jordan, or perhaps James Tredwell against Bangladesh in Adelaide tomorrow morning.
Anderson and Broad need to think solely of taking wickets, rather than protecting their figures. If England take the mindset into their remaining games that they need to bowl teams out, rather than restrict, then they will at least give themselves the chance of making the latter stages of the competition.
Advertisement
From everything that we have seen from England so far, it would not be a huge surprise if they lost this must-win game. Once England teams lose confidence, they tend not to recover quickly in ODI cricket.
An exception to that rule occurred in the 2006-07 ODI tri-series in Australia. Back then, England were awful for the first half of the competition, having been trounced in the Ashes a few weeks earlier, only for Paul Collingwood to single-handedly carry the team to victory with a stunning run of form. One of this England team’s senior players needs to do something similar, starting tomorrow.