There is probably a Bill Shankly aphorism for any situation. This one was once delivered to an eager young journalist in Liverpool. “Laddie, I never drop players; I only make changes.” Similar sentiments are often expressed by those in charge of the England cricket team. They shy away from dropping anyone if at all possible; that is far too shattering an experience for the poor rejected player. Instead, they occasionally make changes.
Even so, Trevor Bayliss does not appear to have much in common with Shankly, starting with the fact that England’s coach rarely addresses anyone as “laddie”. He is not quite so quotable. “Whenever anyone’s a little out of form, that’s a little bit of a worry,” which is what he drawled after the Durham Test match, sounds a bit too measured to spring from the lips of Shankly.
Bayliss quietly hinted that England would keep the same team at Lord’s, which will be a relief to two players in particular. No one has been dropped and there is only a small possibility of any change to the final XI. Nick Compton will continue at No3 since there are no spare batsmen in the squad. And Steven Finn, despite being out of kilter in Chester‑le‑Street, is expected to retain his place on his home ground rather than Nottinghamshire’s Jake Ball receiving his first cap.
Apart from one spell after tea on the third day, Finn propelled powder puffs at Chester-le-Street. True, the pitch was docile but Finn was in grade three among the English seamers. Above him were Stuart Broad and Chris Woakes, who bounded in confidently on his return to Test cricket as well as scoring some handy runs. Above and beyond them on a distant pinnacle was Jimmy Anderson, who was disturbingly more threatening than the rest.
Likewise there is currently a gulf among the batsmen. Along with Compton, James Vince has yet to make much of an impact.
He has been compelled to learn slowly because England have enforced the follow-on in consecutive games and therefore he has been permitted only two innings. Unlike Compton, he has time on his side. So far he has succumbed when trying to play to his strength. Vince is an accomplished off-side player with a much-admired cover drive and his two dismissals have come when attempting that shot. Most of the great players in history have favoured the onside for their run-scoring; that is the business side, where risk can be minimised. So far Vince has yet to convince.
Not that Bayliss has any idea about the alternatives. After the last Test he listed some players, from Scott Borthwick in the north to Daniel Bell‑Drummond in the south, before adding: “To be honest, I haven’t seen these guys play. I’m going to have to rely on the other selectors.” This is a peculiarity. In what other sport does the national coach introduce new players into his team whom he has never seen play? Imagine Roy Hodgson, let alone Shankly, doing that.
This is hardly Bayliss’s fault. England’s cricketers are always playing so he is always working with them and he needs some time to rest and reunite with his family in Australia. So he has very limited opportunities to come to his own conclusions about England hopefuls. This may not be a fresh problem, but it is hardly ideal.
One innings witnessed by Duncan Fletcher, who was coaching Glamorgan in 1999 just before taking on the England job, catapulted Marcus Trescothick into the England setup even though his figures at the time were far from startling.
Fletcher, like Shankly no doubt, was much happier to trust his own judgment ahead of anyone else’s. The indications are that Bayliss is far more prepared to delegate and put his faith in his advisers than many top-rank coaches. For the moment he does not have any other option. He is also inclined to give his players one too many Tests rather one too few, a luxury more likely to be granted in a winning side.
The teams arrive at St John’s Wood with the series decided. So in International Cricket Council terms the match lacks “context”, which is what we all now want even for a Lord’s Test. If England win there they will lead the hastily concocted Super Series by 12 points to nil, which means Sri Lanka will have to win every one-day match to draw level. Oh dear. In desperation I visited the ICC Test predictor and discovered this: if England can beat Sri Lanka 3-0 and Pakistan 3-0, they will be within a few points of becoming the No1 team in the Test rankings come August.
Nor are there any obvious landmarks to celebrate at Lord’s. In Durham, Alastair Cook was justly feted for his 10,000th Test run, though in many ways Anderson’s 450th Test wicket is an even more notable achievement. Eleven batsmen are above Cook; five bowlers are ahead of Anderson. The two pacemen above him are Courtney Walsh (519 wickets and just within range) and Glenn McGrath (563 – that would surely be asking too much).
Most encouragingly Anderson, at 33, has seldom bowled better than in the first two Tests. He looks fit, rhythmical and happy in himself (although Anderson can be so inscrutable that there is always some guesswork involved here).
By contrast the Sri Lanka pace attack is in some disarray. The tourists have already lost Dushmantha Chameera through injury; now Shaminda Eranga, who has taken one wicket in the series, has his action under scrutiny and may not be able to play at Lord’s even if the selectors want him to. The 29-year-old Chaminda Bandara has been called up. He is currently 451 Test wickets behind Anderson.
