Between a muddle and a shambles

NatWest Series: No Nasser, no form and no clear plan in prospect for England to join in the one-day party

Some day England might have a one-day clue again. For now, they are in a mess. This is partly through unfortunate circumstance, partly of their own making, but it makes distinctly unpleasant viewing.

Six successive defeats tell their own story of failure. It would make slightly cheerier reading ­ though not a reason for dancing in the streets ­ if there was any semblance of a genuine plan, never mind an idea of the team who might take the field in the 2003 World Cup.

Come to think of it, a team for the 2001 NatWest Series might be a reason for taking the bunting out of storage. There is no logical reason for assuming that they will end the losing sequence against Australia in Bristol today, such was their shambolic state against Pakistan in the opening match of the NatWest Series on Thursday.

The poor form has now been compounded by the worrying suspicion that England might not be able to keep their house in order beyond the boundary. When spectators at Edgbaston spilled on to the playing area before the game was over it reinforced fears about danger to players. Perhaps it was over-exuberance more than evil intent, but that does not mean players will not be hurt. Incidentally, allegations are surfacing of England players being subjected to racial abuse on the boundary, which makes the whole affair more sinister. At least the England and Wales Cricket Board have acted firmly, which is more than can be said for those guiding the fortunes of the one-day team.

The most disturbing feature of England's latest run is that it is not the first time. Since the late Nineties, England have made a habit of taking two steps backwards and one forwards. That is, they have had their moments, which have inevitably been followed by another hammering.

In 1996, for instance, they lost six in a row in the build-up to the World Cup, where they performed abjectly. In early 1998 they lost another six on the trot, and between February and April 1999 they went down seven times before the World Cup in this country, where they performed only slightly less abjectly than in the previous tournament.

That was the time to act, to set out their stall for South Africa. Despite the declaration of good intentions, it has never quite happened. England are still primitive in the ways of the one-day game. If it is a three-act play (the opening 15 overs, the 15th to the 40th over and the last 10 overs) England are performing comedy from the Dark Ages while Australia and South Africa, especially Australia and South Africa, are conducting classics while understanding that language always has to move on.

England's bowling lacks variety and too often gumption, their batting is frequently badly paced, and they do not sustain a high quality in the field throughout 50 overs. The balance of the side is occasionally lop-sided.

Part of the English conundrum is that they play too much limited- overs domestic cricket and too little of the international variety. All other countries play far more often and therefore gain much more experience. This may seem a peculiar complaint when it is generally accepted that match-rigging has been encouraged by the staging of too many meaningless one-dayers in remote places. England are in a no-win situation in every way.

In assessing their parlous state it is essential to take into account their misfortune. Of the team who were embarrassed by a revitalised Pakistan, four, perhaps five, would not have been first choices. Nasser Hussain, Graham Thorpe, Andrew Caddick, Craig White and, probably, Ashley Giles would all have played if fit.

The biggest loss was Hussain. He is not a great one-day batsman and there is evidence to suggest that he is not a good one. His weight and versatility of shot are both lacking, he cannot adjust automatically to a given match position. But he has become the leader of this England team whatever version of the game they are playing He makes them tick. Like Rick Blain in Casablanca, he does the thinking for all of them. Hussain does what all adept captains do: he gives the impression of doing something even if he is doing nothing. He has a keen cricketing brain and uses it smartly and rapidly, necessary but not always evident qualities in one-dayers.

These absences cannot disguise England's ill-thought-out strategy. They have had several attempts to identify the next one-day generation. What has happened to Vikram Solanki, Paul Franks, Andrew Flintoff? Gone back to rot in their counties, that's what.

The selectors have had another go for this series in calling up Paul Collingwood, Ben Hollioake and, on Friday night, Owais Shah (whose selection surely spells the inter-national end for Mark Ramprakash). These selections all have some merit, but will the selectors do what they should and stick with them? Will they play them enough? The signs are not good.

England's coach, Duncan Fletcher, has repeatedly made it clear that he sees all-rounders as being a key component in the shorter game. He has a point, but he must avoid being sidetracked by ill-equipped members of the breed.

Neither Collingwood nor Hollioake look exactly threatening or containing as medium-paced bowlers. With that pair plus Dominic Cork and Mark Ealham in Thursday's side, England looked rather short of specialists.

Their batting line-up is in a pickle. For long enough, they have not been as well-disposed towards Nick Knight as they should have been. He is England's most successful one-day opener of all, yet he has often been omitted and on Thursday batted at three, where he held up an end as his colleagues got out.

The loss of Thorpe was unhelpful, but there was still no purposeful shape to their order. Obviously, Marcus Trescothick must open, and if Knight is deemed to be a left-hander too many in the opening slots Michael Vaughan should go in with him. What Alistair Brown was doing as opener the other night when he was specifically not picked for pinch-hitting was a mystery.

England appear to be performing the age-old, but still watchable, trick of falling between two stools. In trying to pick a squad for the 2001 NatWest Series with one eye on the 2003 World Cup they will probably fail to win either. It will not be a pretty sight but it will, as always with England, be compelling.