The bloody English weather. It’s about as reliable as Del Trotter’s Robin Reliant. We’ve had no cricket for months, everyone’s aching for some live action, but the overhead conditions just wouldn’t comply. I guess we should’ve known.

What a shame that day one at the Ageas Bowl was curtailed by rain and then bad light. I was looking forward to writing a traditional TFT daily report but the lack of meaningful action has scuppered my plans. However, at least there was a typical England selection controversy to chew over though …

Why on earth did England leave out Stuart Broad? His record in England is fantastic, he bowled really well this winter, and I was looking forward to a Broad / Anderson reunion. With overcast skies, and a West Indies batting line-up that’s traditionally struggled against the seaming Ball, England’s most productive new ball partnership in history would’ve been a real handful.

But no. England decided to include both their express bowlers – even though both have fitness concerns and the pitch is slow. I don’t half worry about Chris Silverwood sometimes. England have made far too many strange selection decisions thus far in his short tenure. I guess we should thank our lucky stars that he didn’t pick Broad, play five seamers, and omit Bess. I bet it crossed his mind though.

Anyway, I don’t want to dwell on the negative. What little cricket we did see what fascinating – although I say that as someone so desperate to watch live cricket again that I probably would’ve found the fifth day of a bore draw on a featherbed interesting. It’s just a shame that the action was so short-lived.

So what did we manage to see in the 82 minutes of cricket? The Windies struck early when Dom Sibley inexplicably left a ball angled in at his off-stump. Thankfully, however, Burns and Denly battled hard until the premature close of play. 35-1 seemed about right.

One thing that did strike me, however, was how relatively little the ball swung. The odd delivery definitely moved, and there was a hint of Swing, but one might expect it to swing prodigiously under heavy skies. Instead I thought the seam movement was far more noticeable. Indeed, it was mostly seam movement that did for Sibley as the ball moved back into him slightly more than he expected.

The reason I’m dwelling on this, of course, is because the players are playing in a Covid-safe and saliva-free environment in international cricket for the very first time. And as we all know, bowlers habitually use saliva to shine the ball and make it move in the air – as we discussed last week.

This subject is worth exploring again because our bowlers’ experience and ability to swing the Dukes Ball gives us a big advantage at home. If the amount of swing on offer is reduced then it reduces our home advantage.

The importance of saliva was a topic discussed by Zak Crawley in a webinar I was invited to on Friday. Speaking from his hotel after England’s warm up game, Zak claimed that England’s players were confident they could produce the required effect using sweat alone.

However, I wondered at the time whether this was just propaganda? After all, when you’ve got Jimmy Anderson in your XI, you want the opposition to think that the ball will hoop round corners. What’s more, I wanted to hear from an actual bowler. They understand the mysteries of swing far more than a young batter – no offence, Zak.

That’s why this interview with Charl Langeveldt on the Betway Insider Blog caught my eye. Not only was Langeveldt a seasoned fast bowler who took over one hundred wickets for South Africa; he’s also one of the best bowling coaches in the world. He also has extensive experience in English conditions having represented Leics, Derbs, Somerset, and Kent. What’s more, he specifically mentions the Ageas Bowl in the article.

According to Langevelt, the saliva ban certainly will make life harder for the bowlers. He describes using spit as ‘second nature’ and wasn’t sure how England’s bowlers were going to get round the problem. Indeed, he said he was looking forward to seeing how the likes of Jimmy Anderson managed:

The maintenance of the ball is key, particularly in England. It’s a big plus for a bowler if he can use saliva. That is especially the case in England because they use the Dukes ball. Once one side of a Dukes ball gets scuffed up and you polish the other side, it does swing a lot more and it swings for longer … I don’t know how they’re going to do it.

The good news, however, is that the Dukes ball should still be our bowlers’ ally.  Although Chris Woakes, who knows a thing or two about swing bowling in English conditions, believes that kicking the saliva habit will be tough, he still expects the Dukes to move around:

The Dukes always gives you a little bit of something, so hopefully that can continue. We will find ways to shine the ball, whether that’s being a little bit more aggressive on the shining side of things.

The question for me is whether this is more wishful thinking (or mind games). After all, Woakes didn’t actually reveal how they intended to generate swing. What does being ‘more aggressive’ with shining mean? One hopes they’re not going to rub a hole in their trousers as they try in vain to create a brilliant sheen.

Personally I still expect the bowlers to find some swing in the Test matches this summer. I can’t see the Dukes not swinging. After all, it often swings in the first couple of overs before the lacker has worn off. However, will it swing as much as before? And crucially will it swing enough to maintain England’s home advantage?

Only time will tell, of course. But maybe Silverwood was being smarter than we thought when he selected England’s two fastest bowlers under overcast skies. Although Stuart Broad is more of a ‘seamer’ than an out-and-out ‘swing’ bowler, doubts over whether the ball will swing might go some way to explaining England’s thinking.

I bet Broad wasn’t impressed though.

James Morgan

The post Little Cricket, And Just A Hint Of Swing, At The Ageas Bowl appeared first on The Full Toss.