What do we really want from a test match spinner?
When we play at home we often don’t need or at least use a spinner unless we get on an unresponsive surface. With Stokes in the XI we will always have 4 seam bowlers, and it will be rare that with a dukes ball, pitch and overhead conditions that is not sufficient for taking 20 wickets. This often leads to the selection of a ‘bits and pieces’ player as the spin bowler, someone who can ‘stiffen the batting’ and add to the fielding unit.
Yet test match cricket is played over 5 days, and when we do need a quality spinner in the last innings, we do not have one.
Overseas, with less responsive balls, pitches and conditions we want a spinner who can be the ‘holding’ bowler in the first innings and a strike bowler in the second innings. This is hard to do when you only play half the year in the team, and you don’t feel you have the support of the captain and coaching unit.
Jack Leach has actually done ok so far:
But ‘if not jack Leach, then who?’
If the criteria for selecting a spinner is indeed based on their bowling, Matt Parkinson makes an irrefutable case. He has both he best economy rate and strike rate of the spin bowlers listed above.
I hear two anecdotal criticisms of Parkinson;
- “He bowls too slowly” – he does bowl slowly, but ‘too slowly’ is a strange judgement to pass on a young English spin bowler is taking wickets more frequently and at a lower cost of runs than any other.
- “He takes them on day 4 at Old Trafford” – to an extent this is also true, yet hardly a problem. OT is a test match ground, and surely it is a key attribute of a good spin bowler to take wickets on the final day/in the final innings of a match.
Often it is said how hard it is for spin bowlers to prosper in England (pitches, balls, scheduling etc), yet Parkinson has picked up 100 wickets from 32 matches.
This does not guarantee success at test level, but it does merit the opportunity after 3 winters of carrying drinks. England will have a 5 man attack in all/any conditions owing to Stokes. They also have part time off spin in Root and Lawrence so the risk of playing Parkinson is relatively low.
I’d imagine he’d be very effective against lower order/tail end batting and the then he’d come into his own on day 4/5.
There will also be occasions when 4 right arm 80mph bowlers are not needed and Parkinson can be paired with a more conservative spinner such as Leach/Bess who can play the holding role.
The reality I expect is that England will look less at the bowling outputs, and more at the ‘what else does he bring to the party’ criteria.
In this regard Parkinson, Crane and Virdi suffer when compared to Bess, Critchley and Patterson-White.
The latter trio have first class centuries, and in the case of Critchley 4 of them. I wonder how much bowling he will do with the move to Essex, he batted at no4 in the most recent match and Harmer will be no1 spinner.
Bess in particular and Patterson-White may well have a role to play in the future when England require a second spinner.
The indicators thus far suggest that Parkinson has something special to offer, he may need to bowl quicker at times, but he can only learn when and how if given the opportunity. We desperately seek strike bowlers (Wood, Stone, Archer) but ignore the spinner we have who could make a huge difference.
The top 7 looks to be taking shape with Crawley, Lawrence, Bairstow and Foakes all supporting Root and Stokes. A remodelled Sibley and hopefully both Joe Clarke and Ollie Pope will provide depth to this unit.
Let’s give them proper pitches to bat on, and select a balanced bowling attack with Parkinson and his Lancashire teammate Mahmood both looking like excellent finds. Robinson, Overton and if/when fit Archer and Stone should be picked on their bowling ability.