"We can beat anyone" said Somerset's temporary wicket-keeper Steve Snell a couple of weeks ago during the group stages for the Nokia Champions League in India. That assertion was a reasonable one, yet neglected the closing words for the sentence, which read "...unless it's a big game."
This is, without doubt, another golden age for Somerset and it may yet go on to match the era of Botham, Richards and Garner. Yet the reality is that despite all of the victories, daring deeds and performances of real brilliance they haven't won anything. They are obviously a county with greater resources than most - one has only to look at the quality of player they have signed to see that - yet the litmus test of a successful side is silverware. That may come in the next few years as a number of talented young players have come to the fore, but it will be interesting to see when there is a sea-change in the attitude of supporters.
Most (note I said most...) like to see a side doing well and winning more games than they lose, but as a side develops the attitude to near-success will change among some from "well done, good effort" to "chokers." It is an unfortunate reality that success breeds greater expectation and with it a demand for constant improvement.
We are an example of that, an embryonic one if you will. After a few years of stagnation, John Morris came into the club and took us forward in some areas, yet found himself surplus to requirements for reasons that have been hinted at yet not officially confirmed. Karl Krikken came in with the usual breathing space for new managers and acquitted himself well, the team winning its share of matches and only falling down due to a lack of experience in some match situations. His challenge now is to build on that in the coming summers, slowly and steadily being perfectly acceptable to most.
To a great extent, of course, success in sport is increasingly due to the haves and have nots. Derbyshire are never likely to be a wealthy county, never having been one over 141 summers. Yet the county is increasingly a role model for small clubs around the country, mixing fiscal propriety and commercial ingenuity to good effect and keeping their heads above water with remarkable consistency, albeit with the exception of last year.
The only way that a club like Derbyshire - and there are plenty of others around - can take silverware is by an outstanding team ethic, an organised structure that brings through and retains young talent and the reality that most of the side need to perform to potential on big occasions. That is how Leicestershire, a side of similarly modest means, won the domestic 20-over league last year. They had some exciting young talent, but the crux of success was the big match performances of Razzaq, MacDonald, Henderson, Hoggard and Nixon, players who have seen it all yet still retained the spark of ambition and a competitive edge.
Of course, when you come up against opposition of genuine class none of that will count for much, as Leicestershire and ultimately Somerset found out in India. It is no coincidence that the two teams that will compete in the final are from the IPL and that the two best 20-over cricketers in the world will be in direct opposition. The Royal Challengers Bangalore should logically never have chased down 204 to beat New South Wales after Dave Warner had one of those days when it went right for him. Yet Chris Gayle blitzed 92 from 41 balls to leave it a stroll, departing in the 14th over with 162 already on the board. Similarly Somerset should have chased down 160 to beat Mumbai Indians, yet were blown away by the remarkable Lasith Malinga, with assistance from the underrated James Franklin.
The reality is that if you put those two into any English county side for the T20 (aided with a few hundred thousand pounds and their very unlikely desire to play) they would win the competition at a canter. Yet the IPL will always have their attention and will continue to make them vast amounts of money based on their remarkable performances, offering riches that no county, even the more affluent, could match. Both will command seven-figure sums in 2012, so what attraction would there be in even an offer of 150K for perhaps ten matches? It's sad, but inescapably true.
In their absence, teams will jockey for position and one will emerge triumphant, but when it comes to a best of the best showdown, as you see in the Champions League in football each winter, the teams with the money to pay for the best will always come out on top.
Why didn't snell Play for unicorns?
ReplyDelete