England’s Cricket World Cup wasn’t really won on that glorious, sun-baked evening at Lord’s on Sunday. It wasn’t won by that magnificent display of batting fortitude by Ben Stokes, that nerve-shredding super over delivered by Jofra Archer or that unerring pick-up and bullet throw from Jason Roy in front of the famous old Grand Stand.
It was won four years ago, in April 2015, when Andrew Strauss was first appointed as the England and Wales Cricket Board’s new director of cricket.
Strauss’ arrival was a watershed. He promptly went about shifting the ECB’s priority from its traditional Test match focus to an unequivocally white-ball emphasis, overseeing the appointment of Trevor Bayliss as head coach and mounting preparations for a four-year plan that would culminate at the 2019 Cricket World Cup.
But most importantly of all, he called on Eoin Morgan to remain as his captain.
Why is such an introduction appearing on a Norwich City fan website, you wonder? Well, in light of England’s extraordinary triumph on Sunday in a game of cricket like no other, it dawned on me that the parallels between this England one-day side and Daniel Farke’s Norwich City were in fact rather striking.
In becoming the ECB’s new director of cricket, Strauss inherited a faltering England one-day cricketing machine, a squad blighted by the presence of inflated egos and past-their-best players who slumped to a humiliating group-stage exit at the previous World Cup.
The brand of cricket was dull. The team were going nowhere. Disillusionment among fans back home peaked to a level not seen since that hapless side of the 1990s. Strauss, a revered champion of English cricket and multiple Ashes winner, knew he had a job to do.
Fast forward two years from Strauss’ appointment, and so did Stuart Webber at Norwich City. The chronology of events has been well-documented, but as we know, Webber arrived at Colney after parting ways with his successful Huddersfield model and acutely aware of the problems that would confront him.
Like Strauss, he had to flush out the egos. Like Strauss, he had to do away with ageing deadwood. And like Strauss, he had to urgently reform the style of play and overarching philosophy at his new organisation.
Strauss kept the faith in Morgan despite that dismal campaign in Australia and New Zealand. Webber? While looking slightly further afield, he turned to Farke, that lovable, softly-spoken, horse-riding German who all those in City circles have now grown to adore.
The rise of both teams has been inexorable. England’s journey had more longevity; a prudent four-year strategy that saw a team continually evolve into the swashbuckling, enterprising and dynamic outfit who conquered the world in St John’s Wood this weekend.
City’s was a faster progression; a two-year transformation period that similarly saw the arrival of hungry, young talent and the advent of a style of football never previously seen in these quarters.
To track how this football club has changed over the past 24 months has become a needless task – it has already been done eloquently by many contributors to this site – but the parallels with this England 50-over side remain startling.
Think Strauss and Webber. Think Farke and Morgan. What about Jos Buttler and Emi Buendia, Jonny Bairstow and Teemu Pukki, Joe Root and Christoph Zimmerman, Max Aarons and Jofra Archer? Even Mario Vrancic and Ben Stokes – both so valuable and versatile: each player in this City team has their England equivalent in their own idiosyncratic and, slightly bizarre, way.
But the most striking similarities remain the broader themes. The vision of both teams has been admirable; progressive, innovative, bold sporting outlooks that have led the way in their respective formats and eventually achieved the ultimate goal. For England, that was at Lord’s on Sunday. For City, that sensational Sunday at Villa Park.
Both successfully reformed stalling sporting machines and executed a staggeringly effective plan. Both promoted the precocity of youth, the advent of a courageous, aesthetic style and a sense of unity that is often so absent in 21st-century sport. Both became so likeable, shutting out the noise and constructing an infectious set of players whose glory is enough to jerk the tears of those who so loyally support them.
Both have achieved something extraordinary. As an avid fan of both, I hope such triumphs only represent the beginning of their respective journeys.
A very good read, Will.
There was a ropey old pop band around in the 1980s called King who had a hit with “Love and Pride”.
And therein lies another correlation between NCFC and England’s white-ball heroes – a love for them and a pride in them.
I must say though that I felt desperately sorry for NZ (although not for long)..
An emotion that I could never dredge up in the footballing equivalent.
Mike Brearley for Bryan Hamilton anyone?
Coventry’s finest, Martin! And I also felt terribly sorry for the Kiwis, its the Underdog fan in me.
I’m just off to paint my Docs.
I enjoyed reading that Will. A really good comparison between the two philosophies of NCFC and The England team. It would be good to emulate the cricket teams success and win the World Cup however I think we will have to be content with winning the Premier league, Champions league and FA cup for the short term plan. I look forward to seeing the Barmy army taking up residence in the river end to compliment the Borussia Dortmund wall in the Barclay.
Hi Will
An enjoyable read.
Breaking news this morning and coming from left field is City have agreed a deal to sign Right Back Sam Byram from WHU for £750k very good news bit also a name no one has mentioned as a possibility.
Onwards and upwards
OTBC
Enjoyed that article as much as I enjoyed the cricket (and last season!).
Great read.
Cricket was absolutely brill on Sunday but it takes all sort to make a team and England proved that, just like City did last season.
Bad losers the Aussies, or are they just trying to get one over us before the Ashes start? Their top umpire has said Rule 19.8 should have been applied for the overthrow and only 5, not 6 runs given.
There are parallels too in the details. Before Strauss quit as director of cricket because of the death of his wife, he’d talked a lot about insisting on a positive mindset. At Colney, players and coaches are told not to moan about anything — the traffic, the weather … anything at all. England cricket coach Trevor Bayliss has insisted on ‘aggressive’ fielding: so, for instance, pick-ups should be one-handed to enable a quick throw to the wicket, and those throws should be flat rather than parabolic. One such throw won the final. At Colney, City players are drilled into keeping possession from throw-ins. Details.
I had no idea that one-handed pick-ups were the order of the day for England. Looking back it’s obvious of course.
As a WK I very rarely outfielded as such, but it makes perfect sense to me now Mick has explained it – and never better executed than by Jason Roy on Sunday.
Parabolic throws are far easier to deal with for the WK as in terms of easier and earlier sighting – trust me – but take up fractionally more time and had Roy gone with that method England would not be World Cup holders.
Oh well the Ashes on home turf and City in the PL to come. Nothing to get excited about, obviously. Ha!
Presumably a parabolic throw would also be less likely to deflect all the way to the boundary for an extra 4 runs….
I would have liked to be a WK but I’ve never had much of an eye for the ball so i generally fielded at third man both ends – which effectively is a form of interval training for athletics
Hi Keith
A parabolic throw (a term only Mick could get away with, but is nevertheless accurate) is paradise for a WK compared to the modern game and these low level shies from distance that are so effective.
You can see a parabolic coming, get your body behind it and if it misses your gloves there should rarely be overthrows as it will hit you in the chest region. Ouch indeed.
The only reason I became a WK is because most people I played with quickly realised my best batting position was #12 and I couldn’t really bowl either.
That notwithstanding, I had some great times playing cricket, a sport I thoroughly love.
I like the analogy.
Let’s hope City get as much luck as our cricketers did. Roy could easily have been out first ball, Archer only became “English” after the ECB moved their stumps, previously we would have lost on the number of wickets falling, and as for the fluke overthrows, given the tight margins in one-day cricket you’d have thought they might have sorted that one out at some time in the last 50 years or so.
Incidentally, I wonder how a top football manager and his stars would have reacted to losing like that? Not many would show the dignity of the Black Caps, that’s for sure.
Actually, given their enormous team spirit and their achievement in making their squad perform way beyond the sum of its parts I’d say an analogy between the Canaries and the Kiwis would also be a pretty close one.
Yes, you may well be right Keith that the analogy with the Kiwis is the closer one, who are truly underdogs and mostly underrated in the way the English cricket team can never be. Overall this was a superb world cup for them.
Brilliant stuff Will, warms the cockles nicely. To keep the theme going we will be expecting a 95th minute winner at Anfield then courtesy of a deflection off van Dyke’s heel and the woodwork!
The Sam Byram signing just perfect, young, talented and hungry I guess to get his career back on track. We may have a few injuries but of course we learn’t last season that they simply open the door for someone else to shine.
I’m not into cricket in any format, but that win was the equivalent of deciding a football match on the number of corners. Should have had more overs, but then it could have gone on all night.
Will, thanks for writing that – it’s a fascinating analogy. “It was won four years ago” – in my view, it’s perhaps two thirds true that the World Cup was won over the preceding four years. But there’s always something else required. This wasn’t a league, where the best team stands an excellent (though not certain) chance of celebrating on the City Hall balcony. This would ultimately, even in the best case scenario, come down to two one-off knockout games. Even with the best preparation in the world, all England could do was give themselves the best possible chance. The nature of sport is that one bounce of the ball here (even off Stokes’ outstretched bat), an inch or two there (by which Trent Boult stepped over the boundary), a marginal decision (the not out lbw off our innings’ very first ball), or even a likely officiating error (six runs rather than five for the overthrow) can make all the difference. This time, those random happenstances worked wonderfully in our favour, and oh so cruelly for our gallant and desperately unfortunate opponents. For all their superb preparation and one percenters, Clive Woodward’s team of 2003 could have been scuppered by one drop goal floating wide rather than through the posts, or by the referee giving a penalty the other way. 1966 might have been very different had the ‘Russian’ linesman (actually from Azerbaijan) said “Nyet’. Yes, you need the best possible preparation to give yourselves the opportunity to win. But you won’t win a World Cup without a bit of luck.