England, Barbados, and a sense of deja vu
Deja vu, if you look it up on the internet, is defined as a feeling of having already experienced the present situation. If you dig deeper, it is described as an illusion of memory where despite a strong sense of recollection, the time, place, and context of the "previous" experience are uncertain or impossible.
Long story short, it means that even if you feel something has happened exactly the way it is happening, it has probably not happened at all. Unless…you are a part of the England cricket team, traveling back to Bridgetown in Barbados - where questions were earlier raised after a defeat to Australia and a rained-out game against Scotland - gearing up for a match that could define a World Cup campaign.
Now, into what transpired in St. Lucia on Friday.
England won the toss and bowled first. They conceded far too many runs in the powerplay (63 to be precise) and were left playing catch-up. They made a fairly decent fist of it, though, and restricted South Africa to 163, conceding just 100 runs post the powerplay (in 14 overs).
The early run-concession part was very similar to what happened against Australia and Scotland; not being able to understand the conditions quickly enough sticking out in both cases.
England failed to chase a very chaseable score
Chasing 164, things went pear-shaped, and it felt eerily similar to botched run-chases at the ODI World Cup in India last year. Their powerplay batting did not lack intent, but their execution was way off. Jos Buttler and Jonny Bairstow, while together at the crease, could not get the ball off the square for large portions and if you needed anything to sum up their plight, this should be it.
Bairstow, in particular, struggled. Not for the first time in this tournament. In fact, his struggles were so apparent that it might have led onlookers to believe that his knocks against Namibia and the West Indies were aberrations, rather than a promising sign of things to come.
Then came the spin-squeeze, applied by a solitary spinner in the opposition ranks. Keshav Maharaj’s pedigree and guile are known to everyone in world cricket, more so on a surface that was stopping. Still, England tried to hit him out of the attack, with both Bairstow and Buttler falling prey.
England, when they are at their best, often try to take down the best bowlers the opposition has. That is as much a tactical ploy as it is a psychological plan. The usual live-by-the-sword-die-by-it kind of philosophy.
But with only 164 needed, it was perhaps what they did not require, especially with lesser-experienced bowlers to follow later.
England ultimately lost by only seven runs. But that was down to the genius of Harry Brook and the sheer power of Liam Livingstone, both of whom made the pitch redundant at times and rendered the strong breeze a footnote.
So, when England sit down and dissect this performance, they would do well to understand when it really went wrong, and how it went so wrong.
This feeds into the notion that they are not quite suited to playing on tracks that hold up a shade. In such conditions, their often free-flowing batters fail to adapt and their shot selection goes awry too. It is, perhaps, the only blot on this otherwise very powerful side, but as long as it is there, it will eat away.
Their team balance, subsequently, has also been cast under scrutiny. There was a school of thought that the eleven that featured against South Africa was perhaps their best combination. But now, having failed to chase down a score they should have hunted down, and with Mark Wood going at more than ten runs per over, they might just start wondering if playing the extra batter is more worthwhile.
There is, of course, no need to panic. Such situations and such questions usually arise during an ICC event. The best teams often find solutions and do not crib over the cards that have been dealt to them. The only issue, though, is that this is happening all over again.
The exact same set of questions. A set that they thought they had found answers to, only to now realize that they were never out of that marooned island in the first place.
Which brings us back to…Bridgetown and Barbados, where England will arrive knowing that their title defense is hinging on what they do on Sunday. On paper, a game against the United States of America should be routine. But nothing at T20 World Cups is routine, not when familiar and fallible questions remain unanswered. Not when the surface will be similarly sluggish. And especially when they need a massive NRR swing in their favor.
England could make a few tweaks, largely because they have a bench that affords them that luxury. Or, they could stick to the players that got them through to the Super Eight and then put them in a commanding position, courtesy of the win against the West Indies.
Whatever the case, they need these answers to last longer than the previous iteration and possibly be even more impactful. And these answers, apart from giving England short-term joy or leading to despair, will likely define how their campaign will be remembered in the years to come. It could still not count for anything, because of results elsewhere, although the least England would want is for them to give it a proper rattle.
It sounds a very unique situation to be in, where even England's best might not be enough. But it also sounds...very similar. Just like it was about a couple of weeks ago. On these very shores. The time, place, and context of the previous experience are very much certain and fresh in the psyche. Hoping fate and their frenetic, thrill-a-minute brand of cricket rescue them one more time.
Deja vu, anyone? Deja vu, England?