da fazobetai： English newspapers didn’t mince their words after England’s ten-wicket defeat against Sri Lanka
da bet7： The Paper Round by Freddie Auld19-Nov-2003
England felt the force from the press
England’s cricketers will be glad that for once the rugby players are hogging all the limelight ahead of their World Cup final against Australia on Saturday. While they are in touching distance of being crowned world champions, the cricketers can only dream of such scenarios after their catastrophic start to the one-day international series in Sri Lanka yesterday.As expected, the English newpapers didn’t spare the rod on Michael Vaughan and his bedraggled lot, or his “Load of Lankers”, as called them. “Michael Vaughan and his England players were shockingly transformed from playground bullies to quivering wimps,” John Etheridge fumed. “They did not so much get a reality check here yesterday as a full-scale assault on their pride and credibility. England suddenly discovered opponents with the skill and courage to stand up to them.”Marcus Trescothick was on the end of most of the rants after he gave away his wicket and started the landslide. Etheridge continued: “Several batsmen self-destructed with rash shots – Trescothick and Andrew Flintoff were probably the most culpable – and the rest simply could not knuckle down against the deviating ball.” were a touch more subtle. “England go down in flames” roared their headline, but David Hopps was just as scathing, pointing out that English collapses are becoming a regular feature in one-dayers. “Occasional batting disasters are a fact of one-day life, but for England they are becoming a habit. Their three lowest scores have all come in the past two years, during Duncan Fletcher’s time as coach. Seven of their worst ten totals have occurred in the past five years.”Hopps added: “So now we can confirm the true value of five weeks in Bangladesh: precisely zero. England did not overstress the importance of their clean sweep in Tests and one-day internationals, but in Sri Lanka’s cultural triangle their preparations here were exposed as inadequate.””The kings of Bangladesh were quickly exposed as the paupers of Sri Lanka,” pronounced Simon Briggs in the . “England’s seamers, though they faced an impossible task, were arguably too ready to stick to the same intimidatory lengths they have been using for the last month in Bangladesh. Against batsmen of this quality, the ball simply sat up to be hit.” But Briggs was able to salvage one bright spot from a dark day: “If nothing else, this match should serve as a useful reality check for the remainder of the tour.”Reality check? Richard Hobson in , said it was more like an awakening “as rude as a seaside postcard”, and added that “Sri Lanka inflicted a beating that was more severe than anything England dealt to Bangladesh during the first leg of the tour.”Lawrence Booth, in , agreed. “It was a massacre to rank with any England have suffered over the years. In the steamy jungle of Dambulla, the two one-day trophies of the English summer feel a long way away. Suddenly, Vaughan is seeing a side of the job so familiar to many of his predecessors – the overseas post-mortem. This time county cricket was definitely not to blame.”Angus Fraser was on the same wavelength in The Independent: Following England’s horrendous batting performance here against Sri Lanka … it could be described as a day-evening encounter, but calling it a match may be pushing things a bit far.” He did however, point out that nothing at all went England’s way: “At the end, and in the privacy of their dressing-room after the game, the England captain will have attempted to convince his side that this was one of those days when nothing went right for them. This to some extent was true.” Then came the but, though: “But England’s downfall had as much to do with their own shortcomings as the excellent form of their opponents.”As Booth said: “Things can surely only get better.”
