Profiles / Andrew Hughes / 17 February 2009 / Leave a comment

Andrew Hughes humbly admits to have been wrong about Ian Bell, who despite huge potential and flawless technique just hasn't stepped up to the plate since being given an extended run in the team. We have all been guilty of weighing the talent without considering the man, he tells us.

The casual English cricket follower might feel as though a part of the furniture has been removed when they read the scorecard for what is now the Third Test in Antigua. For the first time in what feels like an era, England have voluntarily changed their batting line-up. A year ago, Ian Bell saved his Test place with a stunning century in Napier. Last week, Sabina Park brought no such eleventh hour relief and in that second innings bonfire of the reputations, he tossed his wicket onto the pyre with the recklessness of the condemned man.

So Bell has taken the bullet, and though he has been pictured staring glumly out of the shadows of the pavilion at the Antigua Recreation Ground, he cannot with any justification claim to have been unfairly treated. In the last eighteen months, England's top seven has been outdone by every Test-playing nation bar New Zealand and Bangladesh. That is a stark failure indeed. Though Bell, Collingwood and Cook have all averaged in the mid thirties over that period, it is Bell who has been seen to fail most often, being dismissed for less than twenty in just under half of his innings and managing only two centuries.

He has been most cruelly exposed by his elevation to number three, a promotion that some felt would represent the apogee of his career. Those coaches and others, including this writer, who praised his ability and predicted great things, were perhaps guilty of tunnel vision, of weighing the talent without considering the man. Mere technique, however sublime, cannot thrive unless rooted in the right personality. Bell has been encouraged to express himself, to play with freedom but it was never really in him and so from the timid but secure accumulator of his early Test career, emerged the inconsistent and only fitfully impressive batsman with whom we are so familiar.

To bat at three is to be charged with pressing the team's accelerator. There are times when a number three must dig in for a little while. But counter-attack is usually the best form of defence from that position. A number three must be possessed of a range of attacking strokes, the audacity to employ them against still-fresh bowlers and above all the self-confidence to impose himself upon the play. In his attempts to fit that role, Bell has in effect being trying to change his personality by sheer force of will. Such efforts, in any field of endeavour, let alone one as pressurised as international sport, are almost always doomed to fail.

Cardus wrote that a man must bat according to his temperament, his nature. Back in county cricket, Bell must embrace this honestly. He is neither a dominant nor a confident batsman, the fact that he has never been the lone century scorer in any England innings, is evidence of this. He is a careful craftsman, measuring his cover drives and forward defensives precisely, in the shady obscurity of the middle order. The stats confirm this. He averages 47.16 at 4, 54.41 at 5 and 49.00 at 6.

He would probably benefit from being dropped from the one day team, a clean break being most psychologically conducive to a fresh start and the cosy embrace of county cricket should nurture his confidence. Any paranoia he might experience about losing his place permanently will be eased by the fact that he is younger than his immediate replacement, Owais Shah and younger still than the likes of Robert Key, Michael Vaughan and Mark Ramprakash who appear to be the only other serious candidates.

Meanwhile, Kevin Pietersen's refusal to countenance moving up to three has meant Shah has gone straight into the limelight though he batted with heartening swagger on Sunday, his silly run-out undid some of the good work. Still, England's first use of an unexpectedly placid ARG pitch and their removal of Chris Gayle late on Monday evening has had an effect on the series winners market, with England on [2.6] despite trailing 1-0 and the draw at [3.1]. West Indies have a lot of work to do to maintain their series lead and are also available at [2.6]