Would you rather see Cook tighten the screw or Pietersen blast the opposition away?

Cricket

Any England cricket fan with even the shortest of memories is probably still grateful for a win of any kind, but as Andy Flower's team look set to become the number one team in the world, it looks like it is now getting to the stage when we can be a bit more picky.

Alastair Cook is quite rightly taking all the plaudits after yesterday's near-triple century. He has gradually tightened England's stranglehold over India over the last two days as he pushed and prodded his way to 294.

There is no doubt that the cricket purist can admire Cook's work and anyone can admire the score he amassed, but the casual Test match viewer would probably rather see the likes of Kevin Pietersen, Eoin Morgan and co. hitting India's bowlers around the park.

There are probably crude comparisons to be drawn with football and the style of play of a team like Barcelona against a stereotypical Sam Allardyce side 'winning ugly'.

The difference with cricket is that - while in football Barcelona are the standard-bearers for 'playing the game the right way' and entertaining the public, and Allardyce represents the effectiveness of playing the percentages - Cook arguably has not only the moral high-ground in terms of the traditions of the game but also plays the most effective style.

The entertainment aspect is the missing component.

In terms of England's current success, the reason the team is doing so well is down to the fact that there is a healthy mix of players that can play both ways, and well down the order.

But working to the assumption that you can be choosy, would you prefer to see England batting once and batting long where possible in Test matches to force the opposition into weary submission? Or would you prefer closer matches and a few more fireworks?

 

I'd like fireworks and close games when Australia play India, or Pakistan play the West Indies.

When England play, I'll take a win, and if it means grinding it out, so be it. Cook's innings was a great example of what was required in the circumstances. In cricket you have to avoid falling in to the trap of doing what the opposition are trying to get you to do; India were trying to get Cook to play big shots - he refused, and accumulated, and now India are going to lose, barring a miraculous innings from Tendulkar and the lower order, or weather.

 

Ridiculous to see the criticism of Cook's batting especially from the likes Of Boycott a man known for an exceptionally slow batting style. The other England players were happy enough to come in and be more aggressive while Cook held up one end stabilising the innings. The only thing that really annoyed me was the loose shot he got out to, so wanted the lad to get his three hundred but it wasn't to be,

 

I believe Cook was doing his job to perfection, the openers role is to take the new ball and blunt the attack and then to build a base from which the 4 5 & 6 positions can take advantage of a tiring bowling group. Changing tempo which Boycot was discussing on TMS is not something I ever saw him manage.

I would prefer to see England Bat once and win, although the 2005 Ashes series was a belter due to the high levels of tension and drama.