The Archer conundrum

[The Professor]

So gentlemen, what do we think?

A young bowler still finding his feet or an over-rated over-used bowler who wasn't up to the hype?

[bigfluffylemon]

He's only been on the scene for 12 months, 4 of those with no cricket. Let's be fair.

Probably a bit of both. Obvious talent, but after some very good early outings, expectations have been built up too much that he'll deliver the same every time. He's still young and and finding his way in tests.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Probably a bit fortunate to come straight back in the side. But A&B took a while to adjust, so it's early days.

[alfie]

Lot of talent for sure. But he has been a bit over egged , I think. Makes it hard to live up to the hype .

I think he might have been better served by having this part of the summer with the white ball
squad...though I am sure he has a lot of Test cricket ahead of him he's returning from injury in a strange environment and I don't see the rush , when England have a number of quality pace men fit for once.

Can't help but feel all the media hoo-ha over 90 + bowlers has got a bit of a hold on the selectors ?

That ought to endure five wickets tomorrow

[Arthur Crabtree]

What has been hyped is his batting. But England continue to put him at the head of the tail.

[bigfluffylemon]

Archer makes a good start today.

[alfie]

Archer certainly improved in the second innings. Particularly liked his first spell when he pitched the ball up much more than usual and reaped the rewards.
He showed plenty of energy later too. But despite the commentators cooing over his efforts it has to be noted that apart from one brute of a delivery that accounted for Chase he was unable to effect any further damage with sustained - mainly short pitched - attack throughout the afternoon.

He's a talent , but I think a little too much is being expected of him at the moment. His chief problem is that he does not really move the ball away from the right hander . Unless and until he can develop something on that line his effectiveness will be somewhat limited . Pace alone won't clean up on good batting surfaces against a decent batting team.

Nevertheless some encouraging steps today. Hope he maintains the habit from that new ball spell...

[Alviro Patterson]

So gentlemen, what do we think?

A young bowler still finding his feet or an over-rated over-used bowler who wasn't up to the hype?

More of the former, but also how he is managed by England.

There are videos of Archer bowling in County Cricket and he gets wickets by swinging the ball. Could have the potential to be as skillful as Broad and Anderson in that regard.

[sussexpob]

He's a talent , but I think a little too much is being expected of him at the moment. His chief problem is that he does not really move the ball away from the right hander . Unless and until he can develop something on that line his effectiveness will be somewhat limited . Pace alone won't clean up on good batting surfaces against a decent batting team

Pretty spot on analysis, Alfie.

His stock ball at Hove has always been the inswinger to the right hander. On pitches that help him, he brings the ball into the right hander in the air, and gets additional movement from the pitch off a full length that makes him difficult to play. You see him bowling people offering no shot a lot for Sussex as that ball moves really late from that length, or batsman missing the movement and being lbw or bowled playing a stroke. So much in fact, he must be somewhere near the top of bowlers taking wickets in FC from those modes of dismissal. On pitches that help, his lack of ability to swing the ball away doesnt matter, because he constantly has people feeling for that inswinger, he doesnt need it. He occasionally sends a cross seamer that holds its line (not come away) and it has the same effect. Id say most of the right handers he gets out caught are with that straight ball that targets just outside off, and people play inside the line.

To left handers he always targets the same sort of areas, slightly different line but bringing the ball away. He hardly ever bowls left handers, but gets them snicking off behind to the cordon because he brings the ball away from the stumps. But again, when the ball doesnt move he can be too straight to the left handers, and bowls a lot onto the pads looking for that movement.

To be a consistent threat he needs to develop one that more consistently goes away. The scary thing is, if he manages it, he could be almost unplayable on helpful surfaces because that stock ball is very good in getting batsman playing on their stumps.

Sadly though I think England want him to be a more blunt force object. Which is pretty senseless as banging it in short has never been his forte. He gets a lot of wickets with the short ball, and actually when you look at those wickets, most approach comical levels of batting. Why? Because he bowls comfortable fast medium pace for overs on end, then he hits you with something short and very fast. So many batters are left in technical no mans land at the sudden ferocity, that he never has to really be concerned with how accurate those balls are.

Yet with England, its telegraphed. That weapon of surprise has become a stock weapon. I am not sure thats a great idea as it just helps to numb that effectiveness. Id like to see him bowling a tad slower, pitching it up at the stumps and doing what he does for Sussex, rather than his first reaction to resistance being to pound it in short.

In many ways that Steve Smith ball could be the breaking off him. Before that ball I dont think anyone knew Archer had that sort of pace, but like said above, he always did just used it to shock batsman once in a while once they are set. And it caught out the best batter in the world, Smith was totally lost at the extra pace. He should be bowling the bouncer pretty much never, but let the fact he could unleash a 94mph thunderbolt at anytime leave them hanging that weight a little more backwards, which makes playing forward to the moving full ball that little bit harder. Hes put on a lot of bulk since joining England though. And his run up is different, he hits that crease far hard and runs into the crease with much more momentum, dare I say at the cost of a little body control.

Do I think Archer is good enough? Yeah absolutely, hes an excellent bowler. Am I confident England are going to Stuart Broad him and insistent he becomes some enforcer who wastes overs banging it short to batsman..... sadly yeah. I think if hes not going to become a very good test player, England will have a lot to do with it.

[alfie]

After a match in which he played only a peripheral role , the thing that most struck me was Archer's rather peculiar mid-match interview . He was quoted as saying this "was not a pitch on which to bend your back" ???

Now I accept that he , like many bowlers , finds that there are times when bowling at less than full pace and concentrating on accuracy is the best policy. I am not entirely sure however that this match was really a classic example of this : the young Pakistani speedsters did not seem to have any qualms about going at full bore ...and caused a bit of damage to England in the process. The ball that got Pope in the second innings was not a result of declining to bend one's back...
Likewise the brief Stokes assault on the Friday evening that essentially swung the game somewhat back into England's favour (or at least brought it back into reach).

I do not for a moment suggest that Archer is not committed to doing his best for England. And it may be that his remarks were just a little ...poorly phrased ? But at times he appears just a bit too laid back and I do wonder if all the adulation that has come his way hasn't caused him to become rather too sure of his place in the team , and perhaps inclined to believe he can "turn it on and off " at will. (Which is very different from varying his pace : something he does with great effect)

It may perhaps be that he wasn't quite 100% , for whatever reason. But it might be significant that he was largely ignored by Root during England's (very successful) second innings fightback with the ball on Friday. Instead it was Stokes he turned to when it became apparent that something dynamic was needed late in the day . A case of not just having the ability but also very clearly being totally up for the fight : the force of a bowler's personality can be a very useful addition to their skill in imposing themselves on a batsman.

No problem with him concentrating on pitching the ball up rather than banging it in half way down - indeed I'd like to see him attacking the stumps on a more regular basis. But as the man who has been hailed as the serious pace option England have lacked for years (even though he is demonstrably not quite as fast as Wood ) he probably shouldn't be giving the impression that bowling fast is only something he does when conditions suit him. If he's going to be the factor England are hoping on the next tour of Australia he's going to have to toil on some pretty unresponsive surfaces - they aren't all like the old WACA these days.

Seems from what I've been reading on the match thread that the CMS selection panel is leaning towards resting him from the next match If that happens it might be no bad thing : perhaps he would come back a bit hungrier and more hostile , ready to show everyone that he can play a consistent role as the genuine fast bowler everyone has been craving...

[Durhamfootman]

I didn't appreciate the bending back comment. I'm absolutely certain that he didn't mean it this way, but it gave the impression that he couldn't be bothered

[sussexpob]

DM has released another article Archer last night in which he moans about England fans having unrealistic expectations of him bowling 90mph every ball. Again though, he makes a rather clumsy point similar to that above by saying in order to bowl fast, a bowler has to get it all right and have his heart into the effort..... which can be read if you wanted as saying he can rarely be arsed to bowl that fast.

More than anything though, I sense once again a bitterness in his words about criticism he receives, and a self perception that he is some kind of victim of unfair criticism. If he cant get over the fact that being a moron and jeopardizing a whole summer of cricket through recklessness might lead to some form of very light criticism, then the endless slog of test and ODI cricket will wear him down to the nub very quickly.

Overall though, I think the points he are making mirror those I and others have already made. I think this is a plea that England fans and management shouldn't see him as that guy who comes in and sends down fire spells, he never has been that type of bowler. He was never at Sussex a right arm fast, but FM. I get the feeling this is what he means when he is talking of bending his back and what not. England seem to want him to be an all out quick, I think he is saying to be that person he has to bowl himself into the ground to get up to those paces. Its not sustainable.

Something has to give in the end.