thinking of england

Reliance on KP could hurt England.

By Tristan Holme

I've always enjoyed being something of an international man of mystery. It may give you a heavy feeling of an identity crisis, but at least you can always view things from the outside, reporting without favour and only fear.

Born in the States (only proud of it when it suits me funnily enough), raised in Zimbabwe, living in Cape Town and travelling on an Irish passport is enough to leave anyone in a general state of confusion, but in recent times I have found it beneficial.

While my greatest allegiance is to Zimbabwe, I like to think that I have a greater grasp of reality than Uncle Bob and therefore appreciate that 'Babwe will not be among the World Cup contenders.

The older generation will be gutted to hear that my country's colonisers are not my second-choice side, but the benefit of this to me is an ability to view England's chances of World Cup glory from an outside perspective, unblighted by the sensationalism that surrounds one in Blighty.

As a general despiser of domination in sport, I was as happy as anybody to see England overcome Australia in the Commonwealth Bank Series, even if it aroused a chuckle more than a feeling of joy.

But that chuckle turned into full-blown laughter when I read the following day that England had been installed as second favourites to win the World Cup. Overreaction or what!

Now I have to admit that England probably have the best impact player in ODI cricket in Kevin Pietersen, while Paul Collingwood and Andrew Flintoff can also be match winners on their day. I'll also admit that KP loves the big occasion and should take this World Cup by storm.

But I also feel that England are too reliant on this trio's individual performances and this will be their downfall.

The ICC are doing their best to cash in on their big event (there are three less matches than 2003 but only due to far fewer group games) and have extended what used to be the Super Six stage into a Super Eight stage. This means that the teams that qualify from their groups will have to play an extra three games in their bid to reach the semis, giving an even greater value to consistency.

The top eight sides in the world can all beat each other on their day, but only a few tend to dominate a high percentage of such ties. England aren't one of them.

Indeed the four games that England won in a row to win the CB Series was the longest winning run under Duncan Fletcher, and that was largely due to Collingwood's heroics.

While momentum is important for any team at the highest level of sport, never before has it affected a side as mightily as it does England. What will happen if the chips are down?

I'm also dubious about their bowling attack, which could let them down quite heavily - Flintoff, James Anderson and Monty Panesar can do it on their day, but will two others step up to the plate and back them up when it matters?

There is also the issue of the West Indian pitches to contend with, something which will probably only suit the hosts and sub-continental teams, though that is yet to be seen. The fact that England have only won three of nine games in the West Indies in the last 10 years is not a great sign though.

The one issue that I don't see being a problem is that of travelling - everyone says that England are poor tourists, but with Harmy safely home with his mam the rest of the side should relish the idea of the World Cup

Now don't get me wrong - I'm not trying to bad-mouth England and write them off completely, but merely attempting to give an outsider's perspective of their chances.

They've shown in the last few weeks that, for once, we shouldn't be quite so quick to consign them to the recycle bin. However there's still a long way to go and much work to be done on the side before they become a real one-day force.

So tournament contenders, I think not. But dark horses most definitely.