India retain T20 World Cup to add to their white-ball dynasty

Yeah, go, go on, he gets his fairytale ending.

An epic way to go to a test, Matt Conrad.

The London score the first time we did it.

They might be the most remarkable thing you'll probably ever see in cricket.

Six on one, four, and final test wicked, that's new at four.

It's in this, when the T-20 World Cup.

England's captain Ben Stokes, while he is there, England have hope.

That game was done and dusted after the first power play.

Really, wasn't it 92 without loss?

Not much coming back from that.

Yeah, it felt like that.

I was going to say 10 overs, but you're probably right.

92 for none.

I don't think New Zealand were at their best at all,

which is very rare for New Zealand, the way they bowled in that power play.

But let's be honest, India have been the best T-20 side for a number of years now.

They win percentage between the last World Cup they won,

and this one was 85%.

They've won, he lost one game in this.

It's a formula that's pretty simple.

Have a batting line up that is full of power hitters and long and deep,

and that will get you an above-pass score.

And when you have a bowler like Bunra,

even if you get a below-pass score, you've probably got enough.

He is an absolute genius.

And when you mix those two together,

they are virtually unbeatable,

albeit South Africa did beat him in this tournament.

But in these conditions, with this crowd playing at home,

they are a fantastic T-20 side.

It's about Bunra because he got the player of the match,

but really mocked up the tail.

I mean, I know Sanju Sanju got the player of the tournament,

but he was the one, along with Abhishek,

who's had a difficult time, who set this game up.

Absolutely.

In fact, Bunra probably should have got the player of the match

in the previous game against England,

because that game was very tight through the brilliance of Jacob Betel.

They ran India close,

and it was those final overs from Bunra,

which really sealed the deal.

Here are the wickets that he took.

The game was over already.

I agree with you.

The game was over here after the opening power play effectively.

Certainly after the halfway mark of New Zealand's innings,

when I think they were 88 for 5,

the game was over then.

Bunra obviously mocked up the tail.

Just a backup NASA's point.

India are more than just the preeminent T-20 side.

They are the preeminent whiteball side of the moment.

They've added a World Cup here to the Champions Trophy

that they won a year ago in Dubai.

In the last few ICC global events,

before today, they'd won 30 out of 32 games.

They'd only been beaten in the final of the 50 over World Cup here by Australia,

and that game by South Africa earlier in this tournament.

So across the boarding whiteball cricket,

they are the preeminent side.

They're the strongest side here,

and deserve their big treat.

They may well mock it all up.

There's the 50 over World Cup next year,

and they have the chance now to hold a Champions Trophy C-20 World Cup

and 50 over World Cup all in one go,

and that will surely be their aim.

The reasons you've just both given,

you expected India to perform on the biggest stage,

particularly in front of this crowd on conditions they know.

What about New Zealand today?

We know what New Zealand is going to bring.

A lot of competitive fight.

They're going to get the tactics right.

But let's go back to that initial power play.

Matt Henry bowled a superb opening over,

hard into back of a link.

Then it was slower balls.

What were they doing?

Why did they go away from what had been successful?

I mean, we called it wrong really,

because that's exactly what we said.

New Zealand are a consistent, resilient side.

You pretty much know that they're going to bring their best game

to a World Cup final.

They might not be good enough,

but they're going to at least make it a contest.

And they didn't do that.

They were so poor in the opening six overs.

They made the change by bringing in the extra baseball,

a Jacob Doffey from a conky, the off spinner,

and then spent most of the opening power play

on the ball and bowling cutters.

And as you say, Matt Henry, I think four dot balls.

The fifth ball went for six.

And after that, it was a complete onslaught.

But eight wide in the opening power play.

The opening six overs.

So they've already given away an extra over

in that opening six overs,

which is so unlike New Zealand.

The Ferguson went for 24.

Jacob Doffey's two overs.

The thing went for 20 and 15.

It was just an onslaught from the outset.

A bit of redemption for Abyshek.

There has been so out of touch in this tournament.

And what an impact, Andrew Samson has made,

since coming back against Zimbabwe,

to get the player of the tournament,

having basically missed the first half of the tournament,

shows you the impact that he's made.

On beat 97 against West Indies,

match winning performance against England,

and again here tonight.

It's a great story there, top three actually.

You could see Samson.

I thought I was a really good interview with Ian Bishop

about the ups and downs that he's had.

He had the down, where he was left out the side

in the Caribbean when they won it.

And then had the up.

And then leading up to this tournament,

he couldn't buy a run and started to doubt himself.

That's why he was left out.

Now he's player of the tournament.

Then you had Abyshek Sharma,

who was the number one player in the world

who'd coming into the tournament,

had a nightmare, and then performed today.

And even in Shankishan,

he has had the ups and downs in this format.

And it's a real lesson in whoever you are.

Keep persevering, keep practicing hard,

especially in this country.

Because if you keep still,

there'll be a whole load of people that go past you.

So if you get that chance, take it,

and those three have taken it, eventually.

One of the great strengths of Sandhu,

the player in terms of the way he gets the ball to the boundary.

I think he hits it pretty much everywhere,

but you can't bowl back of a length.

You can touch a class as well as not just the big yeah.

I'd say that pretty much about every Indian batter.

This Indian lineup seemed to have the power,

but they have it in a very elegant way.

They all have a very full bat swing,

but they never lose their shape.

And you're right, Sandhu Samson,

when you don't bowl Jordan,

and you go wide, Yorkas,

he'll just open the bat face and run it down to third for four.

You know, even Dubé will swing that bat,

but it's a beautiful arc and shape.

All of them, it's just the way they're brought up,

in that you do have power,

but you have an elegant power about you.

You don't try and over hit, you don't lose your shape.

They are a joy to watch.

Their batting lineup is a real joy to watch.

Samson's been so impressive,

and obviously there's others have been as well.

But he reminds me so much of Rohit,

who's here tonight watching on.

They're kind of stillness to him.

He has that, he goes,

sits a bit deep in his crease,

and when bowlers bowl short,

they get punished.

But there's a kind of stillness and calmness to his game,

and he's such just some proper,

classy shots down the ground,

and then that pull off of a length

when bowlers drop short.

And the shot that has made it so difficult now for spinners.

Most of the spinners, like Baron Chakravart,

he samples a bit different,

but most of them,

they're trying to hit the top of the stumps

with the back of her length and the quite quick,

and spatters like Samson now can hit them

off the back foot down the ground.

Makes it so much more difficult for the spinners.

And his only partner, Abhishek,

and we've discussed it already,

has had such a difficult time.

Who are unique way of holding the bat?

Holds it a long way up the top.

Yeah.

And when he swings the bat,

it's just such a...

The bit like Alex Stewart was like that,

Adam Gilchrist,

holding the bat very high on the bat handle.

And that gives you tremendous power

against the quicker balls.

It doesn't actually always allow you to maneuver the ball brilliantly

against spin,

but he's got a beautiful bat swing.

And I think you have to try and bowl quite a lot of slower balls at him.

I know we've criticized New Zealand

for the way the slower balls got whacked,

but because he's got such a high bat lift,

he sometimes finds it difficult to slow that bat swing down,

and he can be undone by slower balls.

But it was good to see him get some runs today

because he's had a bit of a shocker, to be honest.

Yeah.

He's had a shocker because of offspin.

Yeah.

I mean, we'll jack some previous to him

all the other offspinners.

That's why the Coma Conkey decision.

When he heard that at the top,

he had been like,

okay, they've got Glenn Phillips.

But one of the areas I've been struggling,

that's been taken away from me.

I know when you're out to side, your stock goes up.

But Coma Conkey had a really good night tonight

by sitting on the sideline.

In the semi-final against South Africa,

he bowled in the power play,

and then he bowed one over,

he got Quentin DeCorp,

Ryan Rickleton, left handers out.

So I thought it was an odd move in such a big eight.

I know what will happen,

and I'm trying to explain it.

The stats, the analysts will come to you

and go, this pitch turns the lease out of all of them.

This pitch, you'll need the extra seamer.

But you have a gut feel as a captain.

They've got a lot of left handers

and my offspinner in the semi-final

did well against left handers.

Should I change it?

The complication for them was

that they've got an offspinner as well, haven't they?

In Glenn Phillips, who hasn't actually bowled a lot,

but he does bow offspin.

And Had Phillips did not have the option,

they would have played McKonkey,

but they probably fell with having an offspinner

and the pitch that doesn't turn so much.

Go for the extra baseball,

but it didn't work for them.

It shows the role of the analyst in this format.

Go back to our era,

and in a previous game,

your offspinner's bow was so well to left handers,

you come up in a final against a load of left handers,

we would have never left him out.

You would have always played the second offspinner.

Now the analyst says this pitch doesn't spin much,

go with the extra seamer.

I think the captain in the end should have the final say

any probably did.

But what do you think about the captain

about Mitchell Sand here?

Because you must have been pretty

and part of that decision to make that change

as you've just discussed.

If you go back to that England game in Colombo,

he bowed Phillips in the 18th and Ray and Arby took him down.

What sort of a tournament has Mitch Sandner had as captain

when the pressure has really been on?

I think pretty good.

I think he's done fine.

He's a low heartbeat sort of captain.

He's not, doesn't wear his heart on his sleeve.

The decision against England, I thought,

was an odd one as well.

With two right handers in to bowl Glen Phillips

when he had seamers.

The coach did say after that,

well, if he'd gone back to the seamers,

everyone would have said,

well, why didn't you carry on with your spinners?

That is captaincy.

You only win if you win.

If you make the wrong decision,

everyone will nail you.

And that's why I said,

my conkeys had a really good night tonight.

Who knows?

He could have bowed to Abhishek.

Ishankishan goes after Sandu,

goes after Offspin.

So it's not as easy as that.

But I thought in a big game in a final

whereas India stuck with their 11

and stuck with Abhishek Sharma.

Hello.

How's it going to say?

I mean, you could make the argument

that they could possibly have made the change

to go to Koldi.

But of course,

who knows what would have happened?

Who's absolutely the right thing to do

to stick with Abhishek.

But every time we've seen

Chakravati in this tournament,

he's just getting whacked for six.

He's not getting it off the straight at all.

And I don't know.

I just kind of fancy Koldi a bit.

It's not something a bit different

and a wrist spinner.

You can actually spin it and send it both ways.

It just seemed to me that the

batters have got a bit of a handle on Chakravati

at the moment.

Just to back out one nasa saying,

though, I mean, a fantastic start.

92 without loss with the bat.

And then, obviously, Abhishek gets out.

As nasa said,

they just keep on coming.

The Nishankishan comes in

and puts on what 106.

And you just think,

well, it's relentless.

You weren't happy, though, Ian.

Well, you wanted to do that, Ian.

Well, that was the next year.

I wanted to do that, Ian, ahead of Tillak Varma.

I thought that was very odd, actually.

I mean, that partnership between

Sanju Samson and Isshankishan

was an excellent partnership

after the platform.

And then,

there was just a very short

kind of passage of calm for New Zealand,

when Pandia got three wickets in that Nishamoba.

Had Pandia until like Varma,

who just couldn't quite get going immediately.

And suddenly, there was just a chance

that New Zealand might have kept it to about

to 30 when it looked as though at one stage

there were going to be conceding 300.

And quite why Shivamdubi didn't come in ahead of Tillak Varma.

I don't know.

I mean, he's been whacking it in this tournament.

And then, when he did come in,

he obviously hit that last over for 24.

And that's a big difference, isn't it?

230 to 254.

We were set up there watching

the run chase unfold.

And obviously, there were five down.

And we sort of looked to each other,

and I said, hang up.

They need 16, zero.

Boomers still got two overs left.

I mean,

what do you do?

Absolutely genius.

Honestly,

and no slower ball,

Yorkers,

every batter,

you could see Satan as smiling with him.

You know what's coming.

You literally know what's coming,

but yet he deceives you every time.

It is absolute genius.

I mean,

the similarities to the England game,

because it's very first ball.

That slower ball.

He came on and got Harry Brock,

which was his kind of initial aim in the England game.

And he got,

ratch in Ravindra here with a brilliant slower ball.

I mean, the end wick,

it's he mocked up the tail,

and the game was done by then.

But, you know,

it did follow a similar pattern

with that brilliant slower ball first up,

that neither Harry Brock,

nor Ratch in Ravindra,

really could pick.

It's the dip.

Those slower balls,

you see,

and it gets to here.

And it's the dip we played against one,

Franklin Stevenson,

who played for Nottinghamshire.

And batters used to duck it.

Chris Cairns,

again, Chris Reed at Lord,

ducking it.

The ball dips.

And that's what does you.

You think it's a half-follow your full toss,

and because it's almost got overspin on it,

it dips,

but to nail it every time.

And also,

I wonder this pressure.

At first ball,

to Harry Brock,

he probably knows

that Brock is thinking,

they use their main man.

I want to go at him

and try and make a statement here.

Very first ball trying to hit it over extra cover.

It was a wonderful bit of bowling,

and catching, actually.

I mean, it's subjective,

but how do you define a great player?

Is it the longevity?

The importance of when crucial moments happen

you throw in the ball?

Or is it also potentially

that no one seems to better work you out?

And that challenge is still there,

because there's so much analytical stuff now.

And they play against each other all the time now.

So it's not like

you won't England won't see it for three years.

But he keeps deceiving people.

First of all, it's a bit different, isn't he?

He's not got a classical action.

We've talked about it a lot.

You know,

the release is a yard in front of where

the normal release is.

And he's got the brilliant variations,

the slow ball that we talked of,

the number of times he nails his yorker.

Remember that?

This missile of Oli Pope in Hyderabad where

the stunts were just detonated out of the ground.

So he's got everything

and across formats,

his numbers are just outstanding.

Test cricket strike rate average

up with the best that there's ever been

and the same in short form cricket as well.

So he is a multi-format, multi-phase champion.

Yeah, and the moments that you talked about there.

You know, shame on was a great Brigida

because when you wanted a wicket,

every Australian captain through the ball to shame

when England in 2005 were beating Australia

who was the one Brigida in that Australian side

that stood up with bat and ball.

Bummer is exactly the same.

When you need something special

and special doesn't mean four for 15 tonight.

Special means bowling the 18th over against England

when they need 45 and he goes for six

and that's pretty much game done and dusted.

That for me is what makes a good Brigida great

is when your captain needs you and your looking round

and Syria Kumar Yadav is looking round and say

come on, do something special please.

Bummer will deliver 99% of the time.

Hello, I'm Simon Lazenby.

Join me and a host of top guests on the F1 show

after every round of the 2026 Formula One World Championship.

We'll analyse and debate every twist and turn

of what's sure to be a memorable season.

New regs, new rules, but same show.

Listen to our podcast on Apple Spotify

or wherever you get your podcasts

or watches on the Sky Sports F1 YouTube channel.

That's the F1 show from Sky Sports.

What about the tournament as a whole?

This game was always going to be sold out.

Once in year got there, 120,000 people.

But when you, I think, best shut on commentary

and a lot of people have gone through the turn

starting this event.

We've been at these events before.

Well, India, their games are sold out.

You might get the odd good crowd here.

But we're in Colcutter.

44,000 came in and watched England against Scotland.

Then against Italy, there were 35,000.

The crowd here and in Sri Lanka

have been extraordinarily encouraging and good.

Very much so.

It's been a terrific tournament from that perspective.

As you say, I think 40,000 pre-sold

for the England Scotland game

to the neutral game in Colcutter.

I came here to do a game.

It was an India game admittedly,

but it was against the Netherlands

and there were 80,000 here.

So the crowds both, obviously,

for the home teams,

but also for the neutral games have been good.

I think the pitches have been good generally.

I mean, people will complain about everything all the time.

But, you know, all you want is a variety of pitches.

But that offer bowlers a chance occasionally

and I think we've seen that.

There have been some mighty scores

like the 250 here, 250 in Mumbai.

And T20 is a game set up for that, really.

That's how it is.

We've also seen a lot of games that have been 171-80.

It's been enough there for the bowlers to be in the game.

And then the other big thing about the tournament

that has made it an enjoyable one from my perspective.

The first group stage

when the associates really did themselves proud.

Not every single associate team was completely competitive.

But by and large, most of them were.

You know, we followed Nepal a bit.

They played all their games in Mumbai.

25,000 for each game.

And they played some excellent cricket along the way.

So I think those three aspects have made it an excellent tournament

from a neutral perspective.

Obviously, you know, 100,000 in here tonight.

Millions across the country will enjoy the fact

that they've seen a home win.

But just in a broader context,

it's been an enjoyable competition.

Yeah, I mean, this place is the center.

It is the heartbeat of World Cricket.

They have the best cricket side of the moment.

They have the best fans, the most fans.

They have the best franchise tournament in the IPL.

And that's something I've noticed going around every venue.

And that's why they come in now and see South Africa, West Indies,

or whatever other game.

Because they have an affinity affiliation

with some of those players.

I went out to do the toss in Chennai.

And there was a massive cheer.

I know I'm a Chennai boy,

but you may be overdoing the cheer here.

And Mitch Sandler came out.

Who's the next Chennai superking?

And when it went out to Ratchin Ravindra,

in the deep, who's the next Chennai superking,

there was a massive cheer.

So they love the cricket.

And when it's on, you listen to people

at other commentators.

They'll be already working out their IPL.

You know, when New Zealand were batting,

he's a better player of spin.

He should come in in the middle order.

So that franchise tournament,

this is no coincidence what's happening.

He's spot on.

They've got the best whiteball side in the world

at the moment by some distance.

And that is not out of coincidence.

The franchise cricket they play in that tournament

is producing some great cricketers.

IPL, by the way, starts on the 26th of March.

That's coming around pretty quickly.

But with the associates,

the reason that this World Cup was 20

and they brought people in like Italy, Nepal,

is to try and grow the game.

And we've seen, as you said,

really encouraging sides that the gap has closed a bit.

But what happens next?

Because if you speak to any of them,

and we, as you say, spend time in Nepal,

and you hear it from Scotland,

I spoke to their coach and players, etc.

They want to play more.

They want to play more against the better side.

How do you do that, given the calendar

that you have around the world as the best thing for you?

Yeah, and it's why I'm conflicted a bit

about the number of World Cops that we have.

In a way, you think there's going to be

the law of diminishing returns.

If you have a World Cup virtually every year,

there's essentially three World Cops every four years

with a biannual T20 World Cup

and then the quadrennual 50-oval World Cup.

That makes three out of every four.

So you think, gradually, you know,

that there'll be a law of diminishing returns.

But equally, you know, people will say

who are supporters of the associate nations

that they want a T20 World Cup every two years.

Because that's the time that they have

to showcase what they're about.

And it, you know, the time to get on the big stage.

So somewhat conflicted about that.

But obviously, a global game is a good deal.

A good thing in theory and practice.

And T20 is obviously going to drive that.

It's long been, you know,

we give the ICC a bit of stick from time to time.

It's long been there.

Desire to globalize the game through T20.

It's the obvious format because it narrows the gap

and makes it more likely that games will be competitive.

And that is working to some degree.

In terms of giving teams more opportunity,

it is difficult with a calendar sometimes.

What do you think how many times England

have played Scotland, for example?

I think it's six in our history

when there are next door neighbours.

There must be more to give a team

like Scotland more opportunity when teams

come and tour England and indeed England themselves.

Have we in this World Cup seen any inventiveness

that perhaps we hadn't seen coming into the tournament?

And if you think back to 2010 when England won in Barbados,

you had like the slower ball bumpers

that went into the surface.

Scoop started coming in.

What about in this tournament?

I mean, I'm thinking West Indies here

and some of the shots we've seen from the Indian players.

Power.

Is it just getting more powerful?

I think that phase in the middle

where you sort of knock it around.

There's no consolidate on that round.

There's no consolidate on that round.

The top four or five sides just do not consolidate at all.

The accumulator in the middle of the Barbados

and the Joe Root sort of player has disappeared rightly or wrongly

has disappeared from the game.

It's just every ball must go.

And the reason they can do that is because of batting depth.

You know, let's be honest, how did England get

within a whisk of seven runs of being here this evening?

It wasn't just that it wasn't anyone in the top order.

It was the lower order, the likes of Jackson Beth

or people like that.

Batting depth all the way down.

Which means you can go harder.

If you think of Owen Morgan's side

that was so successful, they went hard

because they had a long batting lineup.

I mean, if you look at India,

Akshar Patel coming in at number eight

in a 20 over game is just ridiculous.

He's going to face half a dozen balls as most.

But it enables the top seven to know

that they've got Akshar Patel there.

Same with South Africa, same with England.

New Zealand to a degree as well.

Santana down the order.

So that's the trend.

The old days of have six ball batters

and five ballers, that's gone.

I would have only made one bat before this tournament.

I like the old ponte, as you know.

But the only bat I would have made

is that the winning team will hit the most sixes.

Now, of course, the winning team is going to play

slightly more games.

You know, they'll play an extra match.

But I think India had hit 88 before this game

and they hit 18 tonight.

I think 106-6s in the tournament.

It is a six hitting game.

And if you've got the combination of power plus

a good bowling attack

with a genius bowler in there, hard to do.

Is it a six hitting game

or also still a boundary hitting game

because the criticism that was thrown at West Indy

certainly in Calcutta in that game

was they cleared the ropes a lot

but they didn't find the boundary enough.

So is it just about going maximum

or maximum and continuing the boundary going?

Well, in the West Indies match

when they lost to India in that crucial...

Super-right, effectively, a quarter fund.

I just don't think they went hard enough, actually.

I'm sounding like it's McCulloch.

I'm sounding like Owen Morgan or Harry Brock

or Brenda McCulloch.

But they're like a punty.

But they're DNA is hitting 60s.

And they're opening their openers

actually crawled along a bit relatively,

which meant that some of their big hitters in the middle

or didn't get that much opportunity.

But I mean, I think it is a...

It is a six hitting game now.

It's talking about having a punty.

You had a bit of a pun on South Africa again in a world.

And for so long, we thought, blind me.

Finally, I might have got it right.

And they're not here.

They might have made a better effort of it tonight.

I've got through to the final than New Zealand.

But, listen, South Africa had a great tournament

up to that point.

They looked the best side.

They looked the most dominant side.

If you remember, they put India away comfortably

in the super-AIDS.

They handed out a dropping to India.

That's a measure of how well South Africa were playing.

But the nature of knockout cricket and T20 cricket

is you can't afford to have a bad day,

particularly in a big game like that.

And they had a shocker in that semi-final.

But I don't think that detracts from the fact that

it is so good to see South Africa being a resurgent team again.

They're the world test champions.

I think in the last two years,

they've won 13 out of the last 14 test matches

on December Bavuma.

They were in the finalists of the world.

T20, two years ago.

Semi-finalists here.

Semi-finalists are the champions trophy.

They're a resurgent side.

And, you know, since we were around in the early 90s

when they came back into international cricket,

they were one of the major cricket-playing countries.

And you cannot afford teams like that to be slipping away.

The more competitive teams in World Cricket, the better.

And it is great to see South Africa

a really competitive side again.

What about England's campaign in this world, T20?

I mean, there's no disgrace losing to this Indian side

in Mumbai, not 120,000, but 40,000, whatever it was.

And they ran them close, albeit they considered 250

or lost by seven.

What about their campaign?

Because it started and it was sticky

and all that sort of stuff that Harry said,

how would you sum it up?

I was thinking that today, watching how

Indian, you know, just decimated New Zealand Blurm away.

I was thinking he put into context how well England played

in Mumbai to get within seven.

I think for England and all the resources England have,

the bare minimum is to get to a semi-final.

They've been to five semi-finals in a row now in this format.

They have high-class players that are much sought after in these parts.

A lot of those players will be here in two or three weeks

with massive IPL deals.

I thought when the pitches were a little bit spin-friendly in Sri Lanka,

I think that brought a more into it

because it brought the likes of Dorsen, the likes of Jack,

Jack's Bethel, Winnie's finger was okay.

Obviously, Adele Rashid.

I think that suited their style of play.

When they then got on to the flatter pitches in India,

Mumbai in particular, they were a little bit scratching their head

with their bowling.

They rely heavily on Adele Rashid.

Joffa wasn't at his best in that semi-final

and they went for two, five, four.

So for all the talk of the batting and the top two,

not firing Butler and Soul, in the end, actually,

what they needed was someone to back up Adele Rashid

and give him that second, third, bowling option

because batter's win-you-games, I think bowlers,

as we've seen with Bumra, wins your tournaments.

What about England overall in the winter?

We hear their reviews coming in.

There's certain speculation in the media about the columns,

okay, keys, okay, I don't want you to comment on that.

From what you saw and what you've seen throughout this winter,

you both were out in the ashes.

What sort of winter have England had overall?

Well, it's a poor winter because the ashes

is such a dominant thing in our calendar, in our psyche.

We go through a cycle to get to the ashes

and I'm not saying the ashes is the only thing

but it is a mighty important thing.

And not just that, England were shocking in Australia.

They had a chance we all felt against an Australian team

that was vulnerable because they had key injuries

to their three big bowlers and they had some vulnerabilities

in their batting lineup.

And England didn't give themselves the best opportunity

to have a crack at that, so that was really poor.

I thought they were okay in this tournament.

They beat the sides that you would expect them to beat.

They didn't beat West Indies, they didn't beat India.

So they were just okay but I think they were jolted

after the ashes and it was good to see them.

They looked a bit more serious about their work.