Under-utilized Archer’s Day 3 stroll brings to fore Joe Root’s cluelessness in handling the pacer
Like it or not, Jofra Archer will always be in the news. He’ll be in the news when he plays, he’ll be in the news when he doesn’t play, he’ll be in the news when he bowls fast, he’ll be in the news when he bowls slow and, like yesterday, he’ll be in the news when he doesn’t bowl at all.
For starters, Jofra Archer’s day, on Friday, did not get off to the greatest of starts. His rather bold statement post the end of play on Day 2 - where he suggested this pitch was not one where bowlers need to be bending their backs on, and where he almost challenged young Naseem Shah to bowl quick and take wickets - backfired within an hour of the day’s play as 17-year-old Naseem relentlessly bent his back, clocked 90 mph consistently, and reaped reward for the same by removing England’s best batsman in the match, Ollie Pope, through an unplayable rip-snorter that was rendered possible by one element and one element only - raw pace.
Instantly - and unsurprisingly - social media trolls rushed to their phones and laptops like their life depended on it to mock the England speedster and remind him - just like Naseem did - that pace can be a weapon on any surface. There was, hence, significant anticipation when England took to the field to bowl to Pakistan for the second time in the game. There was the hope that Archer would channel the beast inside him - especially after Naseem’s fitting response - when he eventually takes his mark to deliver the ball. Long story short, it did not happen and both the supporters and neutrals, as always, were left disappointed. This time, though, it was not Archer who was at fault.
For Day 3 was another chapter in the strained relationship between Joe Root and Jofra Archer. Not for the first time in the past year, fans and experts were left perplexed by the English skipper’s handling of the prodigal pacer. The pretext for the dissent on Day 3, however, was something new, something different - Root refused and was reluctant to use Archer, to such an extent that the Sussex man ended up bowling just 5 of the 44 overs England slid in on the day. But as if making Archer bowl just the 11% of the total overs on Day 3 wasn’t infuriating already, Root rubbed salt on the wounds of flabbergasted English fans by using an “injured” Ben Stokes as an enforcer towards the end of the day.
Stokes’ spell, in particular, left everyone with the same question: why pick Jofra Archer in the side if you’re gonna trust a half-fit all-rounder to be an enforcer, over him? Archer has played nine of his ten Tests under Root’s captaincy yet if this ongoing Test is any evidence to go by, it is crystal clear that the English skipper has no idea how to use or get the best out of his valued possession. So witless, laughable and incomprehensible has been Root’s usage of Archer that a military equivalent of this would be going around physically slapping enemies with a dynamite rather than pulling the trigger and allowing the weapon to explode.
With every single move that Root employed - in this Test as a whole, to be honest - the inclusion of Archer in the side challenged common sense. Not least the fact that a half-fit Stokes was being used as an enforcer late on Day 3 - defeating the purpose of England fielding five specialist bowlers, which was precisely done to stop the all-rounder from bowling. For starters, Archer bowling line and length throughout his 27 overs across the three days - and not pace - made little sense, due to the fact that there were already three pacers in the side - Broad, Anderson and Woakes - who were specifically in the side for just that: to bowl line and length, exploit the swing and trouble the batsmen with accuracy.
Now it must be said that there’s nothing ‘wrong’ in Archer bowling line and length - no one wants him to bowl 90 mph every ball, like he suggests - but him trying to be a ‘bowler of skill’ is of no use to the team, for it renders the whole attack one dimensional - here you have four bowlers trying to do the same thing. The reason why the responsibility ‘to bowl quick’ falls on Archer’s shoulders is simple: he is the only man in this entire side who can clock the 140kph consistently; his USP is his pace and thus to make the attack well-balanced, it is only fair that he employs a tactic different to that of his teammates.
But from the first three days of this Test against Pakistan - and from the third Test versus the Windies where England fielded the same ploy - what’s become evident is that there is a lack of trust or miscommunication - or both - between Root and Archer, for both the way Archer has been used by his skipper and the way he’s bowled in his spells - his approach, basically - have beggared belief. There was a time yesterday when Archer was being outbowled in pace by a 38-year-old Anderson and there was a phase in the first innings when Woakes, a bowler who cannot cross the 135 kph mark, was being employed to bowl a barrage of short balls at Shadab Khan; how could this be possible in a team which has a bowler who is amongst the quickest in the world?
Archer's role in this four-man attack must be simple: to not bowl more than three or four overs at a stretch and send rockets every time he's given the ball; he should, at no point, worry about leaking runs or outwitting the batsmen for there are three other bowlers to do that role. This might, of course, not be an ideal scenario, but the team composition - as was evident yesterday - demands it. And it is not asking much of Archer, either. This is Test cricket and if Naseem and Shaheen, two rookies almost half a decade younger than him, can do it, there's no reason why Archer cannot and should not just bowl fast; it is, after all, fulfilling a role for the team. But the responsibility falls on the captain to communicate it and make it clear to the bowler and, as things stand, there is significant doubt if Root, himself, knows what he wants to do with Archer, let alone him communicating it to the pacer.
The other argument to this is if Archer is going to be a mere line and length ‘skill’ bowler and not an enforcer - from what we’ve seen this summer, that seems to be the case - would England not be better off instead picking Sam Curran? Not only does Sam Curran’s number’s at home dwarf Archer’s - He averages 22.63 and has a 100% win record at home - but he also adds both the extra security with the bat and some variation with the ball - thanks to him being a left-hander - which England could very much do with. And, if that’s not the case, if Archer has been employed as an enforcer and it’s him who has not been adhering to the role, would the side not be better off asking Mark Wood, instead, to go all out? He has done the role in the past and, unlike Archer, he would run through a brick wall for the side and bowl over 140 clicks till his last metatarsal bone cracks.
In Tino Best’s words, Archer bowling ‘toothpaste’ is not beneficial to the team. Not in a four-man pace attack, at least. That said, Root has to carry the can for what unfolded on Day 3, for there was no excuse for not using Archer as an enforcer and making him bowl more. Him bowling an injured Ben Stokes reflected a failure of leadership on his part - either he picked the wrong man or he didn’t and doesn’t know how to play his cards.