Date-stamped : 17 Dec93 - 10:37 The Guardian 20 March 1993 - Few crumbs of comfort for a sorry party - David Hopps. David Hopps reports from Sri Lanka on who did what and how badly for England abroad ''AS usual the Brits will find excuses for their defeat. Down the ages they have never liked to be on the losing side. Somebody must tell them that they must learn to be determined in defeat and be humble in victory.'' ** So thundered Elmo Rodrigopulle yesterday in the Colombo Daily News, promoting Britons as arrogant, whingeing excuse-makers, a view repeated almost daily throughout England's tour of India and Sri Lanka. England did not moan, or at least not till they reached Colombo (and then only privately) where they developed an unhealthy com- plex about the bowling actions of the Sri Lankan spinners and ar- guably lost the Test as a result. But the flimsiest suggestions of colonial superiority receive endless condemnation in Asian newspapers. To Indian and Sri Lan- kan eyes, England, no longer able to rule, do not understand how to integrate. Survival, as a result, is highly unlikely. And Eng- land did lose all four Tests, as poorly equipped for a campaign fought out on slow, turning pitches as it was possible to be. ''Pupils showing the masters how!'' said Rodrigopulle. ''Salt in the festering wounds of the men from Blighty.'' It was, too. But it is time to strip back the plaster and take one final look. Graham Gooch: Victory in India would have confirmed his standing as one of England's most influential captains for a generation. Instead, beset by ill-health, his rigid work-ethic regime was questioned by a series defeat equally as disastrous as Australia Alec Stewart: Remains Gooch's heir-apparent but his hand was not strengthened by defeats as captain in Madras and Colombo and a sketchy series with the bat. Has faultless commitment, but footballer's mentality can grate. Conflicting demands of captain, wicketkeeper and opening batsman must be addressed. Michael Atherton: As a specialist Test batsman, he was poorly treated by an unsatisfactory itinerary which denied him adequate preparation. Problem compounded by illness in Calcutta and mud- dled selection in Madras. Mike Gatting: Regarded as England's trump card against the spinners, he never produced the major innings so badly needed. Catching also fallible. Suspect health did not help, but first hints of advancing years, at nearly 36, will not advance his cap- taincy claims. Graeme Hick: England's greatest success, heading the averages in India in batting, bowling and fielding. Came of age as a Test batsman with a destructive 178 in Bombay, bowled his off-spinners well enough to demand more opportunities at county level, and his slip fielding was world-class. Robin Smith: Immense determination to solve his technical prob- lems against the turning ball demanded respect and his efforts were rewarded with a century in Colombo. Neil Fairbrother: Irrepressible one-day bat. Tormented Test record was overcome during one joyful knock in Madras, in response to a hopeless position, but many more are needed to prove five-day aptitude. Richard Blakey: Nationwide sympathy for Jack Russell (fuelled at one point by the chairman of the England committee), a stroppy reaction by Tufnell in Vishakhapatnam towards a missed stumping, and an inability to read Kumble's top-spinner all left Blakey's confidence in ruins. Seven runs in five innings was a disastrous return for a wicketkeeper-batsman. Chris Lewis: Like Hick, a success of the tour. Stayed fit, bowled with aggression and intelligence (not always reflected in his figures), and played the spinners with the panache of a genuine all-rounder. Brilliant fielder. Dermot Reeve: The only member of England's party not to play in at least one Test, Reeve's effectiveness in one-day cricket was impaired as his bowling came in for heavy punishment. Survived largely on unshakeable optimism, but his mum Monica would have preferred to score a few successes. Ian Salisbury: Another tourist of sunny disposition. Kept on after pitching leg and hitting off in the nets, but inaccurate and costly in his two Tests. Worth endless encouragement. Phil Tufnell: Hyped as England's matchwinner, he found the whole Indian experience disturbing, never remotely hitting form. A creature of extreme moods, things might have turned out dif- ferently had he played in the opening Test. Gooch does not pre- tend to relate to him; someone needs to. John Emburey: His rediscovered form in the final hours in Colom- bo was much too little, too late. Navjot Sidhu's six-hitting ex- ploits early in the tour, extreme enough to persuade Emburey to ask not to be considered for the first Test, disrupted England's pre-tour planning to a damaging extent. Paul Jarvis: Bowled with considerable verve and good humour to justify selection. Out-bowled in England's pace attack only by Lewis, his omission for the Bombay Test defied commonsense. Needs only a more reliable outswinger and he can unsettle the Australi- ans. Phillip DeFreitas: By his own admission he had a disastrous tour, taking only four wickets (and none at all in first-class matches) as he lacked rhythm, accuracy and hostility. Devon Malcolm: Could not be faulted for persistence but found little encouragement from Indian pitches. Shorter and more way- ward than Jarvis and Lewis, he rarely achieved the same hostili- ty. Paul Taylor: Will return from his first senior tour a mystified man. In the Calcutta Test, after a fine swing-bowling display in Lucknow, was understandably affected by debut nerves and not seen again for seven weeks until the tour's final day. Personable tourist who, at 28, saw enough ups and downs to treasure experi- ence. ** [ed: Gooch in ARTICLES/1993/GOOCH_ON_ENG_BOWLERS_24MAR93 Clearly disappointed with the loss of the Test series in India, he shrugged aside several of the reasons put forward. ''There are no excuses. We were beaten fair and square. India outplayed us in every department.'' - good, eh ? :-) ] Contributed by The Management (help@cricinfo.com)