Ashes 2017/18: 4th and 5th ODIs, A Strange End to a Strange ODI Series

 

Ashes 2017/18: 4^th and 5^th ODIs

A Strange End to a Strange ODI Series

January 28^th 2017

The last two ODIs have featured a side that has relaxed and gone off the boil, against another that has lost all confidence that it can win, however favourable the position. The result has been first a game in which Australia staggered drunkenly over the line despite having had England 8-5 after 6.2 overs – a position from which there should have been no return – and then a match in which Australia seemed to be cruising to an inadequate target, needing 71 from 97 balls, with 6 wickets in hand and yet somehow contrived to lose.

Australia can point to the fact that it had a winning position in four of the five games and that the final margin of 4-1 does not reflect the true distance between the sides. It does reflect though their problems: they cannot pace a chase, they struggle to set adequate targets and cannot finish-off games: today’s slow, painful innings by Tim Paine was symbolic of how Australia could not close out a position. Their ODI cricket seems anchored in the past and their confidence close to zero. Australia show all the problems that England did in the last World Cup in the sense of thinking that 260-270 is a perfectly adequate total to set, trying to milk singles from the middle overs and thinking that if Plan A does not work, they should try Plan A… until it does finally work in a game.

England, on the other hand, just lack the ruthlessness that separates the good from the very good. Yes, they won today’s match and pushed Australia to the limit in the fourth match, but against a better side they would have lost the series.

Ultimately the hero today was Tom Curran, who also gave a favourable impression in the Tests in his limited opportunities, but a big hand has to go to Jake Ball for getting up off the floor after collapsing and avoiding the need for Joe Root to have to bowl two of the last four overs with only a small number of runs to protect. Even though Ball took some stick from a couple of balls, he avoided disaster and Tom Curran did the rest, cleaning up Zampa and Paine in successive overs.

The biggest single problem that Australia had all through the series came from the unlikeliest of sources. Australia simply had the holy terrors in the middle overs every time that Adil Rashid and Moeen Ali bowled. Although Moeen’s batting struggles have continued, he has looked a different man with the ball and has squeezed the run-scoring, allowing Adil Rashid to attack at the other end. Adil Rashid has been more expensive than anyone other than Liam Plunkett, but has been the highest wicket-taker in the series and the only bowler on either side to bowl all fifty overs. Moeen has taken fewer wickets, but has produced pressure by drying-up the runs. Between them they have taken fifteen wickets and posed problems that the Australian middle order simply could not solve. So many of Adil Rashid’s wickets have come from batsmen attacking him, thinking foolishly that buffet was served, not realising that this is his main threat: producing rushes of blood and injudicious swipes. While Adil Rashid was expensive on paper, his appearance so often led to precious wickets falling that halted any momentum that the runs off him had created.

This is one of the features of the new England: Eoin Morgan is happy to see Adil Rashid taking 3-55, or even 3-60 from 10 overs, when previous captains would have preferred to see 0-45. As happened in the Tests last winter, until some poor captaincy ended up draining their confidence, Moeen and Adil Rashid bowl well together and complement each other. Eoin Morgan has the happy knack of getting the best from them in ODIs, which makes one wonder if they should be given another chance to bowl together in Tests sooner rather than later.

For England, the pieces that did not quite work in the Tests came right here. Chris Woakes scored plenty of runs in limited opportunities and also took wickets. Joe Root’s 226 runs more than trumped Steve Smith’s 102 – Smith struggled against Adil Rashid and seemed to lose confidence progressively, scoring increasingly slowly. It is possible that the effort of carrying his side’s batting through the Test series has just drained Steve Smith so totally that he simply needs a rest, while Joe Root has been refreshed by being able to hand over the captaincy and the spotlight to someone else. Jason Roy produced two fine innings and someone always produced critical runs: Roy in one innings, Buttler in another, Root in another and Woakes every time him came out to bat. Woakes, Roy and Buttler all scored at comfortably in excess of a run-a-ball and worked around Joe Root’s efforts to anchor innings. Apart from the success of Moeen Ali and Adil Rashid as spin-twins, the addition of some real pace and threat from Liam Plunkett and Mark Wood made a real difference, along with the revival of Chris Woakes as a threat with the ball.

In contrast, Australia chopped and changed their side – they used 16 players to England’s 14 – but only Marcus Stoinis offered enough runs, fast enough to be a real threat, even if his bowling was more of a liability to his side than an advantage. Aaron Finch was massive in the three games that he played: 2x100 and 1x50, but had too little support and seemed to slow, not accelerate, as his innings progressed.

England cannot rest on their laurels, but this series is a massive change from the equivalent one in 2013/14 that they lost 4-1. Australia though have some serious thinking to do with the World Cup coming closer. It is also further evidence that Australia’s superiority in the Tests had more to do with the fortune to be able to bowl their first-choice attack all through the series (with one exception) than it did with their strength in depth. While Australia’s best XI is formidably strong, the next layer of players underneath are not in the same class and Australia are not the same force away from their hostile home conditions.

 

Ps: Odd fact from the ODI series – in every match, Australia started as strong favourites with the bookmakers. There was an opportunity there for someone to make money. Or did the bookies know something that we did not?

Ashes 2017/18: 3rd ODI - Australian Inadequacies Left Bare

 

Ashes 2017/18: 3^rd ODI

Australian Inadequacies Left Bare

January 21^st 2017

As in the Test series, the ODIs have been settled at the first opportunity. Australia needed to win or tie to keep the series alive and, despite almost everything running for them, were never really at the races after England recovered from a difficult position.

Australia had to chase in what were probably the best batting conditions of a match, after England’s main strike bowler limped off having bowled just eight deliveries. After 48 overs, with two well-set batsmen at the crease and comfortably ahead of England at the same stage – having been well ahead during virtually the entire chase – the same thing happened as had happened in the first two matches: their chase died away. Australia’s batting simply fades out in the last five overs when other sides look to score fifty, sixty, or even seventy runs. Today was their best effort of the three matches so far, with thirty-seven from the last five overs but, when you need two-a-ball (a rate that should not be out of reach with two well-set batsmen, one of them a big-hitter), they managed the required twelve from a only single one of the last five overs and, by then, only when it was far too late.

Compare this with England’s effort. Tied in knots by the Australian attack, they were 200-6 after 40 overs and 236-6 after 45, with the pundits speculating that 270 would be defendable. The last five overs went for 8, 10, 10, 24 and 14. The seven death overs of Hazlewood, Cummins and Starc, brought back to slap down those irritating Poms, went for  a total of 83 runs. It all goes to show that what works in Tests, does not always work in white-ball cricket.

Steve Smith admitted that Australia were chasing thirty too many. At times though, their tactics were somewhat odd. Joe Root, brought in to complete Liam Plunkett’s allocation, was given some brutal treatment, finishing his first spell with 6.4-0-53-0: just what Australia needed – to attack the emergency bowler when Eoin Morgan really did not have a viable seventh bowler available to relieve the pressure. Root though came back and bowled his last two overs for just seven runs. Moeen Ali and Adil Rashid then bowled some cheap overs as the batsmen dawdled along and, suddenly, the RRR was climbing. Steve Smith, so different from the batsman who ruled the Test bowling with a rod of iron, scored at the equivalent of 4-an-over and managed only a single boundary in 66 balls. Mitch Marsh was a little quicker (5-an-over) but, with a run-a-ball needed, only Aaron Finch and Marcus Stoinis showed the necessary urgency. As in the previous match, the rest left them too much to do. It was all very well saying that Smith was setting a base for the final slog, but the final slog just has not been coming and the 1990s-style mid-over batting killed the chase.

Moeen Ali, although he has only two wickets in the series, continues to be the most economical bowler on either side. Adil Rashid has almost identical figures to Mitch Starc – they have bowled the same number of overs, have taken the same number of wickets, but Adil Rashid has conceded two more runs – and his mid-overs partnership with Moeen is proving to be England’s trump card. In contrast, only Andrew Tye is giving Steve Smith some control.

England’s other trump card is the finishing. Chris Woakes is proving a far bigger threat with the white ball than with the red. He has four wickets at good economy, but his 92 runs at a strike rate of 146 have given England the final push that they needed in both games in which he has batted because he has batted in support of someone at the other end. Australia, in contrast, have a finisher, Stoinis, who has 120 runs at a strike rate of 135, but he has played a lone hand with no real support: other batsmen have always left him far too much to do.

Today though, the story was of Jos Buttler. He has looked totally lost most of the time in Tests but, give him a white ball and a licence to hit and he looks a totally different player. A century from 83 balls, with his second fifty come from just 31 as he tore the Australia Test attack to shreds.

This being Australia and another defeat, there has to be some controversy. Defeat in the first two ODIs has been marked by suggestions that Australia are not really trying and have not fielded their best side (NB: England have not been able to field their best side either, only the best available, but that is another story). Today, they fielded another changed team and what is undoubtedly their best attack, so it was an umpiring decision that received the brunt of their ire. Steve Smith edged and looked back, guiltily. Jos Buttler swooped and claimed the catch. The umpire gave it out. And Smith reviewed. As is their wont, the TV images just added confusion and we were in a situation where unclear, foreshortened images were clearly out to one side and that the ball had clearly bounced to the other. The Third umpire took the pragmatic view that he could not say beyond all doubt that the on-field call was wrong, so a furious Smith had to go. Australians will blame their defeat on the umpires but, his dismissal probably helped Australia because, at that stage, the RRR was rising and Smith seemed unable to accelerate, while the fall of his wicket brought in the aggressive Stoinis. The Australians might well reply that the wicket lifted England when they might have started flagging, but Smith would have had to start to take some risks or sacrifice his wicket soon anyway.

There are still two ODIs and two T20s to come. You can imagine England winning most, if not all of them. It does not change what came before, but it will allow a more positive spin on the tour as a whole, so different to the 2013/14 tour. However, even if England win all the ODIs and T20s, were we to be counting points, as in the Womens’ Ashes, the final score would still be 22-18 to Australia. The Tests were lost – and lost badly – and that is what will be remembered in future years.

 

Ashes 2017/18: 1st and 2nd ODIs - Cricket Through The Looking Glass

 

Ashes 2017/18: 1^st and 2^nd ODIs

Cricket Through The Looking Glass

January 19^th 2017

It has been an odd week.

The Crown Prosecution Service decides to prosecute Ben Stokes for Affray. This is a serious offence that can be tried in a Magistrates Court (3 magistrates instead of a jury) with a maximum sentence of six months in prison, or it can be sent for trial to a Crown Court for trial by jury with a sentence of up to three years. Stokes’s case has been sent to Bristol Magistrates Court so, with the possibility that the case might take a year or more to be heard, the ECB decided to re-commission Stokes when many fans and pundits thought that maybe he would not play again for England.

Significantly, Stokes will not go to Australia for the end of the ODI series and the T20s that follow; he will go for the follow-up tour of New Zealand where the press and the public are less hostile and the media tend to be far thinner on the ground anyway.

It is fair to say that not everyone favoured the decision and the ECB committee was deeply split. However, restraint of trade and maintaining a presumption of innocence were powerful arguments. Stokes has already been punished severely by missing a significant part of the ODI series against West Indies and the whole tour of Australia and stopping him playing while maintaining the image that he has not been convicted without trial, could be hard to justify in the courts.

Could it possibly be coincidence that the day after Ben Stokes’s date of return – February 20^th – was announced, it was announced that this same date he would be required to present himself in court in Bristol?

It is possible that Stokes could manage to negotiate a change in date. He is going to contest the charge. It is also quite possible that the magistrates will refuse to accommodate him, media personality or not. It is also possible that he may enter the court on foot and leave it in a prison van, thus halting his return to the England side at Her Majesty’s Pleasure.

Watch this space. This one may run and run.

So, have England been further distracted? After all, in 2013/14 they lost all five Tests, lost the ODIs 4-1 and the T20s 3-0. Two of the ODIs were very, very close, but, of thirteen international matches on the tour, England won but one. They then went to the Caribbean for a T20 series… and lost that too. In other words, losing became a habit and the Australians were in no mood to let up even when the Ashes were won. It was thus not surprising that the book-makers had Australia firm favourites for the first two ODIs.

Yes, we expected a one-sided ODI series. And boy have we got it. A whitewash looks a pretty good bet. The novelty is that it is England who look to have a pretty good chance of imposing it. Yes, this is a mirror image of the Test series. Both games have looked closer on paper than they were on the pitch. England chased a ground record 305 to win at Melbourne and got them with some comfort. And, at Brisbane, despite a late wobble, a wholly inadequate 270-9 by Australia was chased down with more than five overs to spare. Australia look to need to set 330-340 to test England and are getting nowhere near that.

Even the Australian successes are a mark of their failure. Aaron Finch has scored 107 and 106 and both matches have been lost. Both innings though have been at under a run-a-ball: he just has not been able to accelerate and get away from England. In fact, today, until a late thrash from Carey, no one had come close to scoring at a run-a-ball and even Carey’s innings was 27 from 24. To have set an adequate target, someone had to score at 150 and get the scoreboard accelerating but, in a batting-heavy line-up, no one could. In the first game, Australia were 196-3 with 15 overs to go: a platform for 330+? Australia simply do not have that kind of vision. Only Stoinis, with 60 from 40 balls, threatened to play the sort of match-changing innings that we have associated with Australia and even he could not see it through. The last three overs produced 19 runs and three wickets. Today, seeing the way the wind was blowing, the CricInfo commentator almost begged for 50 from the last 4 overs to make a game of it: he got 20. Today, Bairstow, Hales, Buttler and Woakes all made significant contributions and all scored faster than Finch. It did not matter than Root’s innings was relatively slow: he anchored as runs came in a flood at the other end.

Part of the difference is the taming, at least thus far of Sir Donald Smith. Caught behind off Adil Rashid in the first game and LBW to Root today, he has made two starts, but not been allowed to get away either time. An important part though has been England’s spin pairing. Adil Rashid has been expensive but taken match-changing wickets. Eoin Morgan has been prepared to see him go for some runs in return for vital breakthroughs and so far his wickets have been Smith, Mitch Marsh (twice) and Stoinis. Today, a handy 209-3 with 10 overs to go, became 216-6 as Moeen Ali and Adil Rashid turned the match on its head. And there hangs a tail: Moeen Ali, 17-0-70-2 – of the bowlers who have bowled at least ten overs in the two games, comfortably the most economical on either side, with his nearest challenger Joe Root, who has only bowled today.

Moeen Ali and Adil Rashid are forming a middle over stranglehold with the ball. And so effective has Adil Rashid been that he was even entrusted with the ball in the final overs in the first game. Moeen looks a totally different player to the sad, lonely figure of the Tests. Add to it that the wicket-taking menace of Mitch Starc is being countered by the menace of Liam Plunkett and suddenly it looks like a different pair of sides. Starc has more wickets at a better average and strike rate, but Plunkett has better economy.

Steve Smith has admitted that Australia are well off the pace and lacking answers and will not have felt in any way relieved by Eoin Morgan stating that England have been well short of their best. And, truth be told, they have not batted anywhere near as well as they can, mainly due to their minimal preparation. With the third game back-to-back with the second, England should start to get into their stride. If they do, you would not bet against 5-0. As it is, Australia have to win the third match to keep the series alive. And you do not know how good it is to say that.

Ashes 2017/18: 5th Test, A Match Too Far

 

Ashes 2017/18: 5^th Test

A Match Too Far

January 8^th 2017

When it is 3-0, the rubber is dead and you have to raise yourself for one last game, sometimes there is a danger that everyone is too flat to respond. Back in the old days, before 2005, England made a habit of winning dead rubbers in Ashes series. It was an old tradition and you can argue that the win at Sydney in 2003 was the Launchpad for the successful Ashes side of 2005. It was only a dead rubber, but the elements of the 2005 side were falling into place, with Steve Harmison leading the attack and Michael Vaughan leading the batting.

Another old tradition was to offer a sacrificial lamb for a dead rubber 5^th Test who would go into the game knowing that this might be the only Test he would get. Scott Borthwick drew the short straw in 2014 and, as many predicted when he was selected, never got close to playing another Test (and now, never will). In 2018, helped by Chris Woakes’s injury, it was Mason Crane, although the suspicion has to be that Woakes who, after excellent performances before the 1^st Test, has been very disappointing, might have been dropped anyway.

Scott Borthwick at least could point to some cheap wickets to ease the pain of becoming yet another one-Test wonder. Mason Crane has the most expensive ever figures for an England debutant. 1-193 from 48 overs make Devon Malcolm’s debut look like a success story. He also committed the cardinal sin of taking an excellent debut wicket only to see the batsman recalled because he had overstepped.

If any wicket in Australia were to help spin in the series and justify playing two spinners, it was likely to be Sydney. Of course, Australia called-up Ashton Agar… and then did not play him. However, given England’s lack of high pace and the lack of success of seam and swing bowling in the series, playing a leg-spinner was at least trying something different.

Yet again though it was a tale of what might have been. Joe Root won the Toss and batted. Eight England batsmen reached 24, yet only Root and Malan passed 40 and no one got close to a century. A partnership of 133 between Root and Malan was putting England in an excellent position to push on to 450 or even 500. At 228-3 when the new ball came England just needed to see out the last few overs of the day and start anew in the morning. Not a bit of it. As so often happened England just could not sustain a position of growing superiority. 228-3 became 251-6 with the ball still new and England were up against the wall… again. It would be funny if it were not so tragic.

Even the good news was bad. Moeen Ali, Tom Curran and a revived Stuart Broad batted effectively and, for the first time, the England tail wagged, but it suggested too that the wicket was very flat and that was not great news. Again, at 335-7, England were getting into what was, if not a strong position, at least one that offered 380 as a viable target. If England were at least close to 400, scoreboard pressure might help them, but 346ao was bitterly disappointing.

Cameron Bancroft fell to Broad’s second ball and you thought that maybe England’s score might be better than appeared. At 86-2 you could dream of a first innings lead. By the time that Smith and Khawaja’s partnership was approaching 200 all you could dream about was for the torture to stop. Even if Sir Donald Smith did not reach his century (whoops! Just short), Khawaja and the two Marshes did. Broad 1-121. Crane 1-193. Moeen a comparative success with 2-170. England were ground to hamburger. Through it, Jimmy Anderson’s figures of 34-14-56-1 shone through as heroic: what would he have achieved had he had a bowler of high pace (Plunkett or Wood) supporting him at the other end? Stuart Broad can still bowl the occasional effort ball at 90mph and Woakes can pass 90mph, but it is a single delivery every few overs, not delivery after delivery. Throughout the carnage Tom Curran was quite lightly bowled, but at least kept things fairly tight and continued to impress.

It reminded one of the regular Christians v Lions fixtures at the Roman Colosseum but at least in the Colosseum you could hope for a miracle. Players were trying, but were running on fumes and the hottest ever day in Sydney would be a day when England were in the field and under the pump on the flattest of pitches. And, of course, when you start your second innings more than three hundred behind, losing both openers with 15 on the board is not a great idea. Cook has played one major innings in the series and not threatened 40 on any other occasion. Stoneman started the series solidly, but has faded rapidly since being hit and has finished the series with scores of 3, 15, 25 & 0. And James Vince has managed 2x50, but no other innings over 25. England knew what they were getting with Vince and he knows that unless he can score a lot of runs in New Zealand, he will not be playing again come the arrival of Pakistan and India in the summer. Dawid Malan has been a huge success, but even he cannot score runs every innings and make up for the failings of others.

On a pitch where Australia’s batsmen could score runs for fun with no danger of getting out, England could only stagger to 93-4 by the Close. Any remote chance of saving the match ended when Joe Root was checked into hospital dehydrated and with severe gastroenteritis and could not resume his innings in the morning. This being Australia though, some Australian fans decided that this showed a lack of toughness worthy of mocking: you have to wonder if the last Neanderthals really did die out twenty-three thousand years ago in the south of the Iberian Peninsula, as science would have it, or were deported en masse to live on in the Antipodes.

Root showed tremendous guts to come back to the ground, still wearing his hospital wristband and batted superbly with Bairstow through to Lunch but, by the end of the session he was again visibly out on his feet. Once Root had retired, ill, for a second time, the end was mercifully swift. It was a suitable ending for a depressing series. For significant parts of the series England competed strongly, but always fell short in the end. They won occasional days and, more frequently, individual sessions, but could not string together a performance over five days. The best that you could say is that, at least this time, every Test went into a fifth day: it is not thought, much consolation.

Ashes 2017/18: 4th Test Day 5, At Least It Will Not Be 5-0…

 

Ashes 2017/18: 4^th Test Day 5

At Least It Will Not Be 5-0…

December 30^th 2017

There was a thought that Australia could come out to score quick runs and put England under real pressure on the last day. It was never really likely but, after so many promising positions have disappeared, there was always that horrible feeling that Australia could make a sneaky declaration and suddenly have England 16-4 with a couple of hours to survive.

Starting the day 91 behind, with 98 overs to go – more likely 96 if there was a change of innings – the equation was simple for England. They had at very most 65 overs to take eight wickets; probably only 60. The key was always to take a couple of wickets in the first hour; if Australia got to Lunch with Warner and Smith still together the match would end in a draw.

As it was England took over 25 overs to make the breakthrough as Warner and Smith batted at the sort of pace more associated with the 1960s but, crucially, avoided giving the bowlers as sniff of a chance. A break for rain seemed to be the et tu brute.

Fortune has been cruel to England all tour and had one last joke to play. With the new ball and England’s last chance saloon barrelling into view, Joe Root put himself on. Warner took a wild slog and lobbed the ball straight to James Vince. Then Shaun Marsh edged the persevering Stuart Broad and Jonny Bairstow flew left and took a wonderful catch. With the new ball due soon after Lunch England were suddenly back in the game. Australia were effectively 8-4, the new ball was due in four overs and there were two sessions left.

As now even the most pessimistic Englishman, or one-eyed Australian could see any way that England could lose, but if Australia did not see off the new ball there was a real threat that they might. Here though, aided by a pitch that got so dead that even the ICC marked it as poor, Australia showed that that they can adapt their game. Just 47 runs came from 29 stone-walling overs in the afternoon session. If Faf du Plessis had been watching, he would have approved. It was a high-risk strategy because it meant that two quick wickets after Tea would have left Australia only around 60 ahead with only 4 wickets left and plenty of time to go, but Steve Smith seems to be able to walk on water these days.

The highest ever ranking for a Test batsman is Don Bradman’s 961 from a possible maximum of 1000. Steve Smith is up to 947, which no player other than Bradman has ever beaten. It will be very tough for him to move up further: from 900 points up, holding points is tough, gaining them requires almost superhuman performances. By 950, the ratings are designed in such a way that advancing becomes almost impossible. Right now though, Steve Smith does not seem to understand what “impossible” means. When he first came into the Australian side it was as a leg-spinning all-rounder: no one could have imagined that he would become harder to dismiss than anyone since Bradman.

Joe Root and England tried everything except dynamite. You wonder if Moeen at his best might have made something of it, or maybe the high pace of Liam Plunkett but, reality was that if a batsman set out his stall to survive and not make a mistake it was hard to take a wicket, which made the Australian first innings collapse from 260-3 to 327ao all the more astonishing. It also put into context the fact that eight England batsmen got out between 14 and 61: only Alistair Cook got in and made it count.

It will not be 5-0, but there is still a real danger of 4-0.