Parallels With 2006/07?

 

 

Ashes 2013

 

Australia going for the throat

 

November 27^th 2013

 
 

Cricket fans tend to have notoriously short memories. England fans like to remember that, after nearly two decades of extreme pain at Australian hands between 1989 and 2005, they have won four of the last five Ashes series. Selective memory though tends to edit out the 2006/07 series when England went to Australia as holders, confident of giving a good account of themselves. Despite a heavy defeat in the 1^st Test – by 277 runs, with Australia running up 602-9d and 202-1d – the 2^nd Test started so differently. When England declared on 551-6 they could little have imagined that defeat was even a possibility, let alone a 5-0 series whitewash. Glenn McGrath had 0-107, Shane Warne 1-167 and were treated with such contempt by Pietersen and Collingwood that many England fans thought that they had both gone on for one series too many and should have retired when the going was good. Adelaide seemed to be their personal Waterloo.

With Australia 65-3 in reply, it seemed as if there was a real chance of making the series 1-1. Australia recovered and managed to get close to parity, but Strauss and Bell saw out the remaining time calmly on Day 4 and, at 59-1 and a lead of 98 at the Close, the question was one of whether or not Andrew Strauss would shake off his cautious image and go after an aggressive declaration he next morning.

When Strauss and Bell added just 10 runs in 11 overs next morning, the question was answered. Safety first! The danger was that a clatter of wickets could leave England with only a small lead and still plenty of time in the day and that is what happened. 69-1 became 77-5 and then 94-6, with only the tail left to support Paul Collingwood. When the last wicket fell on the stroke of Tea England were probably only 30 runs or 30 minutes short of safety. The strokeless paralysis that led England to crawl along at well under 2-an-over, allowed Australia just enough time for a post-Tea dash to the victory that broke English resistance in the series and made the final, 5-0 result, inevitable.

There are clear parallels with 2006/07 in the current series. We have an Australian side that is hurting badly and that is determined to get revenge. It is also feeling aggressive and mean: they feel that they have been on the receiving end of England aggression for too long and are going to give back as good as they have got and more. The aim is to humiliate their opponents, chew them up and spit them out.

No one has said anything about winning and winning big, but it is obvious that Australia want to repeat that 5-0 win from 2006/07 and are going to use any legal means to get it.

If anyone thought that the policy of agreeing to play a credible XI against the tourists and then withdrawing the best players at the last minute until the side that actually takes the field is so weakened as to not provide serious practice would end, think again. Not only have England been sent to Alice Springs for their last non-international match of the tour, but the ACB has withdrawn two of the very few experienced players in the side to play England. What remains is little more than a schoolboy side. The argument is that Australia did not receive credible opposition last summer, so they are damned if they will give England any better. It is shades of India ensuring last winter that England not play any spinners in the warm-ups and that the pitches for those games were green and seaming. It is war on all fronts!

Las winter England lost the 1^st Test badly, but still conquered the Indian spinners and won the series, with the last three Tests getting increasingly one-sided. However, India did not show the incredible ruthlessness and have never matched the aggression of sides like Australia. There is no question that Australia are setting out to break certain key players in a way that India would never attempt.

A strong England performance and, preferably a win is essential at Adelaide. Were England to go 2-0 down, another 5-0 result will be likely.

With the loss of Jonathon Trott, England have to re-organise, quite apart from looking at the balance of the side. They certainly do need to think about the balance of the side again. The most likely thing is that Chris Tremlett will keep his place, but there is always a case to go for the faster, more aggressive Rankin or Finn. Finn, in particular, could win or lose a Test in a session. However, with the Australians repeating their 2010/11 policy of trying to hit Graeme Swann out of the attack, England need a bowler who offers tightness and control so that Broad and Anderson can be rested and that is a job that Tremlett did do largely successfully.

However, the second problem links to the first. With the spare opener already in the side and Gary Ballance having a nightmare tour so far, the most likely option is for Joe Root to move back up the order. Who though should replace him at six? Jonny Bairstow is an obvious candidate, despite doubts about him at this level. There is a suggestion though that Ben Stokes could be brought in as a fifth bowler and middle order bat, but he would be too high at #6 and, with Matt Prior’s crisis of form, makes his promotion in the order a huge risk. Stoke’s bowling too is unlikely to be a major wicket-taking option at present.

However, possibly even more significant is what is going on across Australia, in Queensland, where the England Performance Programme squad are playing Queensland 2^nd XI. Sam Robson hit a century and Tim Bresnan 57 in his return to cricket. It is not impossible that a strong performance by Bresnan in this game could see him return straight back to the England side, also adding some bite to the tail, quite apart from his skill with the ball, making speculation about Tremlett’s place irrelevant. His performance with the ball on Day 2 will be closely watched although, thinking back to 2012, no one will want to rush him back and face yet another injury relapse . Similarly, Sam Robson’s progress and form offer an alternative solution to the problem of the extra batsman: it is not impossible that he may leapfrog Stokes and Ballance into the Test side later in the series if he can make a solid case with the EPP side.