Third Test: Day 3; Australian Resistance, But Too Little, Too Late

 

 

Ashes 2015

 

Third Test: Day 3; Australian Resistance, But Too Little, Too Late

 

August 1^st 2015

 

“Effectively 23-7, Australia need at least one hundred more from the tail in the morning. All logic says that England will win before Lunch but, then, logic hasn’t had a great match so far, has it?”

How else do you explain the Australian tail batting much better – arguably in both innings – than their top order and the match going right up to Tea?

There were even those Australians – and not a few English fans – who, seeing the Nevill-Starc stand pass 60 and the lead head towards 100, with no sign of the batsmen being seriously inconvenienced, who started to have horrible imaginings of Headingley & Edgbaston 1981 and of Edgbaston 2005. Australian fans started to suggest that if the lead passed 130 their attack would be more than sufficient to turn the tables thanks to the shift in momentum.

The Australian tail took the side from 111-6 and facing a humiliating innings defeat, to 265: the last 4 wickets put on 56% of the side’s runs. That was quite a performance and Mitch Starc looks as if he could bat higher up the order than 10 (Australia once batted Geoff Lawson, probably a lesser batsman than Starc, at 7 in 1985 and he responded with a 50). Fifty more runs and a few nerve-ending would have been churning, particularly as several of the England side are not in good batting form and Adam Lyth looks more of a walking wicket with every innings.

However, in the great turnarounds at Headingley and Edgbaston in 1981, England had two bowlers capable of magic: Ian Botham and Bob Willis, both with something to prove; Botham after being deprived of the captaincy and threatened with being dropped and Willis who was dropped, but managed to convince the selectors to reinstate him before the side was announced officially.

The Australian attack, trumpeted as exceptional and with phenomenal strength in depth, looks increasingly threadbare without Ryan Harris to give it some oomph and backbone. This was something that I predicted: Mitch Johnson without Harris is a much smaller threat; he might bowl a great ball, or a great over, or even a great spell, but he struggles to have a great Test.

Here, save for one over that came far too late for Australia, Mitch Johnson was simply absent. And when Moeen Ali and the supposedly terrified Stuart Broad came to the crease on the second day with Australia threatening to keep the lead down to around 80 and launched a tremendous counter-attack, where was Mitch Johnson? Stuart Broad did not hide from him: HE hid from Stuart Broad. When your premier fast bowler has to be protected from batsmen who attack, particularly tail-enders and is intimidated by the crowd, instead of being the one who intimidates, you have a problem.

Mitch Starc came into the series with a huge reputation from the World Cup. Wiser heads noted that the World Cup is played with a white ball and with different rules. At Edgbaston, with the attack leader not generating the same level of threat as expected, Mitch Starc had to step up, but responded with a box of liquorice allsorts, with a lot of balls sprayed down the leg side.

Josh Hazlewood has come into the series with a huge reputation. This was just his 8^th Test, but he averages 20 with the ball and at well under 3 runs and over, showing that he has control as well as threat. He has taken 14 wickets in the series so far at a good average but, in this Test, went at almost 5 an over in the first innings when Australia needed to keep things tight and strangle England’s search for a lead. Hazlewood is frightening no one except, sometimes, his own captain.

Even more than Mitch Johnson, you can ask where Mitch Marsh was. 8.1 overs only for 0-32 and dismissed for 0 & 6. At Lord’s (where he obtained 3 of his 4 Test wickets to date) and in the tour games, he has looked supreme: only once has he fallen for fewer than 30 and has 2x100 and 1x50 to his name but at Edgbaston, a middle order of Clarke, Voges, Marsh and Nevill has had the England seamers queuing up to bowl in the anticipation of cheap wickets.

The batting, as intimated, makes England’s quaking order look solid. Voges averages 40 or more in Tests, ODIs and T20 (an astonishing trio), but has managed 31, 1, 25, 16 & 0 in this series. Michael Clarke himself has 38, 4, 7, 32*, 10 & 3.

Australia are depending on Rogers, Warner & Smith to make runs at the top of the order and for inertia to carry the rest. It worked at Lord’s. At Cardiff and Edgbaston, it has not. Here, Warner failed in the first innings, Rogers in the second and Smith in both.  With four struggling batsmen to follow (Marsh for Watson and Nevill for Haddin has not changed this scenario one iota), the Australian batting has been horribly exposed.

When the series started as a story of England’s lack of bowling depth and frailties against high pace and skilled seam bowling, it is turning into a story of a one-dimensional Australian side who are shuffling their options but have a Plan A, a Plan A and when those fail, Plan A.

For the 4^th Test, Australia will re-shuffle the pack again. The talk is that Mitch Starc may be replaced by Peter Siddle, Adam Voges by Shaun Marsh, Mitch Marsh by Shane Watson. There are suggestions that the dressing room wants Brad Haddin back for Peter Nevill and Michael Clarke may possibly move from 4 to 5.

Siddle is a worthy bowler, but has had little form on tour (2 wickets) and simply does not hold the threat that he did a few years ago. However, Trent Bridge may just suit his style of bowling. Siddle may just pose far more of a threat with nagging line and length than Mitch Starc does at higher pace, but currently with paint-spray control. With so many things going wrong for Australia, having a steady bowler rather than a threatening, but erratic one, is the least of their worries.

Mitch-watch: 3, 16-2-66-2, 14 & 7-3-10-0.

Where has Mitch been? He turned up for one over on the second morning but, for the rest of the match, it seemed as if the crowd and the batsmen were getting to him so badly that he needed to be hidden.

Third Test, Day 1: The World Turns On Its Head... Again!

 

 

Ashes 2015

 

Third Test: Day 1; What on Earth is Going on Here?

 

July 29^th 2015

 

How much damage has Lord’s done to England’s morale? The Australians are laughing and poking fun again, which is never pleasant to watch; really they do not seem to consider this England side worthy opponents and, to their more radical fans, the first Test was a story of a doctored pitch and diabolical luck.

Wiser heads will have seen that Australia are still vulnerable. There are doubts about the health of Chris Rogers, who has had a second, frightening scare. The middle order of Clarke, Voges and Marsh missed out to a large degree when the top of the order were scoring runs for fun at Lord’s. And, of course, there is Mitch J.: can he have consecutive good matches in England for the first time? As the Australian talismen, if Clarke and Mitch J. are struggling, Australia will struggle. It is not hard to argue that Australia are not as good as they appeared to be at Lord’s, nor are England so bad: something between Cardiff and Lord’s is the correct balance. Man for man, Australia are probably better, but by much less than we expected before the series started.

That said, England’s top order struggles are getting too serious to ignore. Lyth, Ballance and Bell are all under real threat. On this occasion, Ballance has been made the fall guy, allowing Jonny Bairstow to come back in for what seems like his umpteenth opportunity but, he has got so many runs for Yorkshire that if the county game is to have any relevance to the Test side, he had to get into the side.

More controversially, with Mark Wood injured, Steve Finn was recalled. This seemed like a high-risk strategy. To everyone’s astonishment though – particularly, one suspects, the Australians, Finn had a blinder. Brought on for Stuart Broad after just three overs from him, Finn immediately removed Steve Smith and suddenly, the whole balance of the series seemed to change. Steve Smith had hit 215 and 58 at Lord’s and here he was, edging to slip cheaply off a bowler who Australia can hardly have considered a threat. And then, in his third over, Finn removed Clarke too and suddenly Australia were under the cosh and England knew that they needed just one more wicket.

Enter another bowler ridiculed by the Australian fans. Jimmy Anderson tore through the breech created by Finn. Within half an hour of Lunch is was 94-7 and you were blinking in disbelief. If the courageous Chris Rogers, who knew that one more blow to the head would probably end his career, had not hung on like a limpet Australia would have been in dire straits. Once Stuart Broad finally removed him, there was no recovery.

The most optimistic fans saw England with a lead by the Close. Shane Warne and Glenn McGrath predicted that 136 would give Australia a significant first innings lead and that Australia would be batting again by the Close.

How wonderful it was to see the Australian seamers show as little discipline as their batsmen and allow England to race along. None of the seamers when for less than 4-an-over (even the most profiligate of England’s seam trio – Steve Finn – went at well under 4) and had it not been for Lyon’s two wickets – one, the most outrageous piece of luck to dismiss Alistair Cook, the other the most outrageous rush of blood from Ian Bell – Australia’s situation would be even more dire.

There was plenty of talk that England were outrageously lucky, with many fine deliveries getting no reward, but the truth of it was that Australia’s attack was like a pre-2004 version of Andrew Flintoff: loads of effort, loads of threat, but little reward because the length and the line were not quite right to turn balls that skimmed past the edge into balls that were nicked behind. Before the innings the pundits said that the Australian seamers would see the English length and line to get the maximum out of the wicket and replicate it with even greater threat. What no one expected was that the Australian seamers would look good, but totally fail to present a consistent threat.

What was interesting was the way that Michael Clarke, seeing how England were attacking – just a single maiden was bowled in 29 overs and both Josh Hazlewood and Mitchell Marsh went at 5 or more an over – seemed to be careful to shield Mitch J. He got a three over spell, then one of two overs and, after Joe Root hit him for a streaky six, did not re-appear, which was most un-Mitch-like. It may just be coincidence that rain-breaks and planned rotations ended up depriving him of a longer spell but, in conditions where he was expected to be almost unplayable, it was odd to see so little of him in the attack.

Mitch J.’s morale is known to be fragile. In the past the English crowds and the Barmy Army have got after him and his bowling has fallen apart. In 2009 he was dropped from the side after a series of increasingly erratic performances and, in 2013, was not even picked due to poor form. With an attack that has a lot of potential, but not so much experience, it would be understandable if Michael Clarke wanted to protect his most valuable asset from a 2009, or 2010/11-like decline, where a single explosive performance was followed by a serious tailing-off.

For Day 2, England know that the loss of Ian Bell before the Close has exposed the middle order. Jonny Bairstow is new at the crease and must surely be nervous after his last encounter with Australia. At parity with 7 wickets left and perfect batting conditions expected, England know that anything less than a lead of 200 would be a criminal waste. They need to bat long and try to put Australia out of the game by the end of the second day.

The aim has to be to see off the first hour and then start to accelerate. England need at least two fifties from Root, Bairstow, Buttler and Moeen, plus a couple of 30s or 40s: if they get them they will be well set. In contrast, if Australia get an early wicket they will be confident of keeping the lead well below 100 and getting right back into the game.

Mitch-watch: 3 and 5-0-20-0.

Where was Mitch?

Second Test Disaster

 

 

Ashes 2015

 

Second Test Horror Story

 

July 28^th 2015

Sometimes you are just grateful to have missed a particularly unpleasant trainwreck. I was fortunate enough to have been in an isolated part of the UK on holiday, with only intermittent Internet access.

After the unexpected win at Cardiff and the discipline and aggressivity shown by the England side, Lord’s was a return to the worst moments of the 2013/14 Ashes series. By the end of Day 1 you knew what was coming. Lose the Toss. See your opponents rack up 337-1 and, worse, know that one definite chance and at least one half-chance that would have limited the damage have been missed.

The England surrender was as predictable as it was depressing. Whereas England found nothing in the pitch, the Australian seam attack looked as if they were bowling hand-grenades in a minefield. When you are 30-4 chasing 566-8d you know that things are hopeless and, despite first innings defiance from Cook and Stokes and, to a lesser degree, Moeen Ali, Australia just needed to pick up occasional wickets, avoid a huge stand developing and think about the Follow-On.

Of course, Michael Clarke did not enforce it, reasoning that a second innings kicking, chasing leather as the lead built to inhuman proportions would crack England’s morale even more. He was right. Five front-line batsmen got into double figures but only the “swing and a giggle” Stuart Broad passed 20. It was pathetic.

Australia: 820 runs for 10 wickets. England 415 runs for 20 wickets. It was a measure of the gulf between the sides.

Now we have the crisis that we feared.

·         Adam Lyth (0 & 7) looks as if he is batting with Geoff Boycott’s stick of rhubarb.

·         Gary Ballance looks like the Ballance of the World Cup and not the world-conquering batsman of summer 2014.

·         Ian Bell (1 & 11) looks like he does not even have a stick of rhubarb for a bat. In 2013, Bell was the hero of the series; in 2015 he looks helpless.

Mitch-watch: 15, 20.1-8-53-3 and 10-3-27-3.

This was the Mitch J of 2013/14 and England could not cope with it. Which Mitch will appear for the 3^rd Test? If it is this one, the series may start to get very one-sided.

Australian Lazarus, Some English Consolation

 

 

Cricket 2014

 

Australian Lazarus, English consolation

 

March 6^th 2014

 

Yesterday Australia duly finished-off South Africa to win the 3^rd Test and the series. It has been a series of three incredibly one-sided matches, the smallest margin of victory was the 231 runs of South Africa’s win in the 2^nd Test.

Following on from the pattern last summer, the side that won the toss dominated all three Tests, scoring 397, 423 and 494-7d in the process, while dismissing the opposition for under 300 in every innings of the three Tests. It is a curious statistic, but South Africa’s 287 in the first innings and 265 in the second innings of the deciding Test were by some distance the best efforts in either innings by a side not batting first. In contrast, the side that had batted first declared in the second innings in all three Tests, losing a maximum of 5 wickets in the process.

In the 13 Tests that Australia has played since the start of the English summer the side batting first has taken a first innings lead in all but two games – the 1^st and 4^th Tests in England, both of them still won by the side batting first. In fact. The only time in the 13 Tests that a side batting first lost the match was England in Melbourne, where even a 51 run first innings lead was not enough to conjure a win.

Given this sequence of “bat first and dominate (usually win) the match”, one wonders what would have happened had England won the toss and batted in the first three Tests in Australia, or South Africa had batted first more than just the once in the recently concluded series. Would England have gone 3-down and had the fight knocked out of them? Would South Africa have capitulated so tamely? We will never know… What is clear is that, in all three series, the toss has had a disproportionate influence on the course of the matches.

The South Africa series also confirmed another trend in the 13 matches: despite the heroics of David Warner and Chris Rogers, their starts have frequently been diabolically bad, with the side being rescued time and again by the middle order and the tail.

At Trent Bridge, 117-9

At Lords, 128ao

At Old Trafford, 129-3

At Chester-le-Street, 76-4

At The Oval, 144-3

At Brisbane, 132-6

At Perth, 143-5

At Adelaide, 174-4

At Melbourne, 122-6

At Sydney, 97-5

At Centurion, 98-4

At Port Elizabeth, 128-6

The best start, by far, was in the Cape Town Test, when the third wicket fell at 217 in their first innings. Seven times at least half the side was out for under 150 and nine times the middle order and tail had to orquestrate a recovery from a distinctly unpromising position such as the 132-6 at Brisbane, or the 97-5 at Sydney. That Australia have won seven of eight matches this summer despite a stuttering top order that has only twice delivered a good start (counting the 174-4 at Adelaide as “good”), is a tribute to how well the lower order and the bowlers have rescued situations, leading to frequent jokes that they have followed Bradman’s example of reversing the batting order to confuse the opposition.

The revival of Australian fortunes has been astonishing, having been saved by bad light from losing 4-0 in England after a disastrously misjudged declaration at The Oval, they have roared back in a way that few people anticipated. Many fans were expecting a closer fight in Australia, as the Darren Lehmann regime started to take effect. However, there was an understandable feeling that Plan A was for Mitch Johnson to have one or, just possibly, two good matches and for Michael Clarke to have a couple of big innings and, between them, to win a Test or two. There was though no obvious Plan B. What has happened is that the new ball pairing of Ryan Harris and Mitch Johnson has proved (almost) irresistible. The one occasion that they had an off day – at Port Elizabeth, on what was expected to be a sporty pitch – the side was overwhelmed.

However, the fundamental problems have not been cured. The top order is still very fragile, but being bailed-out constantly by players such as Clarke and Haddin who are close to the end of their careers. One suspects that much of Mitch Johnson’s revival and effectiveness has been very much due to his new ball partner who is now going under the knife and whose career has been extended nervously Test by Test. Will Mitch be as effective without another bowler to support him who can bowl at high pace and with great stamina? Siddle is a good third seamer. Pattinson has promise, but seems not yet to be ready. Others are highly rated in Australia, but are yet to show themselves to be matchwinners. The other side of the coin though is that Brad Haddin has found a formidable lieutenant at marshalling recoveries in Steve Smith who is scoring big runs and starting to develop as a spinner. It will be interesting to see how Australia fare if they have to go into a Test without both Harris and Haddin.

While South Africa and Australia were playing out an extraordinary finish in Cape Town, England and the West Indies were struggling to look the part in the Caribbean. Although England have won the series, mainly thanks to adapting better to the conditions, the level of cricket was often dire. The batting was hit or miss and the death bowling from both sides appalling, to be charitable and describe it with no worse a term than that. South African and Australian fans were united in being dismissive and have every right to be. However, there are some encouraging signs for England: having thrown away the first game, they could have fallen apart as they did in Australia, instead they came back and won two tight finishes with a very young team, despite wobbles that showed just how low their confidence has fallen.

Ravi Bopara held together a chase to reach a target in a match that appeared to have slipped away in yet another miserable collapse. Joe Root has scored 167 runs in three innings and has centuries in the warm-up and the 3^rd ODI and taken wickets. Moeen Ali has had two useful innings and bowled well. Tredwell has been very economical and Steve Parry a revelation. Michael Lumb also has a century and Jos Buttler should have had one.

On the flip side, Ben Stokes showed that he is far from the finished article with a few, expensive overs and a grand total of 9 runs in three innings. And Luke Wright’s contribution from two matches was one run and not a single delivery.

It is hardly a recovery, but maybe just the beginning of better times to come.

The Unstoppable Mitch & Ryan Show

 

 

Cricket 2014

 

Australian Turnaround

 

February 15^th 2014

 

 

So much for Australia having a rude shock in South Africa. Their top order batting remains fragile, but that becomes irrelevant when the middle and lower order triple and quadruple the score and the Australian bowling, led by an unstoppable Mitch Johnson, continues to be devastating. Suddenly, England’s performance in Australia does not look quite so bad.

England’s problems have been well documented. Jimmy Anderson and Stuart Broad were making breakthroughs with the new ball, but Graeme Swann’s problems and the lack of threatening support bowling saw Australia recover time and again and, the England batting failed to give their bowlers time to recover from their efforts. The wise looked at South Africa’s powerful batting line-up and relentless bowling and saw that things would be different. Well, they have not been.

It is like looking at the Ashes again: Australia 24-2, 98-4 and looking in trouble? Trouble? In comes Steve Smith, scores a century, this time it is Shaun Marsh who supports him with another and they put on 233 together. A clatter of wickets and you think that South Africa could just regain the momentum by ripping out the lower order but, no, Johnson and Harris put on valuable runs and see Australia almost up to 400. Poor start for South Africa, who start to recover and back comes Mitch Johnson… It has followed the pattern of the Ashes Tests line by line, right down to the total disintegration of the South African fielding in the second innings.

South Africa have barely managed as many runs in their two innings as Australia managed in their first after being put in on a lively pitch and, suddenly, are full of doubts and being questioned. Sound familiar? You look at how the South Africans have fallen apart and wonder whether or not there is any way that they can avoid a 3-0 whitewash. There are similar questions to the ones England were asked. People are saying that there is no steel to the side without the multi-faceted contribution of Jacques Kallis with bat, ball and in the field. And Graeme Smith looked clueless and unable to stop his side’s slide having given Australia first use of a pitch that deteriorated rapidly, although the South African effort in the field in the second innings was so poor that Australia’s batsmen still racked up the runs almost without being inconvenienced in the slightest.

What is the change? Take a look back to the 4^th Test last summer where, at Chester-le-Street, Australia disintegrated to defeat having looked in the box seat. Ryan Harris was bowling high ‘80s, with the occasional ball close to, or a fraction over 90mph. He was no faster than Stuart Broad and even Jimmy Anderson was matching him on the speed gun in the first innings. Move forward to Centurion: Ryan Harris was ramping it up to over 94mph – Mitch Johnson had a higher average speed, but the fastest ball of the first innings came from Ryan Harris. Having Mitch Johnson at the other end has added 5mph – that is 8km/h) to Ryan Harris – who has gone from a decent quick, to being just as nasty as anyone in world cricket. Last summer England knew that when they saw off Ryan Harris and the new ball what would follow would relieve the pressure. Now, first England’s and then South Africa’s batsmen have discovered that the pressure is relentless from both ends and that, even if they see off Mitch Johnson – which they are not managing – Ryan Harris is a far faster and nastier proposition than before to support him. With Peter Siddle now relegated to first change, where he makes a far greater contribution than he could with the new ball, keeping things tight and maintaining the pressure while Harris and Johnson rest.

The change in Mitch Johnson is even more remarkable than the one in Ryan Harris. He was capable of great spells and great matches, but would always return quickly to bowling with all the control of a spray gun, but none of the threat. After his return in the ODIs in England, the ODIs in India, the Ashes and now the series against South Africa, he has sustained threat, hostility and accuracy for longer than anyone could have imagined possible and has transformed Australia. While he continues to do it and Ryan Harris acts as his sidekick, Australia are proving unstoppable.