Reflections On The Second Test: it's not as bad as it looks

 

 

Ashes 2013

 

Second Test Reflections

 

December 10^th 2013

 
 

In the end it was quick and it was painless. Matt Prior continued to bat well and managed his first fifty since Auckland, but that was about the extent of the good news. Stuart Broad can bat, but all those ideas of him moving up to #7 and playing as an all-rounder after his 169 v Pakistan in 2010 have been forgotten. The sight of him sending the ball down Fine Leg’s throat in the second over of the morning ended any thoughts that the end might be delayed. Realistically Broad and Prior had to bat past lunch for England to begin to hope. Stuart Broad has ability with the bat – he is a much better #8 than the greatly valued Ashley Giles was – but Geoff Boycott was fuming (again) at his dismissal because, even when the situation looks hopeless and you decide to attack, you should use your brains.

With Broad gone it was always going to be over quickly. Graeme Swan has four First Class centuries (Broad has just the one) and five Test fifties to his name, but rarely hangs around for long these days. Had he come in in the wake of a long partnership between Broad and Prior you could have seen him having some fun, as he did against South Africa at Lords in 2012, when Prior and Broad had put on 64 in a similarly hopeless situation and Swann then batted for 11 overs of mayhem with Prior, leaving South Africa on the verge of panic and getting England agonisingly close to an extraordinary win (a partnership of 74 in 11 overs ended by, of all things, a run out).

In this match, Carberry, Bell, Root, Pietersen and Prior have all got fifties, but Root’s 87 and Bell’s 72* were the highest scores. The killer for England is that no one was able to push on and convert a fifty into a big century. All of England’s top seven – barring Trott and Stokes – have a fifty in the series, but Joe Root’s 87 is still the highest individual score.  In contrast, there have been four Australians centuries and Brad Haddin can also beat Joe Root’s best effort.

One of the top four has to make a century. If they do, England will compete and will have a real chance of winning.

The second great problem at Adelaide was missed opportunities in the field. If England had held their chances, they would have won. Simple as that.

I have to admit that, at times during this series I have started to believe that a 5-0 defeat is almost inevitable. Cold reflection says that it is not. There is not so much between the two teams as has appeared. Last summer England won because (a) Ian Bell had a sublime series and (b) they played the critical sessions better. Right now we have the inverse situation. Australia’s Plan A is that Mitch Johnson continues to fire and that Michael Clarke gives him the runs to defend. It is not obvious that there is a Plan B because, if Mitch Johnson has a shocker at Perth, there is not a whole lot of depth in the bowling to support him, as we saw last summer when the biggest single factor in England’s success was the greater depth of England’s attack. The margin between the two sides is a lot smaller than it looks.

England can come back and win at Perth. To do it they need to build on the (mild) progress shown at Adelaide and pick another “horses for courses” side. That means probably an all-seam attack (Anderson, Broad, Bresnan and Finn or Rankin), with Pietersen and Root supplying any spin that is required although, in 2010, Swann bowled just 25 overs (2-103) and Australia did not bowl a single over of spin in the match. England also need to take their chances in the field. The fact that the slip fielding will suffer if Graeme Swann does not play has been held up as reason to pick him. No, if we want to win this series we should not pick a player for his fielding: not even Gary Pratt got into the side on his fielding!

If Steve Finn plays, he has to be bowled in short spells (3-4 overs) and let loose. No point pussyfooting around: “Steve, you are going to bowl fast and aggressive and if you go for a few runs, that doesn’t matter if you knock over a few wickets”.

It's The Hope That Kills You...

 

 

Ashes 2013

 

Better, but not good enough

 

December 8^th 2013

 
 

The good news: England have passed 200 for the first time in the series and look set to pass 250.

The bad news: barring a miracle, the Test will still be lost by a huge margin and, with it, the Ashes in all but name.

Illogical as it might seem, I felt that if one of England’s top three could make a century, England would save the match. I still feel that we could have saved it.

England are still alive – just – with Prior and Broad at the wicket and batting well. And, despite closing in on victory and a seemingly inexpungible 2-0 lead, Australia are getting rattled and handing out some fearsome verbals. It is one of the things that makes you think that Australia could just struggle if faced with some genuine, sustained resistance: when someone is holding them up, even in these Tests that they have dominated so completely, they take it very badly. It is not the behaviour of a confident side: it looks more like a side that fear that, however strong their position, it could all go horribly wrong and who are trying to put on a confident front to hide their insecurity.

It is not the Australia do not count with help. The horror and bewilderment in the voices of the commentators as, with just the ninth ball of the innings, Alistair Cook decided to take on Mitch Johnson and sent a catch down to Fine Leg had to be heard to be believed. It is true that there was an element of bad luck in it because Ryan Harris had to make plenty of ground and took an excellent catch – Alistair Cook could so easily have got away with it – but to see the captain give it away so quickly  was a hammer blow. However, if there is one England batsman apart from Ian Bell who has shown the sort of calm that promised a big score, it was Michael Carberry. Surely he would not do anything daft and would make England’s first century of the series? Would he? Hell! Inoffensive ball from Peter Siddle pulled straight down Nathan Lyon’s throat. 20-2 in 40 minutes of play and England were timidly handing over the Ashes on a silver salver. A million England cricket fans either switched off and went to bed, or reached for the bottle.

Joe Root, Kevin Pietersen and more briefly, Ben Stokes, showed what might have been but, even getting past 50, neither Root nor Pietersen could convert it into the century that could have changed the course of the match. 131-2 and hope, became 171-5 and oblivion within minutes of the re-start after Tea. Another four day finish looked a certainty.

Matt Prior, who has hardly been able to buy a run this year has held out since Joe Root’s dismissal, supported first by Ben Stokes and then, more violently, by Stuart Broad. When Stokes fell half an hour before the Close it was, to all intents and purposes, the extinction of the last remaining hope. For England even to think of survival, this pair must hold out to past lunch and get a lot of help from the rain.

It is not the defeat that kills you, it is the spark of hope that goes before it…

[Ps: Stuart Broad has just one Test fifty in his last 33 innings – the famous one at Nottingham that seriously upset the Australians. Matt Prior last passed 50, eighteen innings ago, with 110* at Auckland. This would be a good moment for both to do something about those sequences.]

Yes, It Is Worse Than 2006/07

 

 

Ashes 2013

 

Worse than 2006/07?

 

December 7^th 2013

 
 

After England threw away the chance of setting up a fightback on Day 2, there was always the chance that the side could bat long today and make a statement of intent, but that statement, made so forcefully at Brisbane in 2010, has not come and, with each day that passes, looks less likely to come.

In 2006/07 we tend to forget that we dominated the first three days at Adelaide. Glenn McGrath looked pedestrian. Shane Warne looked like someone trying to recall past glories, but not sure why he could not bring them back. For three glorious days England bullied the Australians who, despite almost hauling themselves up to parity on Day 4, looked like the old, tired side that they were, filled with players who were on the point of retirement having spent a decade and more fighting for Australia against all-comers. What followed finished Duncan Fletcher. England, unsure whether to go for quick runs or bat out time, sat on their splices and allowed Australia to attack them. Had England scored 40 more runs they would have drawn and, seeing how Australia wobbled in the eventual chase, could even have won.

Here, after a better Day 1, Day 2 was of abject surrender and Day 3 was embarrassing. Root and Carberry were runless, but at least solid. Root was doing the job that England had picked him for: blunt the new ball attack and give yourself a chance against the support bowlers. At 57-1 Nathan Lyon was in the attack with Peter Siddle coming on, the new ball thrust had been seen off and Michael Carberry was just beginning to look to score some runs. Root and Carberry had taken ten off a Mitch Johnson over to see him out of the attack. Carberry then took runs from Nathan Lyon and you sensed that this was the moment you were waiting for. England were starting to fight back and we would finally see how deep the Australian confidence was. Up in the commentary box Geoff Boycott, a gruff, proud Yorkshireman who has taken such pride in Joe Root’s success, said “not the time to play a reverse sweep”, meaning it as a joke. First ball from Lyon wide outside off stump. Premeditated slog sweep. Top edge. Thanks very much. Boycs was rightly apoplectic. Just when England looked to be doing everything right, a batsman who has done great things for England threw it away.

In comes KP. Still the runs are flowing with some comfort. KP survives a weird review. Surely, finally, things are beginning to go England’s way.  KP tries to attack Siddle, plays the flamingo shot. Straight to George Bailey: in, out it pops, in, out, in, out, in, out – will the ball finally fall to the ground? – in… and held. That was probably the critical moment of the morning. Had Bailey finally dropped the ball you could see KP making them pay but, once again, the small breaks were going Australia’s way. When KP fell that way you knew that things were hopeless.

Still though England wanted to make you think that the fightback would happen. Bell came straight in and played . . 2 .. . 6! His sixth ball disappeared over the longest boundary. Suddenly the game had changed: seven off the Lyon over after KP’s dismissal; ten off Siddle’s next over; eleven off Lyon’s next over; eight off Siddle; then a calmer over… just three of Lyon; Harris comes back and Bell creams him for a boundary. 43 from six overs after KP was out and England, suddenly and gloriously were cruising, with lunch coming up.

What happened then? Shane Watson, who had bowled just two overs – both maidens – at Brisbane, came on and suddenly, the runs dried up. Maiden from Watson. Maiden from Harris. Maiden from Watson. Maiden from Harris. You knew what was coming next. Five more dot balls from Watson, then a loose delivery. Carberry launches into it to relieve the pressure with a freebie and David Warner takes a screaming catch. Two overs before lunch and you knew that it was all over. Watson’s first five overs in the series stood at four maidens and a wicket-maiden.

At 111-3 with two batsmen looking like Bradman, you could see England getting close to saving the follow-on. Minutes after lunch it was 117-7 and the Ashes had gone. IT IS OVER.

There was not even the relief of Michael Clarke enforcing the follow-on and potentially tiring his bowlers. Instead it is England whose shattered bowlers are being put to the sword again. We are not even losing with dignity.

Groundhog Day

 

 

Ashes 2013

 

Good first day, horrific second day… again

 

December 6^th 2013

 

 

This series is beginning to look more horribly one-sided by the day. At least in 2006/07 England could say that they dominated the first three days at Adelaide before finally succumbing to a great Australian side. After having the better of the first day, the second was as bad as anything in 2006/07. Dropped catches, missed run-outs and, when an early wicket would have given England a real chance to dismiss Australia for a sub-par score, a partnership of 200 took the game away from England. From 457-5, Australia slipped to 483-8: keep them to under 500? Not a chance! Haddin, Harris and Lyon added 87 for the last two wickets in the final, will-sapping insult.

All the problems of the 1^st Test are back: lack of energy, lack of imagination and lack of fight. After a much better first day it is a bitter pill to swallow. England are much better than this.

There is no question that Australia are the better side by a distance and that England will struggle to avoid being 3-0 down after the Perth Test. Inevitably there will be the calls to drop everyone. Graeme Swann, who did so much to win the summer series, is having a series as poor as 2010/11 but, even then, he produced one match-winning performance. Alistair Cook, who dominated in 2010/11, is looking a shadow of his former self – when you lop off a side’s head, the body struggles to resist and Australia making life difficult for Cook.

However, this side is already looking very different to the one that played the majority of the series in the summer. There are three changes of personnel and one positional change which, in the Andy Flower era, amounts to a real earthquake. You can make too many changes and just end up destabilising the side in trying to refresh it.

Right now the side’s chances depend on Carberry – lucky to be picked in many people’s book – and Joe Root – who has gone from being the golden boy of the side to looking in a real slump. They have to get England well past 100 and see of Harris and Johnson if England are to save the follow on and make a bid for a fighting draw. Right now the number one priority is to stop the slide and force Australia to work hard and sweat for every wicket, knowing that the 3^rd Test follows this one immediately. If either batsman falls cheaply, the end could be mercifully quick. The fact that Michael Carberry, who started the tour in such imperious form, has hardly scored a run since is not comforting. With the debutant, Stokes, at 6 and the run-less Matt Prior at 7, the follow-on target of 371 looks a long, long way away.

England Try Something Different

 

 

Ashes 2013

 

England show that they can innovate

 

December 5^th 2013

 
 

When you lose the toss on a pitch that looks flatter than a pancake and more lifeless than slowly drying paint, you would normally settle for 273-5, especially with a still new ball in the hand and much better batting conditions expected for the next two days. In fact, you would normally feel quite pleased. It is a measure of how the day went that England will actually feel quite disappointed: had the chances offered been taken it is not impossible that England would have been batting before the Close.

A pitch that had been emerald green three days ago was revealed to be as brown and grassless as any in India and, suddenly, England’s thinking changed. With the 3^rd Test starting only three days after this one (assuming that it lasts the five days, as expected), England decided that their seam attack would be better saved to be fresh for the responsive Perth surface. Australia went for three seamers, backed up by Nathan Lyon and Shane Watson, taking the gamble that they could exhaust the attack if England made the sort of scores that they made in 2010/11. England, as ventured here, went for two spinners. Rather than bring in Bresnan and Ballance, as they had intended to even yesterday, Ben Stokes and Monty Panesar were summoned.

Stokes has taken 1-56 and 0-18 and scored 4 at Perth in the opening match, followed by 0-37 and 28 at Alice Springs. Monty’s entire tour has consisted of 3-41 from 19 overs at Alice Springs. Neither would have been expecting to play any part in the Test series and were probably expecting the Alice Springs game to be their last action of the tour. Yet Ben Stokes is now being asked to bat at 6 and act as third seamer for England in a Test. It is asking a lot of him, based on his form so far during the tour against the weakest opposition that England have faced, to make the step up.

Monty Panesar has been in this situation before and you know what you are going to get with him. Hide him in the field and hope that no catches float his way (a caught and bowled did, with the inevitable result) and, with a bit of luck, you have declared before he is asked to bat. However, there is one factor that people have forgotten: he bowls very well in tandem with Graeme Swann. Picking Monty has been a masterstroke because it has closed one line of Australian attack. At the Gabba Swann was targeted mercilessly because Australia know that if he is allowed to settle he can destroy them. Here, in tandem with Monty, Swann took 1-55 in 19 overs, blocking up an end nicely and getting rid of Chris Rogers. With Swann and Monty in tandem, England were able to bowl 43 overs of spin at well under 3-an-over: at the Gabba, Swann had gone for 2-215 from 53 overs.

Stokes had only a light workload: eight inexpensive overs, although he did bowl the fastest ball of the day and was consistently England’s quickest bowler, although only averaging a fraction under 85mph. In part, Stokes is insurance against the rather frightening possibility of having to give Ian Bell the new ball if Jimmy Anderson or Stuart Broad have to go off, but he knows that his job is to support the senior bowlers, chase like hell in the field, catch anything that goes his way and score a fifty if he can whenever he gets to bat.

The next session will probably define England’s tour. If England can take wickets in the morning, they can limit Australia to under 350 and will have a real chance to put Australia under some pressure. A big first innings score would put down a marker and allow England to put fielders around the bat to Monty and Swann. If, instead, Australia reach 450, any chance of victory will have gone and Australia, in turn, will have a chance to apply real pressure, knowing that England will have to bat last. Either way, England need wickets in the morning and then for the top three to give them a good start.

Whatever happens, the Flower/Cook combo have shown that they are able to tear up the formula and take a gamble. England are being positive in the field and showing that they are going to fight back in this Test.

Twist Or Stick For England?

 

 

Ashes 2013

 

How much should England gamble?

 

December 4^th 2013

  

Popular wisdom is that the Adelaide surface will be flat and that, with rain threatened, a draw or an Australian win are the only possible results. There is massive speculation about what side England are going to put out. Part of that is no doubt due to Andy Flower not wanting to reveal anything that might help the Australians but, with Michael Clarke set to name an unchanged XI, relying on Shane Watson to act as fifth bowler despite the 2^nd and 3^rd Tests being back-to-back, England are faced with some major tactical questions. With no Jonathon Trott and Matt Prior struggling, can England risk changing their habitual 4-bowler attack? With the likelihood of turn on offer, could England play both Swann and Monty? If so, surely they would not play just two seamers.

However, Monty comes complete with his legendary lack of any useful input to the team except when bowling. Word is that has fielding, both for Sussex last summer and for England at Alice Springs, is becoming so devoid of any energy that England would effectively be taking the field with an outfielder missing. The Australians would undoubtedly look for him in the field and see any shot sent in his direction as runs-for-free. The only way to play two spinners would be either to bat Stuart Broad at 7, or to play Ben Stokes as third seamer – not a reassuring thought unless you are an Australian.

What pointers there are suggest that Gary Ballance will play, as will Tim Bresnan. Bresnan will add some steel to the lower order and has an appetite for work in the field that will pep up the attack when the shine is off the ball. However, there are good arguments for picking Jonny Bairstow instead of Ballance.

With Perth likely to be fast and a result pitch that favours Australia, there are plenty of arguments to take a risk and come out hard at Australia. That could mean a left field pick, trusting the top six to get runs and playing Broad at 7, supported by Bresnan, Swann, Anderson and Monty. However, barring Finn and Rankin, who certainly will not play, almost any other member of the squad could be running out onto the field when play starts. How Andy Flower and Alistair Cook decide to play this will give an idea of how determined England are to come back.

One thing though has been mentioned more by the Australians than the English. The Australian side is full of confidence and up for it right now. However, that confidence is only skin deep. It would only take a bad session for this series to swing straight back England’s way and Australia remember full well how, at Chester-le-Street, what looked like 2-1 with one to play suddenly became 3-0 with the final Test a dead rubber. In 2010/11 Australia started making the running only to lose the series 3-1 when they should have been 2-1 up after 3 Tests.

Cook On The Rocks

 

 

Ashes 2013

 

Alistair Cook’s Challenge

 

November 30^th 2013

 

 

Alistair Cook is facing arguably his biggest captaincy crisis as a tour that England undertook with great optimism, looks to be falling apart. The 1^st Test has been lost by a huge margin, with England showing little taste for facing high pace. The Australians are attempting aggressively to destabilise England with inadequate practice and the sort of in your face aggression that they hated receiving from England. What is worse, England are faced with a squad where too many batsmen are out of form and the possible replacements are so inexperienced that they would be a huge risk, while the bowling attack is becoming too one-dimensional.

The game at Alice Springs has solved no problems. Neither Finn nor Rankin have had a good game. The overwhelming opinion is that both are unselectable for a Test.

Steve Finn, who made such an impact three years ago, has lost his way, totally, in the way that Jimmy Anderson did at the same age. Jimmy Anderson though, after a couple of wilderness years, came back better than ever. Steve Finn desperately needs a year of county cricket to go back and sort himself out. However, right now I am not even sure that he would make an impact in county cricket. It may take him two years to come back as a wicket-taking bowler.

The name Boyd Rankin has inspired respect on the county circuit for years, but not fear. Sometimes it is difficult to tell if someone who is a really good county bowler has that X-factor that makes him a Test match bowler. In the case of Boyd Rankin I have always had my doubts. Better judges than me saw him as a likely vital part of the attack but, I see him as a Test third or fourth seamer at best. Against an Australian side that is feeling increasingly confident and, backed up by a hostile public, senses blood and will attack any weakness, you cannot play a bowler who you cannot depend on.

That reduces Alistair Cook’s options. He can continue with Chris Tremlett, who took 4-120 in the 1^st Test and was economical in the first innings, but more expensive in the second. Despite the four wickets, he looked as if he would struggle to be a threat on better surfaces (although it is true that the Gabba pitch looked like a road and the commentators were at a loss to explain the low scoring). He could go for Ben Stokes as a batsman who can bowl, but Stokes is unlikely to be a genuine wicket-taking bowler at this level, at least at the moment and has been expensive so far on the tour. Stokes would also be batting too high even at seven.

Then, there are the two left-field picks. The obvious one is Tim Bresnan. He got through the three day game against Queensland 2^nd XI, bowling 26 overs, having two innings with the bat, one of them a longish one. He has been bowling at full pace for a while in the nets and looks ready. He also gave Australia the holy terrors both in 2010/11 and last summer by bowling long containing spells and taking vital wickets. Tim Bresnan is the sort of cricketer who will walk through a brick wall for you and has more than a hint of Ian Botham about him, although not such a talented cricketer. There are plenty of parallels between them, in physical appearance, pace and need to show their stamina. There are also a history of similar injury problems. Tim Bresnan may never score a Test century, although he has the talent to if he ever finds himself in the right place at the right time, but he is happy to lead a fightback when one is needed.

The other side of this is that a gentle three-day game against modest opposition is not exactly the greatest preparation for a five-day Test in a cauldron of hate. Can Tim Bresnan bowl 20 overs in a day and then come back the next day and bowl ten more? How match fit and sharp is he?

Another option is to play on a perceived Australian weakness and play Monty Panesar in a five-man attack. Andy Flower does not like to do this without a genuine all-rounder and with Matt Prior low on form and confidence, dropping a batsman would be a huge risk. However, there is no question that Monty and Graeme Swann bowl well together and Australia do not play quality spin well, seeing so little of it for years now in their Domestic game.

In this scenario, Matt Prior (or, conceivably, Jonny Bairstow) would bat at 6, with Broad, Bresnan, Swann, Anderson and Monty making up the tail.

However, Andy Flower is not given to panic reactions to defeat and rarely makes more than one unenforced change to a side. It would also give a long tail, with runs needed from Stuart Broad.

In 2010/11, England were hammered at Perth and looked lucky to escape defeat at Brisbane, despite the big second innings score. That series ended with two innings victories. Can Alistair Cook engineer a turnaround as surprising as that one this time? Unlike Andrew Strauss, who was a clever strategist and very much underrated as a skilled captain, Alistair Cook is more inclined to react to events rather than setting the agenda. Can he show himself capable of leading from the front? Australia are full of confidence, but that confidence is likely to be fragile – a defeat at Adelaide could really rock them back on their heels, but how to engineer it?