One of the differences between those who write on cricket in the media and the poor blogger is that they get to see all the play, are spoiled rotten in the media centre, and are paid for the privilege. In contrast, the likes of us have to work for a living – and that’s why the dire quality of some of the output from the usuals is so deserving of contempt.
To that end, I was away all of last week, didn’t see a ball of the first three days, saw only the highlights on Friday and finally got to watch some play yesterday. I did get to listen to a fair bit, while driving around the country, but it’s not quite the same. And so following the match was somewhat awkward, lots of reading of reports and updates, and generally trying to keep abreast of what is happening. Since then I’ve gone back and reviewed the highlights to try and get a proper feel for the Test.
I can’t say I’m totally surprised that England won the match, it very much depended on whether England played in the same manner as they’d indicated in the New Zealand series for both Tests and ODIs. The scale and dominance of the victory on the other hand, that was somewhat unexpected.
Australia’s performance was dire throughout. More or less anything they could get wrong they did. As ever, the question is how much of that was their own doing, and how much was down to England’s performance. What can be said is that after a single Test conclusions shouldn’t be drawn, and yet again we see the crowing from certain quarters. We’ve been here before, in the last two Test series there was exactly the same arrogance (from the press, not the team), only for England to fall flat on their faces the following game.
First let’s take England. Cook unquestionably led the side well and captained well. Good. Very, very good. If this is the new captain Cook, then there won’t be too many complaints, he was proactive in the field, changed his bowlers well and generally looked in command throughout. And this is the point – when the facts change, so does my opinion and perspective, and I don’t have the slightest issue recognising it. It’s those who blindly insist on a particular view in defiance of what is in front of them that have the problem. It’s true too that generally there’s been an improvement in how he’s managed the side over this summer. Quite why that might be is somewhat curious, in terms of what has changed, the only thing that stands out is the replacement of the coach. I’ve long called for Cook to be in control of the side and live and die by his own actions, not fall back on the backroom staff. If he’s doing that and doing it well, that is great news.
Nevertheless, it doesn’t mean that the various meltdowns in Australia and here can be forgotten, no matter how some like to pretend they didn’t happen, preferring to stick their fingers in their ears and say they weren’t listening. What it does mean is that he can look back on this Test with a fair degree of pleasure. And if continues to captain in that vein then he will reap the plaudits and rightly so. It’s a matter of whether he does or not that is the question. He won’t ever be a great captain, but if he’s an adequate one then that is good enough, because up to now he hasn’t been. Plaudits for this one Mr Cook.
What was particularly striking about the approach was in the second innings. England were determined to get to a 400+ lead as quickly as they possibly could, and continued to attack even as wickets began to fall. The sheer jaw-dropping astonishment of seeing an England team do that can’t be overstated. It certainly seemed to take Australia by surprise.
Initially it didn’t look that way, as England got off to a somewhat sedate start and lost wickets. In a single Test, that can happen, but it’s something that has occurred a little too often for comfort. The dropping of Root by Haddin (more on him later) turned out to be fairly critical, as Root took the game to Australia in a way that’s now becoming somewhat familiar. Before the series began Root was largely written off in much of the Australian media, based on his troubles down under last time. It was a strange rationale, given that on the same basis Steve Smith could be written off for his performances to date in this country. I rather doubt it came as a great shock to the Australian team just how good he is looking, but it certainly seemed to elsewhere. Root’s success has led Ian Chappell to call for him to be pushed up to number three at the expense of Ballance. I never see the case for this. If a player is performing outstandingly well in the middle order, where is the benefit in moving him? It’s treating a symptom rather than a cause and risking weakening the batting if the player doesn’t have the same success in a higher position. It doesn’t matter where Root bats if he is going to average nearly 60, wherever he goes in, he is going to drag the side to a higher total. Leave him where he’s comfortable.
Ballance himself scored a fairly scratchy 60 in the first innings, but that will do him the power of good. An ugly knock does more for the confidence than anything else, because the time at the crease allows the player to rather literally find his feet. Of course he needs to kick on, but that innings was deeply valuable both to him and the team.
Stokes and Moeen also contributed, and the latter case is important. He certainly bowled well in the match, but having a batsman of that quality at number eight is a major strength for England. It has been argued it’s a waste, but it makes for an immensely powerful middle order, IF he can hold down his place as the spinner. Previously I’ve argued that Moeen is being unfairly compared to the best spinner England have had in the last forty years, and I maintain that he is doing well enough in his primary role to more than justify his selection. He isn’t going to run through too many sides, but he is certainly useful and his batting frees up an additional spot in the side. His bowling is improving, but like anything it isn’t a linear trend, there will be peaks and troughs.
Stokes himself is contributing too with both bat and ball. Both will improve over time, and the very selection of Moeen creates the space in the team for what might be called a luxury player like Stokes. Patience is required, but England have a genuine five man attack with this line up, and that is a major advantage, perhaps best seen in the way that despite so many fears about it, Anderson is not being bowled into the ground thus far.
Bell scored a few runs in the second innings and looked much more like himself. Yet it is indicative of the knee jerk response that his 60, a well constructed and fluid innings, was treated as though it was 150 and justification for keeping him in the side. Personally, I don’t believe there was ever a case for dropping him, and certainly not after the selectors maintained faith with Cook for two years. But as ever, a single innings proves nothing at all except that if you keep them in the side long enough they will eventually get a few. That doesn’t mean it wasn’t extremely welcome, and nor does it mean that he didn’t look much better. It does mean that trumpeting success on the basis of a single fifty is as downright idiotic as it ever was. He will want more, and hopefully this innings will have got the monkey off his back to the extent he can get more. It’s no more or less than that.
Jos Buttler failed both times with the bat, which is neither here nor there in a single match, but he did keep very well, and the only reason for mentioning it is that every all rounder who has ever played the game will talk about how difficult it seems to be to get both disciplines operating at full capacity at the same time. It seems to go this way mostly – one works very well, the other malfunctions a little.
As for the bowling, Wood looks a threat every time he bowls, and perhaps more importantly, for all the wishful thinking about getting a left armer into the side, he provides balance. Anderson, Broad, Wood and Stokes are all different kinds of bowlers. That they’re right arm doesn’t in itself matter, it’s not a samey attack. And while on this subject, it didn’t go unnoticed that it was mentioned as a problem that England have seven left handers and thus provide Lyon with a line of attack given the rough outside off stump. It’s quite true, but the same applies the other way around given that Australia have two left arm seamers. Sauce for the goose.
Turning to Australia, this one is a match for them to forget. While refusing to form definitive views after one match, I hold by the view that you never know a side past its sell by date until they actually become so – just as with England in the last Ashes. There might be cracks, but complete collapse isn’t anticipated. This game Australia were truly awful. Most batsmen are far more annoyed at getting in and getting out than they are being dismissed cheaply, which is considered an occupational hazard. And yet for the first time in Test history, all of numbers three to six were dismissed in the thirties. This is both good and bad for Australia, good because all have had time in the middle to get used to conditions, bad because they then got out and mostly to poor shot selection.
Much of the talk around how Australia move forward has centred on the future of Shane Watson. His playing around the front pad has got him into trouble throughout his career, yet in this game I have a mite of sympathy for him. The first innings decision was a rotten one, made worse by a proper understanding of how Hawkeye works. It didn’t show the ball clipping the leg stump, it suggested it was possible it might have done, and at a low probability. Yes, by all means uphold that decision from the umpire, I don’t have a problem with that; I do feel sorry for Watson because when he gets hit on the pads now, umpires are seemingly predisposed to giving him out when they likely wouldn’t give out another player. His second innings dismissal was certainly closer, but still an umpire’s call. Another player would have got away with that one probably, the first innings one certainly. He may be facing the end of his Test career, and while that may be the correct decision for the Australian team, he was thoroughly shafted in this match.
Warner and Smith both exhibited signs of where they are likely to be vulnerable in English conditions. Warner’s style of stand and deliver batting is always going to be vulnerable to the ball seaming or swinging. This isn’t new, and it isn’t in itself the end of the world, because he showed in the second innings that he can fight through the hard times. Smith has a quirky technique and that is why he finds it more difficult in English conditions, something he’s struggled with since he first broke into the side. He is more than talented enough to learn how to cope.
Haddin looks like he is reaching the end of the road. Both his keeping and his batting look frayed and have done for a little while now. Of course, he could just be out of form, something rarely granted to older players, but this series could well prove decisive for him unless he improves significantly.
As for the bowling, the surface effectively nullified the pace of Starc and Johnson. Despite some whining in the Australian press, it was a fairly typical Cardiff surface. What did surprise was that England’s attack handled those conditions so much better. Johnson had fairly miserable figures for the match, but didn’t bowl too badly. Starc looked a fine bowler, but I can’t be alone in struggling to understand why when he was clearly injured Clarke insisted on bowling him again and again. By the second innings the game was already disappearing over the hill, it seemed bizarre to watch him limping over after over and still being kept on. If he isn’t fit for Lords some questions need to be asked about why they made it worse. If indeed that is the case, then all of a sudden Australia have some problems. Siddle is an honest enough workhorse and won’t let anyone down, but he’s not in quite the same class. Cummins is highly promising, but hasn’t played a first class match in two years, and it’s asking an awful lot for him to come in and play a Test. Hazlewood on the other hand, looked very good indeed, and will be a handful on other pitches.
Nevertheless, Lords should be a little more conducive to the pace bowling than Cardiff was while not exactly a seamers paradise, and thus triumphal writing off of Australia is highly premature. It is hard to believe Australia will be so poor in the next game, but if they are, then this tour could go horribly wrong for them.
After one game England will feel it went about as well as it possibly could have done. Australia will feel it went about as badly as it did in their worst nightmares. They are more than good enough to step up their game, while England have flattered to deceive on more than one occasion. What it does though is to provide the most perfect start to the series from the perspective of the spectacle.
One other thing I noted: At the conclusion of the Test, the England players made a point of going around the ground and signing autographs and posing for photos with the supporters. I don’t remember them doing that before, so whoever has come up with it as a means of engagement deserves a pat on the back. Is it lip service? Maybe. Is it welcome anyway? Definitely.
*It’s always amused me that this term immediately makes people think of Star Trek and high speed. In times past, warping out of harbour involved rowing the anchor out ahead in a boat, and winding the capstan in to make progress when there was no wind. It was backbreaking work and an incredibly slow process. It seemed appropriate.
Being Outside Cricket 
Two things struck me about England in this match. Firstly the seam bowlers stuck pretty much to bowling a good length outside off stump. There was virtually nothing to pull or cut. I can’t attribute this simply to their good sense and realisation that loose short stuff would sit up to be hit on this pitch I detect the influence of Bayliss.
Secondly, Cook captained as well as I can ever remember. He seemed more in control than he usually does. As you imply, this seems to be due to the coach.
However, I don’t see Australia giving it away quite as easily in the rest of the series. They were decidedly undercooked (is there a pun there?). This is only one match. We shall see.
LikeLike
Bayliss has been there such a short time, I’m inclined to think Farbrace is a big part of it – doubtless in concert with Bayliss when he was appointed in terms of how he wanted it to be.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Managing to decipher !
Sent from my iPad
>
LikeLike
Maybe in Spain cook was taught field placings as set options. Option 1 and 2 for haddin etc and then fielders practised for each position. It looks like anderson and broad have been told going rogue ignoring cook and telling cook what to do is no longer an option. Maybe as the plans are from farbounce and bails there is extra pressure to follow them. And most importantly they may have been told to pitch it up all the time. I think getting dropped from the odi s may have been a wake up call. It looks like mo has been told to use all his variations unlike the darts he was told to bowl last year. All good sensible stuff really and a way of getting the best out of them.
Poor watto. That’s what I say
LikeLike
I suspect Joe Root and Paul Farbrace are dictating the field placings:
http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2015/jul/12/england-joe-root-australia-bowlers-ashes
I’m convinced its now Joe Root’s team, Cook’s a lame duck captan, a captain emeritus as it were.
LikeLiked by 1 person
without the expertise!
LikeLike
“What can be said is that after a single Test conclusions shouldn’t be drawn, and yet again we see the crowing from certain quarters. ”
Which considering they have rejected all the changes that have now been brought in when we suggested them 2 years ago makes their crowing rather hypocritical and moronic. In effect, they are congratulating themselves on being wrong. It takes a particular kind of stupid to achieve that.
I am still not convinced that Englands batting will be able to stand up to very fast bowling if the Aussies get on a pitch with some pace. As for the Aussie batting, the top order wasn’t much kop 2 years ago. It was mainly Haddin and the tail that got them up to decent totals. If Haddin has lost form they could be in really big trouble.
However, Englands propensity to shoot themselves in the foot always hangs over the potential series result. Roll on to Lords…………
LikeLiked by 2 people
A couple of points I’d slightly take issue with;
1) “Before the series began Root was largely written off in much of the Australian media, based on his troubles down under last time. It was a strange rationale, given that on the same basis Steve Smith could be written off for his performances to date in this country”.
Smith’s performance in 2013 (38.3 average) was significantly better than Root’s in 2013/14 (average 27.4). Smith’s record could be said to have been boosted by a not out century in a dead rubber – but I’d have taken one of those in Melbourne or Sydney!
2) “Haddin looks like he is reaching the end of the road. Both his keeping and his batting look frayed and have done for a little while now”.
I’ve been banging the drum on his batting decline since the UAE tour (averaging 15 in 12 Tests since the 13/14 Ashes). However I haven’t seen a decline in his keeping – I thought he kept well in the WC and on the WI tour. The Root drop was obviously massive in terms of the match but i) they were standing particularly close because the first day bounce when the pitch was damp was incredibly low and ii) edges from very full deliveries can be deceptive in terms of picking up the pace of the ball.
LikeLike
On point one, that’s true, but the problem with that is that this series is being played in England, not in Australia. And last time here Root did about as well as Smith. How Root did in Australia is of pretty limited relevance, and precisely why the “Smith is great/Root is crap” line was palpable nonsense.
On point two, English conditions show up keepers, and highlight problems in technique or anything else.
LikeLike
Totally agree with your comments on the Watson dismissals: he was sawn off. I think the gloating amongst the comentariati and fans is very unbecoming.
LikeLike
Kick them when they fall down…..
LikeLike
Why I don’t like England victories as much as I used to, part 94:
“Johnson is no better than Ravi Jadeja.”
“Joe Root* is the world’s best batsman.”
* not AB de Villiers
Courtesy of kpateldf24.
LikeLike
Bloody hell Guardian, steady on…
http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2015/jul/12/ashes-sky-england-australia-ecb-tv
(do you like the end of that url, Dmitri?)
LikeLiked by 3 people
Note the usual cowardly “but I don’t think FTA coverage is the answer” in the middle…
Drives me nuts how someone can assemble all the data and then avoid the obvious conclusion.
We’re living off the fat of 2005 in terms of youth engagement. It’s downhill from here.
LikeLike
This is anecdote not “data”, but I work with a couple of blokes, one in his late 20s and one early-mid 20s. The former got into cricket as a direct result of 2005, has Sky and follows the county game closely as well as Test cricket. The latter has not the slightest interest in cricket and contributes to our conversations only out of politeness. Cricket simply is not and has never been part of the fabric of his life, yet he is interested in sport. There are only five years between them in age.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Blimey, some proper reporting with evidence and stuff on the Guardian cricket pages:
http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2015/jul/12/ashes-sky-england-australia-ecb-tv
About a decade too late mind – but you can’t have everything.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree completely with the sentiment, of ‘we have been here before’. The thing is, we have been here before, before, before and before. I can remember way back when Sajid Mahmood (remember him), had just taken 3 wickets in an innings bowling fast and full. The MSM all wrote, after this one match about how great England were and how in Saj they had found. Strike bowler for years to come. Now I really like Saj, but look how that ended up for him and England in Aus in 2006/7.
Anyway. I think it is very clear that this performance owes nothing to Cook. The fact he captained fairly well is not down to him. Moreover I believe it is the influence (guidance?) of Farbrace and Bayliss. I think that he (Cook) may also be receiving better advice from players like Root etc. than he did Prior (towards the end et al), when on the field of play.
Enjoyed the win, happier when Cook has gone.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Key thing for me is that Cook needs to sew together decent captaincy with more than 36 runs a game…
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree, but just thinking out loud, has he been told, ‘captain properly, don’t worry about runs’?
LikeLike
Well hang on, it’s been one quiet Test with the bat. That happens.
LikeLike
Personally I believe that there’s no way we are going to be seeing Cook coming down the wicket to Lyon again in this series.
LikeLike
@TLG I’m not calling for him to be dropped.
Just observing (in the same vein as you) it’s one Test where the bowlers bowled the right length and good field placings were used. It happens…
LikeLike
“Casual adrenaline junkies” is a new one…
http://www.thefulltoss.com/england-cricket-blog/bloomin-marvellous/#comment-18426
There isn’t time in the day to explain the many ways in which I hate this post.
LikeLike
That post may possibly be a wind-up. It’s certainly intended to provoke. Rise above.
LikeLike
I like the name of the poster. Ralph was a dithering idiot Farmer on the Fast Show. He sort of reminds me of Cookie. A new nickname for him perhaps? Al joking aside that was an unexpected but good win for England.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I was more thinking of Ralph Wiggum from the Simpsons …
LikeLike
Because nothing gets the adrenaline going like blogging! Bungee jumpers don’t know what they are missing.
I’m a great fan of the Full Toss as you know, and I think the authors may feel they are at a crossroads at this point. Indeed, so do I. There’s a tiny part that thinks “my job is done” here, but most of me believes not. I can’t divorce the team from the administrators, because to do so denies reality and that’s what administrators want. They don’t want scrutiny. They want blind obedience and your money. I’m watching a film on Enron at the moment, and there’s what happens when the floor is happy and the people are earning, but not paying attention to the action of the top boys. Look, the ECB aren’t Enron, but it’s too easy to blithely say that a good win obviates the need to scrutinise those above. There are some who have had the “I support the team and don’t care about the authorities” line for a while. Fine. I don’t agree. I strongly don’t agree.
I’d like to thank the ECB for one thing. I watched yesterday in a state of relaxation. I wanted us to win, and knew we would. No pacing up and down. No panic. No concern. Chilled out. Thanks ECB….
LikeLiked by 1 person
Your job is not done here, it’s only just begun.
You seem to have a mission to hold the ECB to account, which is noble. But there’s the small matter of the ICC to address too, and I hope this blog will grow to concern itself with matters beyond England.
Collecting critical thinkers together is a valuable service.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hello Fred, I see *that man* has got your goat yet again this evening… (and mine)
The obtuseness of certain posters regarding criticism of *that man* really is staggering.
LikeLike
Arron
I really shouldn’t bite, but I just can’t help it. It gets my goat because while the tabloids write obviously stupid stuff, Selvey sounds so reasonable, until you pause for a minute and perceive the agenda underneath. Having a pop at CA? You’ve got to be joking!
I’m starting to get angry and have to decide if I should maybe just let it drop. All I wanted to do was watch cricket…
LikeLike
“Fingers in their ears” at 0-1, yet constant defence of Flower, Gooch, Cook, Saker etc etc at 0-1, 0-2, 0-3, 0-4 and 0-5, followed by bigging up the obvious disasters that were Downton and Moores. Remarkable, it really is.
And do you know what else I saw yesterday – an article from November 2013 suggesting that Johnson might be rested at Adelaide because the pitch wouldn’t suit him…
I try and stick to the junior threads now. Don’t want to upset the (cough) “regulars”.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes I remember those articles. It will all be different in Adelaide because the pitch will suit England and won’t suit Johnson. I think Johnson had his best test of the series at Adelaide. At least, that’s where he started to really own certain batsmen, like Trott and Cook. His results were modest at Cardiff, but only a fool would dismiss him for the series based on that. Looking forward to seeing what he does at Lords.
How can you write “fingers in their ears nah nah nah” when you are an English cricket journalist (sic) writing for the Guardian? It’s come to this?
LikeLiked by 1 person
That line was amongst the most amazing yet and he’s set the bar high for nonsense. Amazed. This man covered England cricket in the last 20 months.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think if we are comparing Fast show characters to Cook my take would be he is like ‘competitive dad.’
LikeLike
Yes! Let’s hope little Elsie never tries to play cricket.
LikeLike
It’s the casual adrenaline that makes us so bilious …. fuck ’em …. Greece voted NO, government does what it likes anyway …. thanks for the note LCL, I can send a word document if it helps :0)
LikeLike
Cricket Australia statement about Starc:
“Mitchell experienced some pain in the back of his right ankle during the Test match which is common with fast-bowlers, he was in discomfort while bowling but since then has improved significantly.
“We will monitor him over the next few days but the plan is for him to take part in some light training and we are hopeful he will be available for selection for the second Test beginning on Thursday.”
LikeLike
I’ve said this enough about England players, so I think I can be fair here.
I hope they are really careful in their decision, it’s stupid to risk a career rushing back to a game scheduled “back to back.”
LikeLike
So in light of this test win,and the over the top coverage who still thinks Cook is going to resign after this test series?
Off course it still could all go pear shaped and he is sacked. But if it goes well and the cheering and triumphilism continues will Cook walk away?
Can’t see it myself.
LikeLike
I think he might walk away. It would be a good time for him if we won as he will say he avenged the five nil and also he gets out of captaining in the UAE and SA which he might think will not go so well.
LikeLike
That’s if the UAE tour goes ahead – I’ve a growing suspicion it’s going to be called off.
To be replaced by….. an ODI series against….. well, three (or two) guesses who…..
LikeLike
This match shows up the risks of relying on a 4man attack. Siddle would have been more of a handful than Watson and would have scored as many runs. Lords awaits.
LikeLike
I think they underused Watson – in the 1st innings he was bowling economically. He only got 8 overs. If they’d wheeled him away at one end and rotated Starc/Johnson at the other more (both were threatening but a bit wayward) I think they would have built more pressure.
Of course, just as in various discussions about England bowlers, if the captain doesn’t trust the bowler you may as well pick someone else…
LikeLike
And another thing – can we stop pretending that bringing on the spinner for an over or two before lunch is some kind of nefarious masterstroke? Yes, it worked wonderfully, Ali got Warner and Aus ended up in disarray. But it is very much by the number captaincy – hardly worthy of this halo of glowing praise.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Exactly. Throwing the spinner the ball before lunch is standard practice. There’s nothing ‘funky’ about that. It’s about as funky as Peter Skellern.
LikeLike
Warner’s dismissal was virtually identical to how JP Duminy got him out in the second innings in Port Elizabeth in March 2014.
I don’t recall anyone presenting that as an act of tactical genius on his captain’s part or arguing that it meant Duminy was a better bowler than Graeme Swann.
LikeLike
Indeed. Ive never known a more insecure captain. How much propping up does he need?
LikeLike
Subtext alert. Bayliss on Cook:
“My message to Alastair Cook is to go out and play his own way,” he added. “Yes, we were talking as a group about being mentally aggressive, not necessarily trying to whack sixes and fours. But if you are mentally aggressive those boundary balls – when they do come along your feet are moving and you put them away.”
It’s like he’s talking to a baby, each step has to be confirmed. When I said be aggressive Alastair I meant……
LikeLiked by 2 people
“Dmitri Old @DmitriOld
Settling down for a sandwich and Martin Samuel’s latest piece.”
Too late for a warning, but bloody hell…
Never mind that you topped the averages against NZ by playing your natural game while others were suitably aggressive. Now it’s ok for *you* to get out for 20 and 12 by playing aggressively.
There are literally no goalposts that cannot be moved for our Lord and Saviour.
LikeLiked by 1 person