Ashes Panel

Ashes Panel #007 – The Spectre of a Skyfall, No Quantum of Solace

LordCanisLupus14 Comments

australia-celebrate-the-ashes-whitewash_10piscrajeyf61qj64a1ovgr5r (2)

You knew I’d do that with the title, didn’t you?

Before we start, a little cross-promotion. On the Extra Bits, I’ve added another ten pics from the Lord’s Test. Click here.

The seventh edition of the Ashes Panel has taken time to reflect on the result and consider some of the events of the week. We have an esteemed panel, and a sad absentee. We have Hillel, a major tweeter under the EoinJPMorgan label, Man In A Barrel (MIAB) who has been on this blog for a long old while, our Hammer overseas MD Payne, and Philip Chapman (PGP). Sadly, the other invitee, our very own Bogfather has been unable to participate this time around, so I’ve decided I’ll step into his shoes, if not with poetry, but with passion instead….

So, off we go…..

1. We’ve had a few days to digest the result from Lord’s. What was your initial reaction and has it changed?
PGP – Genuine surprise at how poorly we batted. I was at Lords for about 2 hours on Thursday and the pitch was so flat I fancied a bat against our attack. The thing about our team is that it is mentally weak. So they don’t have the mental strength to say “it doesn’t matter what the opposition scored, I am going to bat for as long as I can and go big”. The Aussies bowled significantly better but it was the wickets that Marsh got that hurt us the most.
Hillel – I am rather ambivalent on the Lord’s debacle, as horrified as I was at the time (and remain so) to see the lack of fight that we put up in the second innings; there are correct ways to lose. Lord’s, in the long run, will not be as terrible as many pundits are suggesting. It was not, as we have seen before with England, the revelation of some horrific endemic problem that faces us, but rather an accumulation of far too many relatively minor mistakes which added up to cost us dearly. The pitch clearly favoured swing and pace over seam which massively advantaged Australia; it seems strange that England are the only country which won’t doctor all of its pitches to suit their bowling attack. Even if one disagrees with the point that the pitch favoured Australia over England, it was clear that whichever team won the toss had as good as won the Test. Additionally, England’s batting lineup are on the whole horrifically out of form and one cannot expect Cook and Root to be able to save us every innings. We have to learn to rest Wood as well. Overall however, I don’t feel that disappointed and think overreactions, whilst plentiful, remain futile.
MDP – I live in Australia so went to bed at tea on the 4th day and my emotion was one of ‘same old England’ again. Waking to find we had capitulated in such fashion was a bit of a shock, though. I would at least have expected them to take the game into the final day. Since then fear has crept in that we are looking at another heavy series defeat.
MIAB – Frankly I was overjoyed at the win.  I find it difficult to support England anymore and so any team that beats us so resoundingly feels like another small crack in the self-satisfied carapaces of Clarke, Strauss, Cook etc.  Eventually they will be gone.
DO – I confess, I was wavering. I thought Australia were sending out some real distress signals with their machinations over Haddin and Watson. This was a time to go in for the kill, but Day 1 put paid to any of that over-used cliche “momentum” to take effect. Smith’s 215, Rogers 173. Once that happened it was almost inevitable, as this team of our’s doesn’t seem to react well to scoreboard pressure – they aren’t alone in that. So once we slumped to 30-odd for 4 while I was there I thought anyone with a Day 5 ticket was in trouble.
My initial reaction was one of feeling stupid that I doubted an Australian team’s mental strength, relief I hadn’t indulged in the hyperbole that followed the win in Cardiff, and a bit of affirmation in the trend we have of following up a win with a defeat. Since then I’ve just watched an England team talking a good game for Edgbaston, and wondering if these are the deluded rantings of condemned men, or real belief. I’m really not sure.
——————————————————————————————-
2. I’ve seen a lot of pundits saying “it’s still 1-1” and “stop being fickle”. I’m certainly not a fan of the last one. But it doesn’t feel all square, does it?
PGP – See the above after we won the first game the emotions were running high, we took the foot off the gas, as we have done loads recently. So a feeling of frustration as much as anything.
Hillel – It certainly does not feel square, and saying that the score is level is a gross oversimplification. All professional sportsmen (or women) will easily be able to tell you that sport depends a great deal on confidence and momentum, which is undoubtedly with Australia at the amount. Nonetheless, as guilty as the eternal optimists are the eternal pessimists. It is foolish to proclaim this series done and dusted whilst there is still much to play for and, as Australia showed at Lord’s, momentum can swing (pardon the pun) round in an instant: It will all depend very much on how England carry themselves, and whether they are able to dust themselves off and move on or wallow in self-pity. I’m pleased to say it seems likely that this new England side under Bayliss are more than capable of shrugging off a large defeat, returning to play positive cricket, and win the series (or at least give the Ozzies a run for their money).
MDP – No it doesn’t. My mind keeps returning to the 1997 series, when England won the first Test convincingly and it all went downhill from there. Can’t see anything coming from the camp to suggest it won’t happen again.
MIAB – It certainly does not feel like 1-1.  Look at the trajectories of the 2 teams – Australia are improving and England got wiped out.  Look at the opening partnership: Australia have made 52 and 19, 78 and 114.  These are impressive figures, especially when you consider that Rogers was deemed too old by certain pundits and that Warner was supposed to be technically fallible.  For all his loathsome personality, he is actually a smart cricketer.  His footwork is quick and his batswing is straight i.e. he has a good technique, certainly much more technically correct than Cook.  He is playing more cautiously than he normally does but he is getting used to the pace and bounce and movement of the ball in English conditions.  He is going to make a big score at some point.  The way that he and Rogers took on the English attack in the 3rdinnings at Lords was superb.  Their certainty of shot, the lack of fuss demoralised the opposition:  you could see confidence draining out of them.  Smith is in good form and he is very impressive technically.  For all his fidgeting, at the point the ball is bowled his head is still.  His backlift is impressively vertical.  He moves calmly into position without any fuss at all and then hits the ball.  He is as orthodox as say Sobers or Cowdrey once the ball is bowled.  Now that he has decided to milk Ali, as he did so successfully in the World Cup, rather than attempt to smash him out of the attack, there is no reason not to expect him to keep scoring big hundreds.  Clarke is getting into something approaching good form.  Nevill and Marsh seem a cut above Watson and Haddin – although it was unfortunate that Watson received 2 such shocking lbw decisions.  The bowling is also getting better and Johnson found his mojo after his 77 in Cardiff.
Looking at England, all you can say is that Stokes is batting well and Broad has remembered how to bowl.  The Aussies seem able to dry Cook up.  Root is about to get the working over that will show whether he really is world-class, as all the pundits have been telling us for the last 2 years.  Wood is unfit.  Ali cannot keep control – there is a rank long hop or full toss every other over – and if the Aussies just keep milking him for 5 singles per over, Cook cannot keep bowling him unless he takes wickets.  There really are not many positives.  Can Cook motivate his team after that debacle?  That will be the acid test of his captaincy.
DO – Anyone who has had the “pleasure” of being in an Aussie cricket stadium when we are getting humped will be used to the chant “Look at the Scoreboard”. Edgbaston is going to be an absolutely fascinating test match, because we need to come out with intent. Someone needs to make a statement of resistance, and play out of their socks. Joe Root did it at Cardiff, but it needs to be more than him. But thinking this is more like 1997 is not being fickle, it’s being realistic. Australia were arguably caught a bit cold at Cardiff, and they showed true colours at Lord’s. England batting first might be a good start. This doesn’t feel like Perth 2011 to me.
——————————————————————————————
3. Gary Ballance paid the price for the Lord’s debacle. Fair or not?
PGP – Fair, although I have no idea why his technical issues haven’t been sorted at some point in the last 2 months. Reflects poorly on the eng coaches.
Hillel – The axing of Gary Ballance is a pathetic yield to public pressure of which England should be ashamed. To set the record straight, the man has not been found out; he is out of form. There are those who will point to his technique and the fact that he doesn’t move his legs, and yet forget that Sehwag didn’t use to move his legs much either. Marlon Samuels barely moves his. It is not technique that matters, but the ability to churn out runs and Ballance has already proven he can do so at international level. The other side to the proffered argument is that Ballance is only being dropped in order to rediscover his form, as of when he can return to the team – the flaw in this argument is obvious, for then why is Bell given the opportunity to rediscover his form in the team, and not be dropped? It is not fair at all to drop Gary Ballance, especially when he is not even being directly replaced by a fellow number 3.
MDP – I think it was inevitable – he has just looked so vulnerable against pace bowling. His technical deficiencies have been exploited by Johnson and Starc and I feel keeping him in the squad any longer could have done long-term damage to his confidence. There certainly are others who were fortunate to escape the chop, mind you.
MIAB – Someone had to pay the price.  I feel sorry for Ballance as he has actually scored more runs this series than Bell and Lyth but the latter deserves a few more matches and dropping Bell would effectively end his career, I would imagine.  So many members of the team have not contributed significantly that something had to change.  Bairstow for Buttler was one possibility but that seems to have been ignored.  It might have been more sensible.
DO – I’d never bought the Ballance ticket, as you know. It’s not personal, because mentally I think he’s the real deal, but I got to see that batting stance and trigger movement in the flesh from side on at Lord’s, and it’s alarming. I’m not a technician, and therefore people may think I’m talking nonsense, but it was always on my mind that when the skill level of the bowlers went up, he’d struggle. That said, the sharks of the media were very keen to circle him, and it seemed rather prescient that they were suggesting he was in the most danger compared to Ian Bell who has been in an even more shocking rut. I also thought we were backing young, fresh talent over older lags if the choice prevailed. So I understand it, but can’t help thinking that this is a little panic measure.
——————————————————————————————
4. Ian Bell’s promotion to number 3 is intriguing. Any logic you can see behind it?
PGP – Bairstow is the form player and has earned his place. He isn’t a number 3. Root won’t do it. Stokes isn’t the right guy. Who is left? Dropping 2 of the top 4 is not a sensible play so bell it is.
Hillel -Once again, England’s fantastic logic is at work: Bell is not scoring any runs at 4, so perhaps moving him to 3 (laughably actually greater exposing him to the new ball) will cause him once again to plunder hundreds for the country. This also points to a wider problem: England have dropped a number 3, and decided to replace him with a number 5, only then to actually worry about who is going to fill the number 3 role; the poor tactical planning in this is so ludicrous it’s actually laughable. It matters not how well Jonny Bairstow is batting if he’s not replacing anyone. Thus it feels less like Ian Bell is intended to be a number 3, and more that he a victim of a team reshuffling to accommodate a number 5 batsman. Furthermore, if we assume if we lose Lyth and Bell early again (for there is no reason to assume we won’t), we are falling into the same trap of asking Joe Root to save the innings, simply at 30-2 instead of 30-3. How helpful.
MDP – Not much, borne out of necessity rather than anything else to accommodate Bairstow. Being first drop when on a bad run of form is a huge gamble. I feel reluctant removing Root from 5 too.
MIAB – I Imagine that the “logic” would be that he wanted to bat at 3 in the Ashes down under when Trott went home but the gig went to Root instead, so let’s bat him at 3 now when he is in terrible form and apparently lacking confidence.  Does he thrive on responsibility?  I don’t really think so.  He seems to prefer it when he is under the radar, out of the spotlight and things are not expected of him.  However, who else can bat 3?  Can you realistically put Ali there the way he is playing at the moment?  Root seems happy at 5 and is one of the few batters to have scored any runs.  Maybe Stokes, but that would be more of a gamble than Strauss and co could take.
DO – I saw Ian Bell make his test best 235 at number three in 2011. I was there, loved every minute of his partnership and thought he made a point. When the chance came to give it to him after Trott’s departure in 2013 from the Ashes tour, they did not change and put Root in to his place. Now this is a decision based on necessity and desperation. They couldn’t drop both Ballance and Bell, because people might question our mighty selection committee’s infinite wisdom, so we come up with this dog’s breakfast. They are flying by the seat of their pants.
——————————————————————————————
5. You are the lucky panel that get the KP question? You are the selector. Yes or no AS OF NOW (i.e. he’s not played first class cricket for a few weeks).
PGP – Yes I pick him. He is one of the top 4 batters we have.
Hillel – We know KP has the class. We know he is still fit enough to play long innings. We know the world won’t explode (nor the dressing room implode) if he returns the team. I may not love the man dearly, but for goodness’ sake, let’s grow up and just select him on merit.
MDP – My position on this is straightforward, is he in the top 6 batsman in the country? If so, he should be picked. I think it’s open for debate whether he is but my feeling is his experience would be invaluable for the challenges ahead. So I’d say yes.
MIAB – Yes.  He has been playing cricket recently after all and I am not entirely convinced that playing for Surrey would be of any great value in preparing to face the Mitches.  I suspect he would do what Nasser used to do after his innumerable broken fingers on tour – set up net conditions and practise as if it were a real match.
DO – When the ECB did him over (and I’m utterly convinced, as I’ve been for a few months now, that this is Giles Clarke’s work) and basically packed him off to T20 humdrum, they cut off an option. An option they should have left open. It isn’t the ECB’s team, it’s our team. The fact that a talent who COULD make a difference, who had just mashed a 355 not out (and stuff those who diminish it), and yes, who would go out there with something to prove, a chip on his shoulder, a passion to make people sit up and notice, would have been an option. But no. We go all prissy about a load of old twaddle, in the old English way. I say no, he shouldn’t be in the team under current circumstances because he’s not played first class cricket for perfectly understandable reasons (a point those who are totally against him ignore), but if he’d stayed here, given a hope to play, and piled on the runs, why wouldn’t you want that option?
We know the answer to that last question. Idiots.
——————————————————————————————-
As is his wont, PGP has had a lovely supplemental comment which I think I should share with you…
I really need have a rant about James Whittaker.
Pre Duncan Fletcher selection was typically chaotic. When Fletcher was in charge we had a vision. Steady 3 dimensional bowler, swing bowler, 90mph bowler and a bouncey bowler. Then a mixture of stroke players and hard working players.
With Moores v1 we had a transaction of players to the successful group which flower and Strauss made blossom (sorry). What both these coaches did was identify the type of players and back them. In most cases it worked.
At the end of the Flower reign when Whittaker took over we have seen no coherent selection strategy. No identification of new players other than just picking the current form player. The only exception is Root.
Where is the Strauss, Trescothick or Vaughan? Players picked for the mental strength rather than the run scoring.
I also don’t see how have two full time coaches is a successful approach for selectors.
We have seen multiple players ruined, the treatment of Hales is borderline masochistic. The over bowling of Anderson and Broad is insane. Any reader can have their examples.
Something has to give. Whittaker should have stood up for KP and Carberry in selection rather than just doing as told.  Pathetic. A man with morals would have resigned.
And that was me being gentle.
—————————————————————————————
As usual, my thanks to the contributors, who put in a ton of time and effort and they are great for doing so.
Ashes Panel #008 will probably be sent out in the next day or so and will focus a little more on Edgbaston.
Thanks all. Have a good weekend.

Ashes Panel #006 – Lord’s A Mercy (Mitchell Collapse Mix)

LordCanisLupus80 Comments

australia-celebrate-the-ashes-whitewash_10piscrajeyf61qj64a1ovgr5r (2)

A little plug – put up 10 more pictures on The Extra Bits from Lord’s on Friday. Have a look, hope you enjoy them. Part 1 is here.

It’s a few days after the disaster at Lord’s and there have been recriminations-a-plenty. So, striking while the iron is hot, and loading up my laptop without opening the piece of crap that is ITunes (which crashed my laptop TWICE last night), here are the latest Ashes Panel responses.

The drill was, as I have ten days between games, to have an immediate reaction, a considered reaction in #007 and a look-forward to Edgbaston for #008. Five questions, responded to at varying lengths by…. Andy In Brum (Andy), My fellow Friday at Lord’s man Keyser Chris (Chris), my fellow Southeastern Sufferer, The Great Bucko (Sean), Cricket Jon (Jon), and our resident Yorkie (Metatone)….

These were sent out on Sunday night and I had all responses by middle of yesterday. Gold stars, and huge thanks, to all.

1. That was an annihilation. Bad day at the office or something more deep-seated?
Andy – If I said both, would that make sense, yes it was a bad day, we’ve proven we’re better than that at Lord v NZ & Cardiff last week. Unfortunately, the flaws that have been bailed out by the middle order & an inspired bowling performance creating a batting collapse.

Our top order is flaky & our bowlers lack penetration on flat decks. Losing Rashid was a massive blow. Even if he would have got spanked, he’d have got wickets.
Jon – I think it is a matter of sustainability. In conditions that suit ( and the evidence is overwhelming that the Lords pitch doesn’t suit our seam attack) and where we have a chance to apply some scoreboard pressure, our guys can keep up from time to time with the best of them. But even in circumstances where, for instance, Darren Bravo is on his way to a match winning knock such as he was against England just three months ago we “go for a walk” in terms of competitive intensity. The heads drop.
It isn’t surprising. One banner you can expect to get rolled out over the next few weeks is that they are halfway through a long campaign in the Test arena and it is affecting the players. Well no shit Sherlock, whose Board agreed to this schedule? I hope the MSM are reading this because if they roll the fatigue banner they will be pooing on their own doorstep ( by virtue of them being the extended media arm of the ECB). In short, it’s a bad day at the office that has a recurring theme. [ I shall now remove the splinters from my backside].

Meta – I feared a humping when I saw the weather forecast. We don’t have the bowling attack to prosper on Chief Executive pitches. We’ve been reliant on Joe Root to get big scores, he was bound to have an off day sooner or later. Aussie bowlers were bound to bowl a bit better than in Cardiff. We’re not good against real pace. Certainly not “a bad day at the office” – this defeat sits in line with the failures against a touring SA and of course the drubbing we had Down Under. Very little has actually changed since then. Surprise, surprise! Sacking KP didn’t make much difference – a cynic might wonder if actually he wasn’t the problem.

Chris – In isolation, an aberration. But it’s not in isolation, given England’s recent performances. Anyone who follows me & Dmitri on Twitter knows we were at Lord’s separately on Friday. Separately we straightaway saw the Aussie bowling in the flesh was a step above in that last Friday session compared to us, even accounting for the extra rest Rogers & Smith gave them. It was sensational. And on an allegedly duff pitch. Losing by 400+ at home, at Lord’s, with the sun mostly out? Oh my. England have a bad recent habit of collapses, and it’s under Cooks watch even when he gets (blood-soaked apparently) runs. There has to be some ministerial responsibility on that front.
Sean – It was a complete annihilation and probably one of the most embarrassing performances that England have put in for a long time; however it shows why most people on the blog didn’t embrace the musings of the national media, who had made Alastair Cook and Andrew Strauss the saviours of all cricket. We are ranked number 6 in the world and that accurately reflects where we are in international cricket. We haven’t had a front line spinner since Swann retired and a reliable opener since Strauss himself retired as well as a middle order that is consistently inconsistent. The fact that the national media decided to throw eulogies around as if it was going out of fashion and had written off the Aussies, shows how far up the ECB’s backside they all are. I predicted at the beginning that the series would be a tight one and i still think it will be, but we need to sort the top 4 out as Root can’t always be there to dig us out of 40/3 hole.
————————————————————————————————————-
2. Focus is on the batting, that undoubtedly did not do well – we’ll come to that. But that’s two deeply unimpressive test matches from James Anderson. Reason to be worried?
Andy – Yes, he doesn’t appear to get the ball to move anymore, either normal or reverse swing. That’s very worrying.
Jon – It is understandable that as he gets older Anderson will become less effective on these types of pitches. So yes we have reason to be worried. For this is not a time for change in Planet ECB. This is all about maximising inflow of funds for the Paymasters so my delight at a 180 plays 210 plays 210 seeking 180 shootout, the best type of a Test you could ever see, is something of a sporting fantasy and flies in the face of the modus oppo of these dreadful people who run our game. (Mind you I thought he bowled well in the 2nd inns at Cardiff).
Meta –  Post 2011 (where he was excellent) Anderson has been neutered when the pitch doesn’t swing. I’ve gone all the way to saying England should have looked at the pitch at Lords and the weather forecast and not picked him. That’s probably a bit of 20/20 hindsight because you couldn’t know it would never swing across the 5 days. Yet at the very least he shouldn’t be using the new ball if there’s no swing… Worried? Yes I am, because if we get 2 more flat pitches, well hard to see how that’s not the series lost…
Chris – Lyth needs more time. We all know that, rightly or wrongly. Bairstow is in sensational county form, and has to play especially given the way he’s been messed around on previous tours. Every stat backs that up. It’ll be for Ballance, because you can’t drop 3 & 4 at the same time, plus Root has to stay at 5. Apropos of nowt, Cook opening but not facing the first ball & leaving it to Lyth is just wrong, hiding behind the captaincy pressure thing to avoid it – just wrong. Cook primarily is an opener. Open.
Sean –  It’s a concern and has been for a while. Anderson now seems to only be able to perform on those pitches that suit his bowling and provide him with some swing and seam movement. Granted the two pitches we just played on offered nothing for the quicks (unless you happen to be tearing it down at 90+ MPH) but it was a horribly toothless display from our attack (Broad excepted) and I wouldn’t be surprised to see Finn given a go at Edgbaston, though as a Middlesex fan who has watched a lot of him this season, I’m not sure it’s the right call. I think we have to understand that we have bowled Jimmy into the ground over the past few years and it looks like he has lost his nip (or that it has been blunted from years of bowling on flat pitches) and that Father Time may be catching up with him. He may come back, if Edgbaston and/or Trent Bridge offer some sideways movement replicating what happened against India last year, but unfortunately i think we are seeing the gradual winding down of a top drawer test bowler.
—————————————————————————————————————-
3. I confess, I saw none of the 337 for 1 first day. What went wrong?
Andy – Shit dead pitch, good batting, bowling not that penetrative, but it wasn’t bad.
Jon – Nothing much. Australia just applied themselves.
Meta – I didn’t see the whole day. From what I saw we had a bit of bad luck in the morning session, and shelled a couple of chances. And good players on a reasonable batting pitch took advantage. And yet… Jimmy didn’t threaten and Wood looked a bit tired. And Ali was bowling with an injury. Stokes didn’t get it together. Basically we didn’t have enough threat on this kind of pitch. It’s the usual story – real pace or mystery spin takes wickets when the going is tough – and we have neither. As I say above, this is an issue going back to 2012 at least.
Chris – Primarily, 337-1 happened (from what I saw on telly whilst, erm, working) because Rogers & Smith batted really really well. They earnt it. Ignore the bad pitch guff – those runs still had to be scored. Anderson going wicket less is a real worry this early in a series. 4 Tests ago I would have Broad dropped for his terrible scared batting; he bowled terrifically this Test. Anderson needs a question or two raised about him so he ups his game. It’s been a while since that was necessary, but needs must. We may need to think about Mark Wood alternatives later this series as well (not necessarily for the alleged fitness issue – more him slowly being found out? Unless he digs out an imaginary alpaca!)
Sean – I worked from home that day and watched some of it on the TV. The main thing that went wrong was we lost the toss on a flat, flat wicket. Australia batted very well and i thought Rodgers and Smith batted very intelligently (and Davie Warner showed us again why his score outweighs his IQ); however It wasn’t our performance on day 1 that lost us this test, it was the batting on the evening of day 2.
————————————————————————————————————-
4. What changes would you make to the batting line-up, if any?
Andy – I’m a massive bell fan, but he’s so far out of form, he’s down with Downton looking up at those fishes with lights. So Bairstow for him & Root to 4.
Jon -Remove GB, his runs against poor attacks such as SL, India and WI count for little once you face NZ and Australia. I wouldn’t make any other changes. These are the guys the Paymasters want in the team so let’s lie on the pillows we spent two years plumping. However to not remove GB would be stubborn and I think his replacement should be Compton ( although it won’t be).
Meta – It is still 1-1 and we actually lost this match bowling, long before the batting f!cked up. Hence, I’d give Lyth another chance – also I’m having trouble saying that Carberry or Compton would do better – yet they are the prime candidates in CC at the moment. I’d send Ballance back to CC and pick either Taylor at 3, or promote Bell to 3 and pick KP. Ballance has clearly been worked out and is all over the place. It’s kind of odd as a Yorkshire fan to not pick Bairstow, but he’s not cut out to come in at 3 or 4 – and he’s not clearly better as a package than Root, Buttler or Stokes.
Chris –  I think move Bell to 3 & play Bairstow at 4. It keeps the changes relatively minimal. Hales should be looked at as well, but maybe not for a Test or two. Firefighting is the order of the day right now. Post-Ashes then we look at the longer term, even considering the third straight potential “difficult winter”… It really is all too predictable this situation. Honestly Dmitri, bet you regret not “piping down” now!
Sean – It’s a difficult one, because a) i don’t think chopping and changing the batting works and b) there is no one (Bairstow excepted) who looks like they could fill one of the problem child spots. I think they will make one change and that will be Bairstow for Ballance (who if he tried to bat any deeper in his crease, would be standing at first slip) with Bell at 3, Root at 4 and Bairstow at 5 – now whether i agree with that decision is a mute point, i just can’t see the management dropping Bell. On a side note, I still believe that we have to give Lyth the whole series before we decide whether he is good enough (I think Bob Willis giving him a 0/10 and calling him out of his depth, was an extraordinary statement for a batsman who has played 4 tests and scored one hundred). I also couldn’t name another opener in the county game at the moment that isn’t out of form or could do a better job again the Mitchells.
——————————————————————————————————–
5. 103 all out on a featherbed. Can you think of a worse England Ashes batting performance. Go let it out……. pick one. (Not allowed to pick Adelaide 2006).
Andy – Sydney 2013
Jon – There was one in the Boxing Day 1990 Test at MCG where we were 100ish for 1 on top of a lead of 50 and from nowhere 9 wickets fell for 50 runs meaning they within the space of a session only had to chase 200 in a day (which they did). A bit like Melbourne 2013 but without the team meeting.
Meta – Worse batting performance? Hard to choose in my lifetime – Headingley 1989 probably hurt me the most, because it feels in retrospect like a precursor to so many more. Melbourne 1990 being the obvious next one. But in the end, surely the one I have to tag, because it so represents how this team is still Cooky’s is Brisbane 2013…
Chris – Damn you. You knew I would go for the 2006 “Scottish play”… Score-wise, these don’t really compare, but Melbourne & Sydney in 2013/14 and Headingley 2009 spring to the top of my head. Most of those were rescued by an individual or twos scores (“him” twice in Melbourne, Swann & Broads humpty at Headingley ’09); but mostly abject. There have surely been worse – I just can’t bring myself to statsguru those dark places in my soul!
Sean – I’ve been watching English cricket for the past 20 years and unfortunately have seen more English collapses than i’ve eaten hot meals; however the one that sticks with me is the 51 all out at Sabina Park in 2009 in part 1 of the glorious Peter Moore’s reigns. This again was no minefield off a pitch and the West Indies attack was hardly a mirror of the one from 15 years previous led by Walsh and Ambrose (I remember the 46 all out debacle as well), yet we succumbed in such a weak and gutless fashion, so much so that my partner at the time decided to go for a long walk to get away from all of the expletives that I was hurling at the TV (I was in a mood for about a week after that performance). Salt was then rubbed in the wound by the fact that we couldn’t beat a mediocre West Indies side in the remaining games of the series and went down to a 1-0 series defeat, which i still believe should have cost Peter Moores his job first time around. Mind you, England’s collapse against the short ball last Summer in the second innings at Lords against india was pretty rage inducing too. (er…..Ashes, Sean…. still this was too good to leave out.)
As always, some terrific responses, and some decent insight from these outside cricket muppets! Keep an eye out for #007 (no James Bond question) in the next few days!

Ashes Panel #005 – My Lords…..Poetry and Positions, Regrets and Decisions

LordCanisLupus8 Comments

australia-celebrate-the-ashes-whitewash_10piscrajeyf61qj64a1ovgr5r (2)

As an aperitif to the main event, the social event of the cricketing calendar, the Ashes at Lord’s – also known as England’s second test venue – we have the fifth instalment of the Ashes panel. Same format, five questions, of varying levels of banality, tackled head on by willing volunteers. Because we had such a short turnaround, I increased the number of people questioned, and once again, as with Panel #004, we have more than four respondents.

So, to introduce them, there is…

Philip Chapman (PGP); Oscar da Bosca (OdB); CricketJon (CJ); GraemeCr (Graeme); Metatone (Meta) and the inimitable poetry of The Bogfather (Bog). Hillel (EoinJPMorgan) was gracious enough to send his apologies for being unable to contribute this time around, but will be back soon.

Thanks one and all, and with all hope for the formatting not being completely horrendous, here we go….

1. We’re on the brink of the Lord’s test. Do you think this will suit Australia more than Cardiff?
Meta –  Lords will suit Australia more. It probably won’t be as fast and bouncy as they would like, but it will play to their bowling strengths more than Cardiff. On top of that, the forecast is fine weather and that usually blunts the swing there. That brings an advantage to Warner and Smith.
CJ – I think we are entering the realisation ( that the MSM haven’t yet done) or point of recognition that Australia perform with the Kooka on fast pitches and we perform with the Duke on slow pitches. To me it really is as simple as that. England are in a better place for sure but we will know much more about them after Lords and Brum.
PGP – Given that Mick Hunt the Lord’s groundsman has significant previous at preparing “home” pitches, I suspect the pitch will be slow but with better carry than at Cardiff. Will it suit the Aussies more? I am not sure that matters at this point – It will be a flat batting track. Lord’s has significant development work in progress and a full house on day 5 will be helpful.
OdB – As ever it will depend on what the groundsman serves up.  Lords can be a road, but as last year against India shows, they can give us a green seamer.  I think the Aussie batsmen will enjoy it more, it is a quick ground so good shots are rewarded.  I think that their bowlers may struggle, Johnson had issues last time with the slope, and I think that’s where his song was first heard, Starc was dropped in 2013 and will have to learn quickly how to deal with the slope, Hazelwood if he gets it right may be a handful, but they have to get used to it quickly.  They didn’t really seem to cope with Cardiff too well and took an innings to work out the lengths and areas to bowl, if England bat first again and they don’t acclimatise quickly they could be looking down the barrel after 2 days.
Graeme – The Lords pitch is always difficult to predict.  For a number of years in the noughties, the tracks used to have life for 2 days and then suddenly die, enabling some amazing feats of batting endurance from the likes of Sri Lanka.  Mick Hunt now seems to have cracked the art of creating a pitch that lasts for 5 days.  Last year he produced a green-top for the India match, which Broad and Anderson bowled appallingly badly on, but it turned into a good batting surface and retained enough pace and bounce on day 5 for Ishant to bowl India to victory.  I think this year’s pitch will be fairly similar given that he has had a period of hot dry weather, followed by some cool, damp days.  If there is bounce, then Australia will be a handful and Brad Haddin might even be able to catch a ball.  He really struggled when the ball was round his ankles at Cardiff – the Aussie technique of taking the ball at your side does not work so well when there is unpredictable bounce.  Rogers knows Lords well.  Clarke averages 47 there, however, which is a touch below his total average and Smith had a rough time in 2013.  A lot will depend on the toss and which set of bowlers uses the conditions better.  I favour Australia slightly because this is one pitch in the UK where raw pace might count for something and I wonder whether Anderson and Broad can keep their discipline for 2 matches on the trot?
Poetry Corner from The Bogfather…

I’m sure we expect a more even contest there

With even bounce across sloping square

The Aussie bats will like this consistency

I fully expect Smith to make hay at three.

.

A little damp below, but with more lift and rip

Hazlewood will love it when an opener gloves to slip

But if England’s eyes alight on a short of a length strip

Then we’ll see if our beloved leader can keep a grip.

.

Whether Mitch J can swing it the right way

Will be very important periods of play

Clarke will lead his wounded hordes

To a series equalling win at Lords.

——————————————————————————————-
2. Brad Haddin’s drop of Joe Root was pretty important, yet it is his batting that is really a concern. How long do you think he should be given? [Note – some responded to the question before the news of Haddin’s issues were made public.]
PGP –  I would drop him now and get Neville in – as we have seen with England last year over Matt Prior, you get fresh energy from a new young keeper. That won’t happen as he is one of Clarke’s only mates on the pitch. Which is good news for us.
Meta – As an England fan, going by the stats, I’ll be hoping they give Haddin at least until the end of the series. I expect Lehmann to pick him for the Lord’s game, but if he has another bad game I would think they will pick someone else – particularly if they go 2-0 down. Now if I’d seen more of the alternatives, I might be keener to drop Haddin.
OdB – The remaining 4 tests…..Seriously I am surprised he is still playing with an average of about 14 since Sydney 2014.  Perhaps Brad is a magic name like Alistair that allows selectors to ignore form and look at the other values he brings to the team.  I have never been a fan of his keeping and I think his batting is typically Australian so he will always struggle on English wickets (lots of back foot play).  I think both he and Watson will be retained for Lords, Lehman’s ‘just a blip’ describes how they view themselves and England and changing the team would be seen as a backward step.  I also think both he and Watson will be dropped by the 3rd test.  The problem with dropping them is that once you do it is the end of their careers so it is not an easy decision to make.
Graeme – I would not be surprised if Haddin were dropped.  Unless Broad and Anderson bowl short to him, he appears to be totally unable to play a moving ball.
CJ – We appear to be overtaken by events. There may be other forces in the background but apart from that I am surprised at such a downturn in form at 37. Bob Taylor was still a class keeper at 40 to 42 between 1981 and 1983 albeit in a very different era.
Poetry Corner from The Bogfather…

A single dropped catch happens

His keeping has become leaden-footed yet

If he fails and Australia lose this one

He’ll be replaced for the Third, I’d bet

No longer a danger to make the tail wag

Time to put gloves away in his kit-bag.

.

(Update)

It seems that Brad

Will miss the game

For personal reasons

And that’s a shame

Like him or not

To be unable to play

Such a pity to miss

The match in this way.

————————————————————————————————–
3. Are you at all concerned about our opening partnership, which, one stand at Headingley apart, appears to be going the way of other recent pairings?
Graeme –  The English opening partnership is a real concern given that Cook is impregnable.  I think Lyth should be given more time but, thanks to Moores’s safety-first (I need good results so I will stick with the guys I know) approach, he did not get a run in the Caribbean and has been given a difficult baptism against a lively New Zealand attack, even if it was not firing on all cylinders, and now the Aussies.  He seems a decent batsman but, let’s face it, he is doing no better than Carberry who was dropped presumably for having the temerity to outscore Cook down-under.  The worry is that the Aussies seem to be able to tie him down quite easily and he does not know how to rotate the strike…and nor does Cook seem to understand the importance of trying to bat WITH his partners rather than against them.  When things got bogged down, you would often see Strauss try something to break the deadlock, risking his wicket in the process.  Cook will never be unselfish enough to do that even if he had the ability, which I doubt.  For all his faults, Boycott had the ability to pinch a single and play from the other end.  I wish he could pass this know-how to Lyth.
Meta – Very concerned. You can’t keep losing openers quickly and still win matches. If England are to win the series they’ll need one of the openers to stand up. As a Yorkist I’m also particularly concerned that unless Lyth comes good very quickly he is likely to be the fall guy, even if he is outscoring Cook.
OdB – No, I think Lyth got a good ball in his first innings and moved the game on really well in the second (I still can’t believe how naïve the Australians played on Saturday afternoon, just bat a session and a half on a slow pitch and walk away with a draw (only about 2 hours play maximum would have been possible on Sunday)).  Cook just needs to continue his form against NZ, dancing down the pitch twice to Lyon was bizarre, however not as odd as seeing an off spinner bowling the 7th over of a first innings.  Unfortunately the Trott debacle hasn’t let us see enough of Lyth and Cook, but I like the cut of Lyth’s jib and I think he will last the summer and beyond.
CJ – Far too early to say although there is form with Compton, Robson, Root (temporarily) and Trott being experimented with. Lyth was found out on day 1 trying to force to leg when he should have been playing straight. This brings me to the point about being aggressive. There are times to do this, it will not always be appropriate against the new ball. Fwiw I think Lyth looked pretty good in that busy period with Ian Bell last Saturday.
PGP – I think I have said before that my gut instinct is the selectors picked the wrong Yorkshire opening batsman when they went for Lyth – although I would have picked Hales. Lees is a more talented player who can also read a game as his Captaincy of Yorkshire has proved (better than Cook and Root…!) However, he score a ton recently and as he has been picked on weight of runs he should be given more time. Cook scoring some runs will be helpful.

Poetry Corner from The Bogfather…

Who would accept the poison-chalice ?

Of opening with Our Leader

Just as likely to be abused by Alice

And fed into the farm animal food feeder.

.

If so daring to outscore or upset

He who must be eternally lauded

Tho’ if one of them were to run him out

I for one, will have applauded.

.

In truth our top order

Is in need of some vigour

For e’en a small partnership

Can seem like mortis (rigor-).

————————————————————————————————–
4. Despite a wonderful team performance, there are murmurings that Root should bat at three. Do you agree, and if so what do you do about Gary Ballance?
OdB – Madness, he averages 90 odd at 5 in the past year why move him?  I have concerns about Ballance, I think his average was inflated by mid-range bowling last summer, however they clearly see something in him and I admired his nuggety 60 at Cardiff.  It looked awful, but runs are runs, however you get them.  Bell is more of a concern, his first innings was all the collar up, bristling with intent bollocks that he thinks makes him look like a better batsman, to me he looked like he was going to get out at any minute, and the dismissal against Johnson in the second, backing away a la Clarke v Broad leaving all stumps visible.  Like Haddin and Watson, if he gets dropped it’s the end of his career, and I can’t think of any attacking no 4. batsman eligible for England with a good record against Australia who could replace him….
Graeme – Root looks good at 5 so why move him?  In his earlier days, Sobers batted all over the place, even opening during the Tied Test.  However, once Worrell put him at 6, he stayed at 6 for the rest of his career, even though he was the best batsman in the team/world.  You can influence a lot of matches from 5.  Ken Barrington played a lot at 5.  As for Ballance, while his recent performances have seen a tailing off from last year, he should be given a few more games.  However, if it becomes clear that he has an issue against the short ball, as appeared possible at Cardiff on that pudding of a pitch, then he should be replaced…and I would favour James Taylor rather than Bairstow.  I am not a great fan of Ballance, his extraordinary trigger movement seems to render him a sitting duck for the full, straight delivery but his record – admittedly against attacks without much in the way of threatening quick bowling – is good.  I would rate him on a level with solid county pros of yesteryear such as Luckhurst, Tim Robinson, Kim Barnett, David Lloyd.  He will score against normal bowling. 
PGP – In the second panel discussions I said I felt that Root should bat at 3, I still think that – but with Ballance’s first innings runs at Cardiff and Root’s apparent desire to stay at 4 or 5 then this is a bit of a moot point. As an interim, I think we would be doing a favour to Ballance if he was pushed to 5 with Bell at 3 and Root at 4. Alternatively Bairstow has been ripping the door down to get into the team. Then there is the option of putting Ali at 5 and playing Rashid.  Technically Ballance is in a bit of a mess – although the time at the crease last week will have been a huge help for him. His head position is key and he needs to get his head moving towards the ball earlier – but that takes confidence, so his issue is a little chicken and egg.

My belief is that the England batting order is a little odd with three blockers up to, then Bell, then Root – then a series of stroke makers in Stokes, Buttler and Moeen. I would prefer to see the order a bit more evenly spread personally.  I also feel that Buttler should be relieved of the wicket keeping shackles, give the gloves to Bairstow, this would give my ideal world order of Cook, Lyth (I would have Hales but that is for another day) Root, Buttler, Bell, Stokes, Bairstow, Ali. Yes I know Buttler is at 4 – but I think he should be given the KP role. He is going to be a superstar, it is time to let that happen – and it evens out the batting order somewhat. Please don’t say “it is too early” rubbish, now is the time.

Meta – I can’t see the benefit at this moment to shuffle the order. Ballance scrapped hard in the 2nd innings and got a bit of reward. Why risk Root’s purple patch when Ballance could be coming back into form? Of course, one might argue Bell may be a better bet at 3 (stronger technique, balance out the R/L a bit more as well.) Or one could call up KP. (As if.) Anyway, realistically, Root is the golden goose and you don’t touch him.

CJ – Ballance at 3 for me, Root at 5. Make the most of the talents you have. A classic case of symptom and cause being mixed up. I think Australia would have been well served leaving Smith at 5 even if it made Watto at 3.
Poetry Corner from The Bogfather…

Nooo! Leave our Joe

To take Root at five

He works so well

With 6/7/8

Giving our innings drive

So there should be no debate.

Perhaps at four in times to come?

When Bell has left the crease

Then Ballance at five

May be where he’ll thrive

And all this conjecture will cease.

Then perhaps Hales could cement

A spot at three to raise the pace

Maybe Bairstow or Taylor too

To provide competition for every place.

—————————————————————————————————-
5. As is our media’s trend, we are going overboard about the new management set-up of Strauss, Bayliss, Farbrace and Cook. I’m a notorious curmudgeon and think this is giving them too much credit. What do you think?

CJ – This is more about the absence of Moores. you could almost see he and Cook looking at each on the balcony for inspiration. Farbrace and Bayliss appear to have advised him to take responsibility. There appears to be a welcome embargo on Broad and Anderson ruling the roost ; it is quite possible someone has had a little word in their ear. Their bowling was the difference for me during the Cardiff gig.

Meta – Well Strauss didn’t do anything remarkable. Neither did Cook. So the first pile of nonsense from the media is trying to include them in the halo. Bayliss & Farbrace did do something amazing – they got Broad and Anderson to bowl a proper length – which was in recent times beyond Flower, Saker & Moores. (Who for all their faults are not the worst coaches out there.)

That said, it’s easy to imagine Australia winning the toss at Lord’s, Warner and Smith hitting big scores, England beaten by an innings and FCBS (Farby, Cooky, Bayly & Straussy) looking a lot less clever.

Graeme – Something has happened because they are not playing the way they did last year or earlier this year.  The bowlers are no longer testing the middle of the pitch; the batsman are trying to take on the opposition bowlers;  catches are being held; there is less of the Andersonian adolescent petulance.  Obviously the credit does not belong to Cook because he has been there all through.  You have to wonder what has changed.  Saker and Moores must be prime suspects.  Can you credit Cook for the field placements at Cardiff – the guys waiting for the drive?   This is not Cook’s method.  Something must have changed behind the scenes, somebody must be giving him good advice, supporting his fragile ego, winding back the stupidity and obstinacy of Broad and Anderson.  I wonder if Strauss is not being active behind the scenes….

PGP – Farbrace and Moores were at significant odds during the last 6 months, from what I have heard. The way the Odi team was turned around and the way the test team batted in the Cardiff test suggests a much happier mood around the England teams. Farbrace has to take a huge piece of the credit for this – I also think that Root may be a catalyst to this too.  This is probably a question to ask at the end of the summer. or may be after the trip to Pakistan/UAE or maybe after the trip to SA.  Our next few months of test cricket is bonkers. One of the advantages of playing a young team now is that however the next six months go their group experience will set them up for a long time. I am also worried about Broad and Anderson – as we will miss them when they are gone…

OdB –I discussed this with a friend (who attends a test with me each year), he thought that we have had a potentially good test team that just needs direction, and that the ODI narrative has been usefully transferred to the test team.  I think Giles Clarke is a see you next Tuesday who has had a malign influence on this team, was behind various sackings and useless appointments, and I still rail against the ‘outside cricket’ jibe.   It doesn’t help when people like Selvey describe bringing on a spinner for the last over before lunch (a tactic as old as the game itself) as ‘the instinct that gave Moeen the last over before lunch on the final day in which he claimed Warner’s wicket and kick-started the Australian slide to defeat’.  Sorry I thought it was standard practice and a poor shot by Warner who should have gone forward rather than back.  It is clear that Bayliss has had an influence on the fielding and the manner in which we approached the second innings was a breath of fresh air, particularly Lyth and Bells’ counter attack of 49 in 5 overs.  A Flower / Moores side would have been batting on the Saturday morning and got to a 450 + lead by lunch (possibly declaring for 6).  That would not have been enough time to win the match, so I think there is a positive influence.  Strauss is a tough one, I liked him as a captain until the whole twitter/texting nonsense.  He overreacted to texts and ignored potential bullying (whatever Broad says, someone was clearly feeding KPGenius from the dressing room).  Calling someone names on live TV he was unfortunate to be heard, it is the gloating reaction of the MSM that is distasteful not a private conversation overheard by accident.  As for his actions since becoming Director, Cricket; sacking Moores was great, not rehiring KP was always going to happen as he wouldn’t have been given the job otherwise, but retaining Morgan was a brave (and correct) decision and he has reaped some immediate rewards for this.  He is establishment but you have to be to join the ECB, I will wait and see over the next year before I make my mind up on him.  I believe Cook has already retired as captain, they will remember to tell us at the end of the summer.  It looks like Root’s team already, and if Cook gets another home series win under his belt good luck to him, shame about the last 18 months of ordinary performances, was it the previous coaches, or Cook, or both?

The problem is, until we win at Lords (or don’t lose), then it is a bit new coach, same old fallibilities, win one test convincingly, lose the next poorly.  Headingley day 4 (pick a year, any year) is fresh, and if Australia put us under pressure how will Cook cope?  I think we have a potentially good test team (see how we do against SA and Pakistan later on this year to see whether there is the potential to be great), and if Rashid is brought in at 8 and Ali moved to 4 (when Bell retires/is sacked due to media pressure) then we have a team that covers all bases.  Wood has been a revelation, he bowls fast, and a good length, almost like Harmison used to do twice an over.

Poetry Corner from The Bogfather

Early days, lazy days

Of media puffery

Just a new phase

Of ECB bluffery

We’ve been here

So many times before

Near every write-up

A predictable bore.

.

It does seem that

The coaching team

have brought about

A new regime

Yet we outside

Must still press

For it’s our England

Nothing less.

Even the Captain

Seems to have read a new book

Though I think Bayliss

Spells out the words for Cook

And as Our Leader can’t think for himself

Farbrace helps him pick one from the shelf

As to leave Alastair in wonderland

Is unfair on someone so dim

So keen is he to please Strauss’s band

He’ll do anything they say at a whim

So no need to tell you all to keep an eye

As like Dmitri, a proud curmudgeon am !.

———————————————————————————————————-
Where else do you combine analysis and poetry? A tremendous effort by all concerned. As always, happy to see plenty of comments but please keep the first day’s play’s comments on the relevant thread.
My thanks to all of you for your time and effort. It’s a cracker!

Ashes Panel #004 – Surprise Surprise For The Dad’s Army….

LordCanisLupus56 Comments

australia-celebrate-the-ashes-whitewash_10piscrajeyf61qj64a1ovgr5r (2)

Here is the 4th in our series of panels, and with one glorious exception, they seem to go down well. As I could run just two before the Lord’s test, I’ve expanded the invitation list and secured a new contributor to boot. So, without further ado, let’s introduce our guests..

We have Keyser Chris (KC), David Oram (DavidO – the man behind Roland Butcher’s Hook), Steven Melford (SM), The Great Bucko (SeanB), and Paul Ewart (PaulE – a regular round these here parts). We also have newbie, Martin Payne (MP – who I’ll let off being a Hammer for now), who is a debutant and I’m sure we’ll make him welcome.

So, off we go… Fire Away. Apologies if we lose the formatting, it always happens!

1. Well, that was a surprise. Or was it?
KC – Yes, that was a surprise. I had a sense this team could play like that, but didn’t expect it to actually happen. Just goes to show that simple things like pitching the ball up with fielders on the drive works. Who knew…
SM – The question for me was always could England carry the aggressive mind-set kindled in the New Zealand ODIs into the tests. The answer was yes. I was worried this would be choked. For for too long we’ve had a team that was ‘less than the sum of the parts’. That’s no longer the case and we have a team playing to their full potential. The fact that these players at their best can challenge the Australians is not a surprise. The fact we’ve turned the approach around so quickly is a surprise. And not a great reflection on the previous ‘leadership’.
DavidO – Of course it was. But isn’t it amazing how many people, subsequently, now say they could ‘see it coming’ after the event? Those are the people I’d want to hear from about what will happen next at Lord’s!

Pre-series, on these panels, and in the wider print and broadcast media, the consensus was ‘more of the same’ from down under 2013/14. I have a personal sense of cosy smugness right now as one of the few believers backing an England series win in Ashes Panel 3 – but I am realistic enough to know that Australia may come bouncing back and still stuff us. But I am thoroughly enjoying the moment! I can go to Lord’s next week knowing the worst I can see is Australia level the series.
PaulE -Yes. I didn’t expect England to play so well or Australia to play so badly. Hats off to Farbrace and Bayliss, it just goes to show how much untapped potential there has been in this poorly led team.
MP – Very much so. I came into the series thinking the worst (a built-in mechanism for me when it comes to the Ashes) and both teams have surprised me. Australia perhaps are not as strong as I gave them credit for, although I expect them to bounce back at Lords. England have carried on their attacking intent from the NZ one-dayers which is good to see. Could have been very different if Haddin had taken that catch though…

SeanB –  Well Watto getting out LBW twice and then referring was a pretty nailed on certainty. I’m not sure if it was a surprise or not, mainly because i couldn’t really call the series before the start (think i went for 2-2 in the end), that said, it was a very encouraging result for England and we played some really positive cricket. I think the Australians were caught cold by the pitch and spent most of the first innings banging it in halfway down (something England generally aren’t immune to doing), but i think my main concern would be their batting unit as it crumpled in a heap twice in the test with some very ordinary shots. We all knew that they would try and attack Mooen, but some of the shots were just outright slogs, so i think they will need to reassess how they play him for the rest of the series. I think England winning the first test is what the series needed as i would have been worried about old wounds reappearing had it been the other way round.

———————————————————————————————————–
2. A lot of conjecture about the pitch, which I’ve heard more than a few complain about. What were your feelings about it (presuming you saw the game)?
KC – I don’t think the pitch was anywhere near as bad as made out. Last years at Trent Bridge was far worse. It seemed like the media getting excuses in really early on day one by going on about that. 300-350 seemed par for the wicket, which is good for result cricket – it was Roots ton that slanted the game massively in our favour.
SM – So Australia would prefer a pitch that plays more to their strengths? Who knew! 40 wickets fell; one team scored over 400; one team scored their runs at over 4 runs an over; spinners and seamers took wickets. It was fine.
DavidO -It was a poor pitch on which excellent cricket was played. Scorecards do not always accurately reflect the state of the pitch. We’ve all seen days when twenty wickets fell on a shirtfront in three sessions. But this was not the horror track some attributed to it e.g. Boycott and George Dobell. It IS a bad thing to have balls bouncing in front of the wicket-keeper on the first day – but let’s be honest, we do not want to produce fliers for Johnson and Starc! Surely we were all jumping for joy when we saw the pair of them dig it in early, and it scuttle through to Haddin on his knees!? They did still manage to get the ball around the ear-oles on occasion, so they weren’t entirely neutered, but the pitch did reduce their potency.

Jarrod Kimber was spot on in his assessment – home advantage is an important part of the game, and visitors SHOULD find it hard to adapt. And they didn’t. Uneven surfaces and indifferent bounce make for far more interesting cricket matches than ‘roads’. But ultimately, an England Ashes win is of far more importance to me than ‘bright’ cricket. And yet, despite the sluggish track, we had both! More pitches like this will try the patience, but I want the Aussies to come back to England next time still never having won an Ashes series here since 2001.
PaulE – Don’t like it. If the rumours about groundstaff brushing the wicket are true then it’s doctoring, pure and simple. I wouldn’t mind so much if we didn’t whine quite so much when ‘shifty foreigners’ do it. Play up and play the game and all that.
MP – I think the description of the pitch as turgid is probably a fair one, but still the Test failed to reach a fifth day so perhaps some of the criticism has been over the top. It seemed like a fairly typical Cardiff wicket to me..

SeanB – Pitch wasn’t great in fairness, although it did just produce a result in 4 days as a caveat to my first statement. I’m slightly old fashioned in that i like to see something there for the quicks and when someone bowling at 90mph can’t get it above head height in the first morning, then it’s a little bit disheartening. It was an obvious ploy, that as England felt the Australian bowling unit is their main strength and hence ensured that the pitch would be fairly slow and low to negate this. We were never going to see a green seamer or a quick bouncy wicket, just as we would never see a raging turner at the Gabba; however it does mean that it will be harder and harder for away teams to win away series when the pitches are doctored to suit the home side in such an obvious way (i can’t remember the last truly quick wicket produced in England). I would suggest we will see similar pitches throughout the series

———————————————————————————————————-
3. Are you of the view that this test goes to show that Australia are an old team and this could get messy in a hurry for them?
KC – I reserve all judgement until after Australia have played on the pace and bounce of Lord’s. They may be ageing, but there is also a lot of experience in english conditions in that side. I thought their bowling looked slightly undercooked as well; in two weeks that’ll change. That’s not to say I wasn’t a little smug overnight to my Australian friends.
SM – I think they have at least one crumbly too many and it’s time for change. We now have definitive proof (again!) that the Watson experiment is not working. Not sure Haddin is justifying his place. There were also other things didn’t come together for Australia in this test. Harris being ruled out; Starc not at full fitness; Johnson and Warner not firing. I think they will come back fighting & pose a much tougher challenge at Lords.
DavidO – Yes, and yes. Though it is more likely they will rally, ‘dig deep’ etc. and be much tougher at Lord’s – including bringing out the old bad mouthing etc. I suspect they’ll win the 2nd Test – but that they haven’t got enough in their legs and aging bodies for the full five Tests. But of course I would love to see them unravel again like they did at Lord’s two years ago. As I said before, a good team on paper is capable of folding.
PaulE – Could do but as well as they bowled at Cardiff, Jimmy and Broad(y) aren’t Mitch and Rhino. I expect a snarling response. Let’s remember, had Haddin not dropped Root we’d have been in a sorry state. Fate, gossamer threads and all that.
MP – Not really. I would expect them to play a lot better at Lords. I would expect Johnson to have a more productive time on a presumably faster wicket and if Starc regains his fitness in time that will be a boost for the Australians. I can’t see Smith and Clarke going too long without big innings either. I think the main question is can England continue to play at the same intensity that they showed here.
SeanB –  I think this test shows that Australia also have weaknesses if Warner and Smith don’t fire, but to write them off at this stage would be foolhardy as they have had a lot of success over the past 18 months. I do think it is a series too far for Haddin and for me Watto is the epitome of wasted talent (though i find his continued struggles with the straight ball sidesplittingly hilarious) and i’m not sure they have got the right balance to their team – it looks like Harris could be a bigger miss than we all thought it would be. I would expect Mitchell Marsh to come in for Watto next game and maybe Siddle to get a game if Starc pulls up lame, but i still expect Lords to be a closer game and i think this series will ebb and flow. I might be wrong, the wheels might come off and England might hammer them, but i just can’t see it.
————————————————————————————————-
4. Joe Root was man of the match, and it was hard to argue against that. Who would have been your runner-up?
KC – Goes against the grain, but Chris Rogers is certainly worth a mention. And for pure comedy value, Shane Watson. Why Australia still persist with him is bizarre (sorry, but any chance to have a dig at Shane will be gleefully grasped by me…!)
SM – Broad and Moeen both had strong tests. After a tough time, Mooen proved critics wrong with both bat and ball. Broady just edges it though because of the comedy value of 1) getting Watson to review an LBW decision and 2) for ‘walking’ only to be recalled to the crease. Root’s hight point for me was being in utter stitches when Cook took one to the plumbs. Future captain material for sure.
DavidO – Moeen Ali. Had a super game, and he proved he can take quality Test wickets, despite bowling his fair share of rubbish, and still bat like a Test top order player from number 8. England are blessed with having three proper ‘all-rounders’, men who are genuine top-6 batsmen, who also bowl or keep wicket. Add Root as a more than useful bits-and-pieces bowler and we have so much more depth in batting and variation in bowling options than we had a year or two ago. If we were brave enough to add Rashid instead of Lyth, Bell or Ballance (and bat Moeen in the top 5) we’d have even more bowling options, and I’d back Rashid at 8 to still score quality runs. We have some super cricketers, who proved how good they can be when they play to their potential – but in our euphoria let’s not forget that they have already previously proved to us just how crap they can be too.
PaulE – Stuart Broad or Moeen Ali, vital wickets at vital times. Too close to call when you consider Ali’s runs.
MP – I would go for Moeen Ali. An important innings to get England over 400 in their first innings and chipped in with some vital wickets, particularly the Warner LBW.

SeanB – Broad for me was very close to being man of the match and it was the best i’ve seen him and Jimmy bowl in tandem for a long while. Their bowling on the morning of day 4 was brilliant and although they didn’t get the wickets they deserved, i thought it set the wheels in motion for the afternoon. Broad for me, is a painstakingly frustrating bowler, sometimes looking like a world beater and sometimes looking like a clown, but one thing we know is that he has periods when he goes on a hot streak and takes wickets galore, which is something i’m hoping will happen over the next 4 games. One other point on Broad was that he spoke very cogently to Ian Ward at the end of the test around the game plan they had for the Aussie batsman and how he struggles to bowl full and straight as it sometimes comes out too floaty but realised bowling wicket to wicket was the answer in this pitch. I think the England bowling coaches have really done their work on the bowlers, now that David ‘bang it halfway down the pitch and look hard’ Saker has since thankfully departed and it shows in the fact that all the bowlers have been more consistent this summer.

———————————————————————————————————
5. Do you think this marks a vindication of sticking by Alastair Cook as captain of England?

KC –  No. This looks far more like a continuation of the change in thinking in the ODI team, with added Bayliss. Alastair Cook doing things right is automatically deemed “innovative” by certain sections of the press. The real reason England won is because the bowlers pitched the bloody ball up. But that won’t suit the narrative.

SM – No. It was his best test as captain but I’m reminded of the saying “even a broken watch tells the right time twice a day”. If I’d captained England for what seems like a decade,  I’d have had one good day at the office! Cook’s captaincy is much better when the team is well on top. When we are up against it, he is poor. Let’s see what happens when things are not going so clearly our way.

DavidO – Vindication is a horrible world. It’s too near a relation to vindictiveness for my comfort. I wish we’d all get away from this situation where everyone seems to have some point to prove about Cook/Pietersen/ECB etc. What’s done is done (and it was a disgrace) but I want to focus on the cricket now please.

Cook captained well – but let’s not get carried away. He will have good and bad games in the future, like Clarke has always done. I’ve never agreed with the received wisdom that Cook is a bad captain, and Clarke a great one. They both have had their moments! Clarke is undoubtedly better tactically, but he is not Bobby Fischer or Julius Caesar. Neither is Cook George Custer or Lord Cardigan. Besides, many past captains have agreed that the on-field stuff is the easy bit. Well, we seem to only compare Cook and Clarke in that arena. Having the players ‘with you’ is something in which Cook has hugely out scored Clarke, in both good times and bad.
Cook has not been an especially good, or especially bad captain – but as the incumbent he is certainly the best-man for the job right now. Root may prove to be a superior successor, but he would not be better NOW at this moment in time unless he’d already had 6-12 months behind him. This may yet prove to be Cook’s last series as Skipper, and I like the idea that we may win the Ashes, and he stands down as leader anyway. He might see that as VINDICATION, but personally I have no interest in either petty self-absorption or brick-batting.
PaulE – No. Whilst its heartening to see someone learning after 115 test matches, England could and should have been playing like this for quite some time. The recent improvement merely highlights how much time and potential has been wasted under Cook’s craven stewardship. This is Joe Root’s team, if you’re still in doubt read Jason Gillespie’s piece today: Yorkshire tactics, Root and Farbrace.
MP – I probably have a more favourable view of Cook than most on this blog but I don’t think so. He’s had some shocking moments over the last 18 months and has certainly received more second chances than captains of old. Having said that I thought he got most things right in this Test and has certainly improved as a captain but one swallow does not a summer make.

SeanB – Hmmm – not sure how to answer this one. I have been a bigger a critic of Cook’s captaincy as anyone on here – I think i called for the Investec Zebra to be given the gig at various points last summer. Credit where credit is due, Cook has his best game as England captain (though some runs would be nice too) and he tinkered with the bowling and the field and it paid off big time. My biggest criticism of Cook is that he lets games drift and after plan A fails, plan B involves trying to bounce out the opposition and plan C – well there is no plan C, but this wasn’t in evidence in this game. Could this be the input of Farbrace and Bayliss? Is this a new Alastair Cook, trying to get England playing an aggressive style of cricket? Only time will tell, but it has been a positive start and also means the Root can concentrate on his batting (and we are massively reliant on him) rather than being constantly linked with the captaincy this summer.
———————————————————————————————————-

So, there you have it. My thanks to the contributors, who, once again, have put a lot in and gave up their time. I’m also thinking of five more questions to put to the next round of the panel, so look out for the e-mail later tonight. If I could have responses for Wednesday on those, then I’d be really grateful.

As usual, be gracious in your comments, even if you disagree. I thought the chaps put in a great show and I want them back!!!!!

Ashes Panel #003 – Starc Ballanced Poetry, Give Johnny A Bell

LordCanisLupus33 Comments

australia-celebrate-the-ashes-whitewash_10piscrajeyf61qj64a1ovgr5r (2)

We have four entries in, so as usual, I will stick this up. I am awaiting Dennis Does Cricket, who volunteered, but he’s obviously incredibly busy with his site and has covered some of the ground already.

So, without further ado, let me introduce our esteemed panel. First up is Rooto, who is a regular here with a base in the South of France. Then we have Sean B, another loyal follower on here and on Twitter. We have our own Bogfather, who has responded in his own inimitable way, and finally, the blogger of all things West Indian, David Oram (AKA Col Blimp and Roland Butcher’s Hook). A great panel to match the two already, and they were put the usual five questions.

1. Australia appear to have lost Ryan Harris for the first two tests at least, and Mitchell Johnson thus far isn’t pulling up any trees? Has your confidence in England risen or fallen with this news?
Rooto – My confidence in England couldn’t fall, it could only rise. It’s perhaps important to state that first up, as it colours all that follows! This news only provokes the smallest, slightest quiver on the needle, however. Johnson could get a hot streak tomorrow and ride it till September. Now that Harris officially isn’t playing, it only renders concrete what was already being rumoured – that he wasn’t going to be picked anyway, because they have enough bowlers faster, fitter and (in Hazlewood) as tight as he. The reason we all like Ryan-o is that he isn’t quite so dangerously Aussie. Harris was the connoisseur’s fast bowler, or at least that’s what observers like Mike Selvey would have us believe. That’s great, and I don’t wish to speak ill of the retired, but I think the Aussie team runs on bloodlust rather than fine appreciation. The Aussies will play 2, maybe 3 Mitches and they’ll be full of confidence whoever puts on the annoyingly ubiquitous cap.
Sean B – Not really, i still think they have a very strong fast bowling unit in Hazelwood, Starc and Johnson, although i think Gary Ballance will be mightily relieved that Harris is not playing, his lack of foot movement would have made him a sitting duck for Harris to get him LBW. I watched the Aussies in the West Indies and Starc was the real danger man, he can swing it both ways at pace and is particularly strong  at bowling to left handers, so it will be a real test for our top 3 and could largely decide who wins the series.
David O – Risen enormously! Luck plays a huge part in sport. Of course we want to compete with and beat the best – but if they are hors de combat, well then so be it! It’s no use crying over spilt milk, but nothing wrong at grinning like a Cheshire Cat when Glenn McGrath trips over a cricket ball. Harris was a fine cricketer – but his moment in time has now passed. We shall see whether the same is the case with Mitchell Johnson. Is he past his sell by date? Or is this his majestic swansong? Much has been made of the age of the Aussies. Are they over the hill? Maybe. It is fine line between players passing their peak, and being ‘past it’. Similarly teams. Recently I made this comparison of the age factors which defined England’s two recent Ashes whitewashes:

The 2006/07 series was characterised by a bunch of old blokes (Australia) who knew they had ‘one last job’ in them and, after the 2005 Ashes result, were determined to prove a point.
The 2013/14 series was characterised by a bunch of old blokes (England) who hoped they had ‘one last job’ in them, and after the 2013 Ashes result, were self-deluded enough to think they had nothing left to prove.
Australia are great on paper. As an Englishman, I hope they crumple and fold.
England are looking fresher. And in years to come we may look back as this being the defining breakthrough series for players who have promise, and may realise it.
The Bogfather: The formatting might go astray here….
Oh, No Harris
To embarrass

Our batsmen..

With Mitch J

On the spray

We’ll relax then…?

Yet the future is still Starc

As Hazelwood hits the mark

And Siddle can still riddle them…

Yet, I still expect

Each Mitch to click and collect

The openers and three

Bell too, intimidatingly quickly

Feeding on weaknesses known

As runs dry up amid ‘outside’ groans

Leaving 4 through to 8

To get us out of a state

Which won’t always occur

So forgive me if I demur

From taking the positives…

—————————————————————————————-

2. England have chosen two spinners in the squad. Is it for show, or would they ever contemplate playing two in the same team?
Rooto – They’ll only play Rashid if the backroom staff have burnt the DVD of Cardiff 2009. It’s amazing that memories of that match have brought us this far, but so few writers (BTL is different) remember how ineffectual Monty and Swann were on that pitch. This pitch could, of course, be different. In which case why are the press talking about 2009? Either it’s as slow and low as before, and 2 spinners won’t help, or it’ll behave differently, in which case the parallels are unhelpful. On a different note, Bayliss may have ideas about Rashid’s greater mystery, and his ability to turn it the other way from Root, but Cook will be in his ear with different ideas based around familiarity and poor net-bowling in the Windies. My feeling is based purely on cynicism, but I don’t think they’ll play both this summer. If Rashid gets a game it’ll be because Ali has been suffering. I hope that doesn’t happen, though not because I don’t rate Rashid – I do, as much as I can without seeing him play much. Firstly, it’s because Ali seems like a good guy, and secondly as I have sub-zero confidence that Cook will be able to nurture, guide and help Rashid through his test debut. If the Aussies get after Ali in the first two tests, I want Cook to be played a video, on permanent loop, of Morgan putting his arm round Rashid and giving him the last over in that ODI at Trent Bridge.
Sean B –  Absolutely for show – i think there is more chance of seeing Lord Lucan riding Red Rum down Queen Street than England playing 2 spinners at Cardiff. They had the perfect opportunity to play to 2 spinners at that bunsen in Barbados and still only ended up playing 1, so if they didn’t do it there, they won’t do it at all. I also don’t see who they would drop to accommodate 2 spinners – it would be madness to drop Stokes, but that would be my gut feeling on who would get the chop if they did.
David O – Yes they might. All-rounder Stokes is a credible third seamer, and if the came across a ‘raging bunsen’ England have the option of playing two spinners and still having enough seam options in a five-man attack. But it’s unlikely. I think we all expect them to start with Moeen, and turn to Rashid if we go a Test or two down. Personally, I wish we’d be bold enough to pick Moeen as a batsman, and Rashid as a bowler – though you could almost switch that around. My own England team would have 6 bowlers –

1. Cook
2. Lyth
3. Root
4. Barstow
5. Moeen Ali
6. Stokes
7. Buttler
8. Rashid
9. Broad
10. Anderson
11. Wood
The Bogfather –

For sure it’s for show at the Mo’

Cookie won’t want to be Adil-do

By not having a clue how to win

By placing fields for twin spin.

If England wanted to show fight

They’d let Buttler bat higher and delight

Bring in Bairstow to keep up close

He’s more used to Rashid’s mixed dose

And Jonny’s in hot form with the bat

So what would be wrong with that?

If that means dropping Ballance or Bell

Then so be it, what the hell!

———————————————————————————————
3. You are the last panel before the start of the series. You can give me a score if you want, but who do you pick to watch for each team as the key performer (one of you I know the answer from….)
Rooto – I’ll repeat my bold claim of 0-4. It’s hard to judge the weather forecast for Nottingham, Cardiff, London and Birmingham when I’m sat in sweltering Mediterranean heat (sorry to mention it), but in this mindset I can’t see Anderson thriving. Too dry and flat. This leaves England’s key player as Broad. He’s not going to be dropped in a panic as others might, and he just might swing a game for us (see question 5). My other answer is Cook, perhaps repeating other people’s responses. So much will trickle down from his performance. For Australia, we know what we’re getting with the bowlers, and with the quality batting that Clarke and Smith bring, so the crux for them, the known unknown perhaps, is Warner. He tees off successfully enough times, and our neck is feeling the hobnails again.
Sean B – For me, there are a number of people who could be key performers on both sides (Anderson, Stokes, Warner, Smith) but i would go for Root for England and Lyon for Australia (expecting some abuse with the latter choice). I think Root will need to play the same way as Ian Bell did in the 2013 Ashes series and score a mountain of runs for us to have a chance. I can see the Australian attack making early inroads into our batting order and with our late order batsmen sometimes flattering to deceive (they’ll either put on an extra 150 or fall over for 30) i think we are very reliant on Root. I have chosen Lyon because i think he is a vastly underrated bowler and I think spin could play a big part in the series. Lyon quietly goes about his business but he has the ability to either tie down an end or to be an attacking wicket taker. Whilst not a big turner of the ball, he varies his pace well and is a wily bowler (whilst the plaudits for the debacle down under should rightly going to Mitchell Johnson, Lyon took his fair share of wickets that series as well and i think he is even better now). If you offered me an English ‘Nathan Lyon’ i would snap your hand off, i just don’t think Moeen is quite good enough.
David O -I’m backing my ‘Youth over Experience’ narrative for the series and England to win 3-1, possibly coming from behind – but definitely having the best of the luck and the weather. Little things we’ve mentioned lately in passing,but not focused upon, may have a bearing e.g. Australia’s behavior. If Haddin etc are as foul as they were in the World Cup I think the officials (consciously/unconsciously) will lean in England’s direction and we may be at the better end of those key border-line decisions and DRS reviews. This is nothing but a hunch. But a think a moment has been reached when the authorities have grown tired of their histrionics and may be less accommodating to them.

Key performers:
For Australia Mitchell Starc. And Pat Cummins. One-eyed joy at the retirement of Ryan Harris is tempered with the call up of Cummins. I first saw him and Starc during the 2012 World T20 tournament, and I thought ‘shit – these two will blow us away in next year’s Ashes (2013)’. Of course we didn’t see that happen – but my premonition may still come to pass.
The batting form of Smith, Warner and Clarke is also crucial. Is Smith the real deal, or a shooting star. Is he phenomenal or a phenomena? Likewise Warner. And is Clarke still great, or is this his last Test series? Is the decline of his back, and form, terminal?
For England Root and Stokes. Are these blokes good cricketers, or great cricketers? Ashes series decide these things. Root is going to overtake Alastair Cooks run scoring record about 15 years from now. He’s bound to have at least one 700+ victorious Ashes series. I’m hoping this is the first. Stokes has likewise got a Botham 1981 or Freddie 2005 in him. Is this their time?
Equally, several senior England players need to set their career record straight – further failures for Cook, Bell, Broad and Anderson could see all of them put out to pasture if England get stuffed. If they have a big part of an England victory, we’ll collectively gloss over 2013/14 (as we did 2006/07) and acclaim them as England ‘greats’ (though I do fear we may get thumped and wave farewell to them all as England ‘goods’).
The Bogfather:

2-0 after three

To the Aussies it’ll be

Then our leader is replaced

by the young and fresh faced

Joe Root…

He’s held our batting together so far

Already lauded as a global superstar

He’ll take up the challenge with gusto

Watching him grow is a must…Oh…

Here he comes on a Wood-en horse

Leading us to win the last two of course

So a 2-2 draw, no Ashes regained

A flight of fancy? Must pull in my reins!

Opening morning of Ashes is dawning

MSM bow down with such fawning

As Cookie awaits the first ball to face

He prods forward, a buzz, a nick, at pace

An appeal, hushed silence. Hark!

Here cometh, Mitchell Starc…

——————————————————————————————-
4. Jonny Bairstow is in incredible form both in ODI and county cricket. Will he replace Bell or Ballance before the series is out?
Rooto – I hope so. The sooner the better. We need to ride the wave of his form. It would be very old-school England to pick him as it crashes onto the beach. If I was trying to convince Trevor Bayliss, I’d talk about Bairstow as an essential extra member of the squad; of the importance of having a squad of regulars, from whom the most in-form are picked, especially as it’s a tightly-packed back-to-back series; and therefore of the need to tell Ballance that he’s merely being rotated for a short while.
Sean B – They won’t drop Bell full stop unless he is injured (whether we agree that’s right is up for debate, but that’s just the fact of the matter). Ballance has looked in incredibly poor touch and is most at risk, his footwork has been non-existent and has looked like he has been trying to play french cricket for the past 6 months, which is a real shame as he was a revelation last summer. Bairstow is the next cab off the rank (and more worringly the only cab off the rank), so if Ballance has a poor couple of tests, then i can see Bell moving up to 3, Root at 4 and Bairstow at 5. If we get a couple of injuries to the batting line then i would be seriously worried, as i don’t think Lees is ready, Hales still needs to work on his 4 day game and Vince isn’t good enough. I like the look of Varun Chopra, but that is just a personal opinion.
David O – Yes without question.  Bairstow is in wonderful form and ought to be in the side at this minute. I’m totally unconvinced by Ballance – and was when he was scoring runs for fun. But I hope I am wrong.
The Bogfather:

I think I covered this in Q2

And that is what I think they should do

But knowing how clever our selectors are

They’ll wait ’til the Aussies lead by two bar

and Jonny will then be so out of form

So they’ll pick him, isn’t that the norm?

—————————————————————————————————–
5. Finally, give me a favourite Ashes memory that isn’t 2005 or Botham’s Ashes for the English respondents….
Rooto – Broad, Durham 2013. I thought we were going to lose that one. Also, I was able to watch it abroad on a legal, not-for-UK youtube stream. I think that was officially the last good thing the ECB ever did for fans.
Sean B – As i’m banned from saying 2005 (I pulled so many sickies at work that series to watch the cricket), then i would say the Melbourne and Sydney test in 2010/11. I have always dreamed of watching an England team travel to Australia and then completely crush and dominate the hosts (unlike the normal spineless demises of past and present). This was a demolition job, an absolute embarrassing pounding from both ball and bat and it was wonderful. To see the normally chipper hosts (I was watching the coverage in Malaysia at the time on channel 9) be an embarrassed and meek shell of themselves was extremely fun to watch. I don’t think i’ll ever see an Australian team rolled over by an innings, 2 matches in a row, at home again and i revelled in it. I also really liked and connected with the England team back then as well – The Swann sprinkler, Chris Tremlett (who i had a bit of a man crush on in that series), KP, Trotty, Bresnan, it was just a great and likeable team and we played some wonderful cricket in that series.
David O – 3rd Day at Edgbaston 1985. I was 16. My Dad and I and some of his friends went up for the 5th Test, for the first three days, series level at one-all. After 2 rain-effected days Australia were 330-8. When we got up my Dad looked at me with shock and horror. One of those awful looks parents give teenagers, and we just want to say ‘fuck off!’ I said, “what?” “Look in the mirror”. I did. I was covered in spots. I felt fine – but that was it, we were heading home. When he rang home my Mum revealed that my brother had come down with German measles. Ah.

We drove home to London listening to the cricket. England took both the final wickets in the day’s first over, and despite Gooch going for 19, Gower and Robinson creamed the Aussies all day in glorious sunshine, adding 331 for the 2nd wicket. By the close we were ahead with plenty of wickets in hand, and in a position to boss the match. I’d missed one of England’s great days of Aussie bashing. My Dad had got home in time to pick up his Spurs season ticket and head off to White Hart Lane. First day of the season, Tottenham unveiling new signings Chris Waddle and Paul Allen. They won a spanking 4-2. No wonder he made such a quick decision that morning without protest.
I got through my German measles. I didn’t get to see Ellison’s decisive series-winning spell on the Monday evening live on TV – the BBC had left the cricket when the extra hour took play into their normal evening scheduling – but I can confirm that despite my incapacity, I saw clearly and distinctly Gower take a clean catch off a Wayne Phillips cut via Allan Lamb’s boot on the Tuesday afternoon. It was nowhere near the ground. Obviously. Ever.
The Bogfather:

Not an Ashes memory, but my first Eng v Aus experience. As a bit of background, my initiation to Test cricket came in ’76, watching Greenidge, Richards, Roberts, Holding et al on the box, as well as Hampshire at the United Services ground, Portsmouth. Then, in March ’77 came this…

I lay awake in pure excitement

Radio tight to my ear

Awaiting the Centenary Test

from Melbourne, near midnight here

My first exposure to radio commentary

And from 12000 miles away

Determined to stay awake

E’en tho’ I had school the next day

Sound kept low so as not to wake

Anyone else in the house tonight

Crackling lines and Aussie tones unknown

Yet still Arlott was there to delight

What a first day

Australia blown away

McCosker felled, as seagulls stood in a line

Lever and Willis, Old and Underwood

Only Greg Chappell briefly withstood

This was more than mere dreams, so sublime

Then England were shattered

Lillee and Walker battered

All out for less than a ton

Greig top scored with eighteen

I remember him yorked, it seems

Leaving Willis, not out, one

Second innings commencing

No more tepid batting or fencing

Aussies building, Hookes imperious

Marsh, a century fightingly serious

McCosker jaw-strapped

Aussies cheered and clapped

The score mounted, 463 to win

Surely impossible, imagine Lillee’s grin

Early wickets fall

Brearley grinds and nicks

Then Randall fidgets and refuses to fall

Except for a back-roll after a Lillee ball

He doffs his cap as the bowler glares

Passes 150, supported by Amiss’s share

And Greig, then Knott edge us past 400

Until Knott, LBW, Lillee’s 11th wicket plundered

So near yet so far, and an amazing final stat

45 runs the final difference,as was 100 years before that…

————————————————————————————————-
Well, that was different. The panels will be mixed up now, and it’s not to late to get on one by the way. You have our e-mails and twitter feeds, so on certain days we might get you to comment on the days play or some big issues. Thanks thus far, and we’ll certainly reconvene at the end of the 1st test…..

Ashes Panel #002 – Cook, Smith, KP and Memories

LordCanisLupus75 Comments

australia-celebrate-the-ashes-whitewash_10piscrajeyf61qj64a1ovgr5r (2)

Mainly decent reactions thus far to the first Ashes panel, so the pressure is on for me to keep up the questions. I’m sorry, but I lapsed with question 5, and one of my respondents wrote a wonderful piece on it which I will produce at the end.

So, we have, in no particular order for this panel, Andy In Brum, a legendary Twitter presence and lover of our press @AndyinBrum; Mr Steven Melford, another Twitter follower and occasional poster @drmelf; Keen retweeter and technician extraordinaire, @pgpchappers , better known as Philip Chapman (usually the first to retweet my posts), and cricketjon, who posts here quite regularly and has stood up to the task. I’m waiting on one more, and if they get back to me, I’ll add it on.

The rules are four out of five of you respond, I put it up, and the next batch of questions will be out to the third round of panelists towards the end of the week.

Reminder – Ashes Panel #001 can be found here – with PaulE’s new answers added in!

So, here are the questions and the responses…

1. Many are saying we are riding a crest of a wave after the ODI series. Do you feel it out there? Does it compare to 2005?
Andy – No, the ODI side is so different in personnel, attitude & captaincy that they’re completely separate. Also the 2005 ODI series was against the Aussies, this one wasn’t, so I’m not sure how it’s relevant. Also 2005 came off a fantastic 2004 & winter tour against South Africa. This time we’ve had a fucking awful start to 2014, an ok middle & a fuck awful end, we’ve only managed to draw with NZ this year. 2005 had a pack of excellent quicks, good batting & a captain who knew their players, trusted them & knew how to win games.
DrMelf – When you’re on holiday at the seaside for a fortnight, and it’s been pissing down for 13 days, a small break in the clouds will always be exciting. The ODI series showed what we are capable of and it was great for fans. However, I am worried there are too many ‘old guard’ in the test team to embrace a new mentality.  I hope Bayliss & Farbrace can push the guys to rediscover their fire. Compared to 2005?  It feels like the enemy is ourself as much as it’s Australia. If we are two down after the first couple of tests I expect big changes.

PC –To be honest no it doesn’t compare to 2005. We haven’t just beaten SA and the Windies away and the team is nothing like as established. We are also not playing against one of the greatest ever teams. My view is that the England team now doesn’t have the strength of personality of the 2005 team and as a mentally weaker team are more likely to mirror the opposition behaviour than have the ability to set the tone themselves. With that in mind I don’t think it in anyway compares to 05, personally. The fantastic New Zealand attitude rubbed off on this England team in the one day series especially and, if that continues, then wonderful we are in for a treat. Not likely though. Also remember we were outplayed in the second test.

 
However we are in a hugely different places to where we were after the world cup so that is good news. If we have a big start in Cardiff then it might be interesting – although I think the Balmy Army may have to sing Land of my Fathers rather than Jerusalem to start the day. Realistically, I don’t think we have enough to beat the Australians.
 
Looking back to ’05 the other key difference is that hardly anyone will be able to watch it, the kids will be worrying about their teams football transfers and they won’t know or care who Ben Stokes is as it isn’t on free tv or covered that well by the mainstream channels. That is a bit more bah humbug than it was meant to be!

Cricketjon – I do not think this is like 2005 at all. Back then we hadn’t played them since the difficult winter of 2002/3 and the team had moved on considerably in the period between 2002/3 and 2005. We had, at least, experienced a Sydney Test which was the first one without Warne and McGrath in several years and won due to some quality batting from Vaughan in the third inns of the match and a swansong from Caddick on a dying pitch. in the 2.5 years that followed, the captain had changed and a fit, available and increasingly experienced bowling line up had grouped together with much success.  Dare I say it, KP had added some venom to a reasonable batting line up.

In that era there wasn’t a lot between the composition of the ODI team and the Test team. The ODIs were an appetiser to the main event and quite a good one although the cynically scheduled NatWest Challenge served to fill the pockets of the peeps in charge ( a sign of things to come?) On this occasion, the make up of the teams is different as is the captain though we had to burn some fuel for such separation to take place. The 2015 World Cup was the crystallisation of the chaos that ensued before and in a similar way to 1996 we have new thinking in Planet ODI ( observe inclusion of Neil Smith as pinch hitter at 3 against India in seaming conditions in May 1996 as a knee jerk reaction to Jayasariya and Kalithawana in dry conditions two months earlier). The recent announced ICC regulations will reset the dial and provides another opportunity for England to assess how to play to those regulations notwithstanding that applies to all other teams as well.
In short there may be some carry over of “intent”, “euphoria” and “bonding” but there’s no credible way of arguing otherwise that the teams and captain differ greatly. If England do play well ( and they might) it is less likely to be down to the warm gloss painted by the ODI players no matter what is reported afterwards. Little is reported of what Dermot Reeve advised them in his one day assignment but the hell for leather performance cannot be entirely coincidental. The rewiring spoke of is of a different nature for Tests.
———————————————————————————————-
2. Alastair Cook is seen as a key man for England, and he does appear back to some good form. How do you think he’ll go in this series?
Andy – Batting wise I’ve no idea, hopefully well, he’s looked like he remembers how to hold the bat, is still & scored runs, last year he didn’t. Captaincy wise, a burning paper bag full of dog shit could do better.
Dr.Melf – There’s no question that Cook(y) is looking better with the bat than any time in the last two years. We need his runs, so I hope he does well. However, Australia will clearly target both his batting and his captaincy. If they get to him and he personally starts the series badly? I think he will be a huge liability. As an individual he has strength but I think he lacks the aggression we need to bag this series.

PC – I believe he has already agreed to step down after the summer if the team looses, so won’t be under any personal pressure to succeed as captain. That will be to his benefit. His form is good. His technique is looking stronger than it has for ages so he is in a good place. His hip alignment is much better, hence his impact, really good to see, but I have no idea why it has taken so long to sort.

With Harris looking unlikely to start the first game and him being a good player of the quick stuff, he should do well, an attack of Johnson, Starc and Hazelwood may not be as intimidating as Harris, Siddle and Johnson at their peaks, as it was in Aus last time. Cook (and the rest of the batsmen) will certainly benefit from not having the accuracy of Siddle and Harris thundering in at him. Cook’s Ashes record is mixed and it is time for that to change.
Cricketjon –  It is instructive he is in good form and telling that he had to venture outside of the bubble to make the changes to his game. The Australians will target him and have a better chance of frustrating him than the West Indies or New Zealand. Australia’s availability of a quality first change bowler will be the reason. How he overcomes that is both a matter for him and a matter of fortitude. His record is excellent against average attacks and less so against the quality attacks so much rests on him setting a precedent. All this with the pressures of captaincy. We shall know even more about him come the end of August than we do now and yet we have learned much in the last 18 months.
—————————————————————————————————–
3. Stuart Broad has been clear in thinking that Steve Smith at number three might be a vulnerability. Do you think he is right?
Andy – Yes, get to him early with a swinging ball of course he’ll be vulnerable. Not that I have anyfaith that broad or Jimmy will pitch it up in the stumps to get any swing.
Dr.Melf – This has been a big problem position for Australia in recent times. On paper you’d agree with Broad(y) which is why England historically would never make this gamble. But Smith looks a like the kind of guy who loves proving people wrong, so I think he’ll rise to the occasion. He will be helped if Warner has a great series.

PC – No.

I think Smith’s technique is fine and we don’t play on uncovered wickets any more, we play on low, slow roads. His form is not a fluke it is a sustained period of excellence. Smith will score runs. If Rogers and Warner get a few starts it will be very messy for England. To be honest I would move Root to 3 to relieve Ballance of the pressure and to get his impetus into the top order, which would be a similar move to Smith batting at 3. But not many agree with me on that!!
Cricketjon – The media have pages and screens to fill and rent a quote Broad isn’t going to deviate too far from his tape on a loop monosyllabic responses. Number 3 is clearly more challenging than lower down the order and Warner may give him cause to test his skills early on. He looks like someone to me for whom (from an ugly stance) everything comes together perfectly at the split second it needs to. I do not know whether Broad is right or not but sides do have this habit of sending in their best player into a difficult position. To answer the point a different way, I wouldn’t want us sending Root in at 3 this summer, the burden is on Australia to demonstrate why they think this benefits the endgame at the expense of every other option.
————————————————————————————————-
4. If you’ve been reading the blog, we’ve been walking down memory lane. Give me an Ashes memory….
Andy – Sunday, day 4 of the Oval test 2005, Oz in a strong position with both openers getting tons. Freddy & Hoggard with a fantastic spell to get the last 9 wickets for under a hundred. That spell was as vital in saving the test as KP’S fire works the next day. Plus the Aussie players all wearing sunglasses to pretend it was really bright & all the England fans putting umbrellas up to pretend it was raining. Now that’s banter. Oh and meeting twatto in 2009, a really nice man to random fans.
Dr.Melf – Lunch at my grandparents in 1981 (aged nine). My dad and my grandad cheering as Bob Willis(y) scythed through the Aussies at Headingley. I walked in after his fourth wicket to ask “what’s going on?” My dad replied “something absolutely amazing”.  The oven was turned down and the roast was eaten late. #Hooked (#skatingonthinice – ed.)
PC – Sydney 2003. England bat first. It is my first Ashes test live and Lee opens the bowling with absolute thunderbolts. The Australian team is without Warne and McGrath, but Gillespie, Lee, Bichel and McGill was more than useful attack to a beleaguered England team! Vaughan was out early nicking off to a ball I can confidently say no other batsman on the planet at that time would have got within a foot of. Butcher walked out at three and batted astonishingly. He ground out a 100 when he could have been out at any time. Hussein got a pair of 70’s and Alex Stewart made runs In the Aussie innings there was the hugely emotional Steve Waugh last ball of the day 100, then we had Vaughan’s match winning second innings 180. An unbelievable innings. Followed up by Caddick’s last appearance for England by bowling out the Aussies. (should get you to write an Ashes Memory on that. ed.)
Oh and Harmison struggled to hit cut strip…
 
A brilliant 5 days and a brilliant holiday!
 
We had lost the ashes, but I was unbeaten in my part of that tour!
Cricketjon – Ashes memory. Hmmm. Sitting inside a damp rented house as a 12 year old with my mother watching ( on free-to-air)  Botham’s 118 at Manchester in 1981. When he was dismissed, the number 3, Tavare ( batting to orders because he was a dasher in the county game) was on 69 not out! My memory is of how dark it was that afternoon both in Birmingham where I watched it and at Old Trafford. For those who see those shots on the recordings now and think ” yeah ok, he was good but so what?” they need to realise that people didn’t play like that in those days. He truly was exceptional. It is fair to say that having top edged Lillee twice into the Old Warwick Road end he was millimetres from an Andy Roberts ball in the mouth repeat. He had no fear and he brightened up a very dark day and dismal rioting Britain ( sorry – don’t do royal weddings).
—————————————————————————————————
5. Let’s go for it. If he were selected, which won’t happen, how do you think Kevin Pietersen would have done?
Andy – If he was fit, a few infuriating 20’s or 30’s & probably a big fuckyou score & a vitally important wicket. But no thanks or appreciation.
Dr. Melf – Kevin loves a good script. Particularly when he’s the romantic lead. He is fit, playing well with a point to prove. I genuinely think he would have “mullered them” this series. I also think it’s a shame that a sport in desperate need of some exciting stories has been denied a fantastic narrative.
PC – The short version….
In short, 3 or 4 50’s and an epic, match winning 100 at some point. Because that is what he does. Also a crass interview with Jonathan Agnew about playing for the team, great to see Rooty batting so well and wanting to get 10,000 test runs. The jumpers aren’t mentioned.

Cricketjon – He would have done ok. A 300 in division two doesn’t make him a genius nor indeed was he disengaged in Sydney ( well no more so than anyone else in the team and that is the critical point, no-one else was demonised for it ). This isn’t about KP anymore because the ECB always continue to supply us with new material but there is no doubt they could have handled the matter  better ( I suppose aplomb is a bit much to ask). His absence means that Root can take over with only a slightly soiled sheet of paper when the time comes as distinct from the reams of pungent toilet roll currently wrapped around Cooks pristine whites. Root can take it forward without the legacy issues, as far as I am concerned, let Cook deal with the legacy of KPgate since he was undoubtedly involved in the shenanigans. What goes around comes around, it’s just a shame for the paying fan.

What I strongly object to is the rewriting of history that ECBTV propagates. The absence of KP in the Billy Joel remix flies in the face of what would have been a 2-2 drawn series in 2005. Lest we forget.
————————————————————————————-
So, many thanks to those who participated. I think this is working thus far, and would love to keep this going as best we can. I’ve always wanted to get you lot writing stuff, and so far, so good. And my god, have we got an ecelctic mix for the third set of questions. We have a poet, an Aussie or two, and a couple of other regulars.
I mentioned Philip’s epic on KP as a long-form answer for number 5. Instead of a separate post, I’ve added it below. Enjoy or wail, your decision.
——————————————————————————————————————
Here is PC’s Long version of the KP question…
An alternative view of a hero/villain’s return [delete as appropriate]
 
After being frustrated by the Welsh rain the Australian team humbled the “new era” England team with a very aggressive brand of cricket at Lord’s. In fact England were really struggling with Bairstow already called up for Jos Buttler whose split webbing had got infected.
 
Gary Ballance at three had made a no impact in Cardiff and made a pair at Lord’s. As the selectors sat down to agree the squad for Edgbaston, a mysterious force comes in and hypnotises the selectors, including Jonathan Agnew who sits in on the meetings so he can tweet the decisions really time.
 
Somehow they agree to select a maverick former player to come back and “rescue” the team, in a selection that harked back to the days of Brian Close. Steven Davies another Surrey player was discussed, but it was felt he “wasn’t quite ready” no one was totally sure what that meant but Aggers assured them it would keep the journalists inside cricket happy and the sages would nod wisely.
 
When the announcement was made on Sky news the following day Shane Warne was interviewed saying “ow look, this is the best think that could have happened”
 
No one was sure what this meant either, but the Guardian cricket columnist suggested foul play. He then wrote a lengthy blog on the retrograde step and how Davies, an openly gay cricketer, was the future, in the “comment is free” section below the “line” there were accusations of click bait, but these were censored. Boycott mentioned something about rhubarb and his mum.
 
Fast forward to the morning of the third test. A fight had broken out in the dressing room, someone had already started kicking off about the new stash and a misspelt name. New hi tech Adidas woolly jumpers were thrown off the balcony and Afrikaans was heard outside the rooms. Paul Farbrace was laughing with Trevor Bayliss and ignoring the fracas. Peter Moores was interviewed about the jumpers and said they should talk later about them, but a lot of scientific stuff had gone into the design – especially so they would look great on kids from the right kind of family. There was absolutely no mention about data, I repeat no mention about the data, even for Sky. The BBC wrote another apology letter.
 
Meanwhile out in the middle Alistair Cook had elected to bat, said some form of waffle to Mark Nicholas about being delighted to have a world class player back in the dressing room and said Root at 3 KP at 4 and Bell back to 5.
 
Piers Morgan had self combusted in his private box and even his wife was said to be relieved. “there were three of us in a very crowded relationship” she was overheard saying by a Mirror correspondent.
 
Back in the middle Alistair Cook had started nicely, but lyth was out early from a snorter by a bowler called Mitchell. The tourists had named a 4 man Mitchell attack, with Lyon for support. Clarke said they had thought of playing Siddle, but he had refused to change his name to Mitchell so it didn’t happen.
 
Just before lunch with England on 69-1 The heroic skipper inside edged a full ball onto the stumps for 27 off 98 balls.
 
There was a hush around the ground.
Cook departed to polite applause, then the booing started. First it was the Aussies in the crowd, then the Yorkshire fans who felt Lees or Rashid should be playing not a past it, cast off Saffer with a didgy knee.
Finally a small portion of the crowd got to their feet and cheered, only to be removed from the ground by Andy Flower and Giles Clarke dressed as the ECB security guards.
 
First ball. The Aussies were on their toes, with a funky field of three midwickets and 4 slips.
 
The new batsman knocked the ball into the leg side and called for the “Redbull” run. Root responded and there was a cloud of dust as the ball broke the stumps as Root leapt for his ground.
 
It goes upstairs.
 
Fortunately Colin Graves had stepped into have a chat with the third umpire and the Yorkshire hero was adjudged to have made his ground.
 
In the sky commentary box Michael “Slats” Slater was incensed, letting out a strange wailing noise through his nose. David Gower was non-plused and Bumble was going nuts about his car and it not starting.  Nobody was watching anyway as the sky coverage had just been put up to £250 a month to pay for the football.
 
Back on the pitch Root and the South African born batsman made it unscathed to lunch.
 
“Honours even, my dear old things” said Blowers to his adoring fans whilst eating some cake in the TMS box.
 
After lunch Root started playing well and moved to a nice fifty with a cover drive. Ed Smith suggested he looked like Michael Vaughan in his pomp. At the other end, the 100 test veteran was strangely becalmed. The online ball by ball commentary suggested he was facing a more hostile environment than he received in his native South Africa for that memorable first ODI series there, after his failures in Zimbabwe.
 
40 mins after lunch there was a crack like a rifle shot which awakened the post lunch slumbering crowd. A split second later the ball was removed from an advertising board. The ECB marketing machine was furious with the batsman for damaging their sponsors logo, who had moved to 40 before anyone had really clocked what had happened. Not that the Waitrose chief executive minded – he was watching at Lords as Edgbaston was too far north for Waitrose.
 
Ruing the decision not to play a left arm spinner, Clarke (who had earlier pulled his hamstring setting a funky field) asked Warner to have a bowl and he promptly got into a fight with Joe Root, who was soon out hooking at Mitchell Johnson.
 
In strutted Ian Bell, showing he was up for the fight all collar popped and positive intent. He knew the Aussies were scared of him.
 
At the other end his partner at the crease raised his bat for a well-crafted and chance-less half century. Bayliss and Farbrace are on the balcony clapping whilst the Skipper doesn’t look up from his hymn book. Broad was too busy tweeting and Jimmy was in the match referee’s office still talking about Ravi Jadaja.
 
After tea it was like the apocalypse had arrived at Edgbaston. Clarke had set the field for a barrage of the short stuff for both Bell and the newly recalled batsman. While Bell bobbed and weaved, fearful that he might get out without playing enough trademark cover drives at the other end, as the Mitchell’s charged in the ball was deposited further and further into the stands.  
 
The crowd was going nuts now and as his 100 came up the ground stood to applaud the returning king – with many saying “he always was a player of great innings, I still don’t think he is a great player though”.
 
At the close of play, England are 331-3, Root with 67, Bell with 48not out and the other player with 158 not out. 
 
James Taylor was seen crying over at Trent Bridge as once again his county runs weren’t enough. 

Ashes Panel #001 – Sledging, Scheduling, Sentimentalism, Sky

LordCanisLupus41 Comments

Welcome to a new idea, which I hope will work. TLG and I will come up with five (could be more, could be less) questions and selected volunteers (and I might try some of the regulars who didn’t) will answer them. It’s a format blatantly copied from the Daily Mail, but with bilious inadequates rather than professional writers and broadcasters. I’m grateful for all volunteers.

I will wait for the first four responses, and it would be great if you could turn any answers around in 48 hours if you are requested (and let me know if you can’t as I have plenty of volunteers).

Let me introduce the panel for the first of these – we have stalwarts Keyser Chris (@keyserchris), our resident Yorkie, metatone, @EoinJPMorgan on Twitter (known as Hillel) and our reasonably infrequent, but very welcome to be here OscardeBosca. We are waiting on one more (our man in Finland) and will add his answers when they arrive. He did warn me of internet problems in advance. UPDATE – I’ve added PaulE’s comments, so all five are now here.

A second set of panel questions will be e-mailed tonight. TLG and I might even answer them ourselves.

As I say, I hope it works.

1. What do the Ashes mean to you?
KC – The Ashes for me started as a legend, specifically Beefy at Headingley. I was only 5 at the time so didn’t experience it, but as I grew up later watching what seemed like endless summers of TMS, Richie on the telly, Viv Richards, Windies bowling & Gatting/Gower/Gooch, it was always there in discussions. But it came alive for me with the Warne ball. I had never seen anything like it, and it was the portent of pain up until 2005. God, ’05 was GOOD! The Ashes is generally expected pain at the hands of a gritty Border or Waugh, with intermittent huge highs, 2010/11 particularly (I was at Adelaide in 2006 and 2010 – yin and yang indeed).
OdB – There is a lot to admire about Australians and their attitude to life and sport.  It’s why beating them at cricket is satisfying.  I was 9 in 1981 and didn’t really get cricket, 86/87 was when I have vivid memories of my dad telling me we’d won when I was waking up for school.  So then fast-forward to 2005 having got into cricket post 87 and I really, really wanted to beat the Aussies and 2004 showed me we had the team to do it.  I have loved the past 10 years even though it included two away whitewashes as we have beaten the Aussies at home.  For me it should be the epitome of test cricket and it is the one team I want to beat.  Hayden epitomises the Australian cricketer i want to beat (and potentially see cry 😀) not enough of the current lot have an element of Hayden about them (Warner excepted) which is unfortunate.  I like some of them (such as Harris and Lyon) and I feel dirty saying it.
Metatone – When I was young, the big Test was the West Indies. Greenidge and Haynes, Richards, Marshall, Ambrose and Patterson all stick in my mind. And (biographical alert!) my Dad is Indian, so India and Pakistan loomed large. When you get down to it, the Ashes were just another series at first. There was a mythology about Botham and 1981, but I was only 6 at the time. Then came 1989… The Ashes became a ritual reminder of how low England cricket had sunk. There’s an irony that in some ways I didn’t really notice how good the Aussies were (the new dominant team across the world) because I knew how bad we were. 2005 was a joy not just because of victory, but because we’d turned a corner, we were no longer inept.
Hillel – Like most English fans, my interest in cricket was sparked by the Ashes. Specifically, my epiphany came in 2009 when I wandered off from the physical exertion of tennis camp (don’t ask) to find solace in the wicket-taking antics of Stuart Broad. In fact, I even managed to maintain from 2009 to 2011 that I was a cricket fan who “only followed the Ashes”, before I too was eventually sucked in to the spiralling vortex of hipster cricket, attending county out-ground fixtures and desperately refreshing live scorecards of affiliate T20 games. To me, the Ashes are not simply another Test series but a cultural outpost which England and Australia share. The competition is as old as modern cricket itself, and unrivalled by any perhaps besides that of India/Pakistan. Whilst there remains a certain magic to the country becoming enchanted with the Ashes every couple of years, I am always reminded by the specialness of the contest when chancing upon a random Australian abroad, and without hesitation jumping into an in-depth Ashes discussion as if we’d been buddies for years.
PE – The Ashes means different things at different times. It means of course, victory and defeat, and gloating rights. It means heroic narratives; Botham and Brearley, Bob Willis and Graham Dilley, David Gower in the sunshine and Allan Border kicking back. But most of all it means 2005 and a nation briefly at peace with itself: positive, comfortable and progressive, it felt like the nation and the cricket team were as one, ready to embrace the future. Bliss was it in that dawn to be alive, But to be (relatively) young was very heaven! Sadly it wasn’t to last, and England as a nation and a cricket team hasn’t been as likeable since.
 
2. We all agree (say if you don’t) that three series in two years is overkill, but do you think this is damaging the brand that is the Ashes?
KC –  I had no problem with back to back series, the one-off idea really excited me & separating it from the WC is still essentially good. And there is precedent. This series though is the one I don’t like, blatant filler even pre-ICC stitch up. Should stick to its cycle from now on. Not optimistic though…
OdB – the ashes test series should be the epitome of test cricket, but there has been too much if it.  It now feels that Eng v SA or Eng v Pakistan is now a more important/interesting series, and that is due to its scarcity.  The ECB has milked this goose.  I went to Edgbaston to watch the Ashes in 2001 and my ticket was £28 for the Eric Hollies stand.  The same ticket for 2015 has cost me £81, now I may be wrong but I don’t remember 9-10% inflation over the past 14 years.  The lack of free to air coverage and the rising costs mean that whilst I will continue to go and watch test cricket in England, it will be an older and older audience watching and the younger audiences won’t be interested in the game.
Metatone – It’s not all the scheduling (the ECB has done plenty else to put those “outside cricket” off) but I’m basically bored of playing Australia. I’m much more looking forward to the SA and Pakistan series. Of course, a close series could reignite some enthusiasm. Part of the problem has been that since 2009 things have been rather lop-sided. Still, familiarity has left me jaded and yes, the media hoopla around the Ashes now rings hollow. I don’t think the damage is permanent, if we get back to a proper schedule – but right now it is hard to get excited.
Hillel – People tend to forget the enormous benefit of playing the Ashes with such frequency, inasmuch as it allows a narrative to be constructed. Usually the length of time between one Test series and another is so long that it virtually disconnects the two from each other. The beauty of the Ashes being played every two years is that we can remember the last and the anguish or triumph it brought. All of the vendettas, the rivalries, and the storylines that surround individual players exist because the Ashes are played so often. We would not have witnessed the complete evolution of Ricky Ponting, Michael Clarke or Mitchell Johnson if the Ashes were played more sporadically. It is also worth pointing out the majority of the British public only witness the Ashes every four years, for it is only the diehards who are prepared to risk the cycle of poverty initiated by being caught napping at work. Whilst the last few years have brought us more exposure to the Aussies than is recommended in a lifetime, normal service of England’s most popular cricket competition will resume, bringing the Ashes frequently enough to be brilliant, and yet infrequently enough to avoid devaluing the contest.
PE – Not the ‘b’ word again! Yes and no. The real damage was done in 2013 when the venal ECB and it’s draconian coach demanded far too much of the players. All the reports say that the England camp was in a good place until around 2011. The ECB and Andy Flower damaged England’s ‘brand’ more than any Ashes series.
 
3. Do you think the media are making too much of this sledging issue? Do you see it as a psychological ploy to get under the skin of the Aussies?
KC – I’m not sure. Aussies sledging is not news. England it seems we’re worse than I thought at it, hadn’t realised how bad their rep was. Agnew using the Hughes speech against Clarke was contemptible though. Ultimately it’s mostly boorish, but adds some theatre to a series. Though I reserve the right to poke endless fun at Shane Watson.
OdB – It will backfire.  The Aussies don’t give a shit what others think of how they conduct themselves, and Agnew sermonising to Clarke about Hughes is not something I want to hear.  I don’t care about sledging, it goes on, it works for some and not for others.  What I don’t like to see is the moralising that goes on after, especially regarding the ‘spirit’ of cricket.  The ridiculous nonsense regarding whether to walk or not (don’t, the Aussies don’t (when in Rome dear boy)) that became the meme of the last home series, it would appear that until the series start and proper incidents occur, the MSM Ashes preview meme is player behaviour.  When you are paid to write you need something to occupy your pen.
Metatone – Yes, it’s typical media froth. It’s not against the Laws of the game, so the Aussies will continue the way they always do. (I lived for a while in Perth, WA – and if you think they’ll do anything other than play up to the very limit of the laws, you’re a fool.) If it is an ECB ploy, it’s an inept one. (Tautology alert?) If anything it helps build the AU siege mentality. Worth noting that their fast bowlers will be looking to hurt the batsmen – and I’m sure there will be plenty of verbals. The way to respond is to get ahead on the scoreboard. The verbals always start to look silly then.
Hillel –  It is generally impossible to understand the workings of the British media, and this case is no exception. The tour of an exceptionally pleasant New Zealand team have left the media banging a ridiculous drum of worthless stupidity requesting that the Australians replicate the behaviour of their neighbours, naturally forgetting that such a cause makes no sense whatsoever. Whilst New Zealand are simply an international team with no cause for us to hate, the Ashes brings genuine competition between England and Australia. When an Aussie sledges an Englishman (or South African for that matter), it represents the wider rivalry between the two nations. In my mind, one hasn’t understood the purpose of the Ashes if they don’t want to throttle an Aussie by the time it’s all over. If this is a psychological ploy to irk our Australian cousins, it is a horrifically awful one. Rather than splashing our complaints all over the back pages, we should think about sledging the Aussies back: Meet fire with fire.
PE – Yes, and yes. We know how the ECB and their lapdogs in the mainstream media operate. File under cant and hypocrisy, next to smear and Operation Pietersen. Vic Marks did a wonderful job of lampooning his fellow scribes, Darren Lehmann, proved himself a wily operator today. No-one’s fooled by media spin anymore, are they? (Don’t feel the need to answer).
 
4. I’m not a fan of Sky’s coverage of cricket, but I’m a notorious curmudgeon. What do you think of it?
KC –  Technically, Sky’s coverage is superb, near-flawless. Most of the commentators are really good value (Holding, Nasser & Atherton especially) bar the likes of Knight & Strauss. It’s nowhere near as sycophantic as Channel 9, but you do have to listen with a pinch of salt at times (Botham…). Declaration speculation in particular is crap – play the time left in the game, not the weather. Sorry, bit of a personal bugbear that!
OdB – Channel 4 went to racing regularly and unless you had satellite or cable you missed cricket.  The BBC were similar.  Sky’s coverage is at very least committed to covering it properly.  The problem is the commentary team is hit or miss, for every Atherton there is nick Knight (anodyne),Botham (awful) and Warne (best taken in small doses).  However the smugness of Lovejoy and ficjam (Ed ‘fucking’ Smith) make TMS unlistenable at times (although I do like Boycott, Alison Mitchell, and Charlie Dagnall).
Metatone -Commentary teams are a matter of taste, I don’t mind most of Sky’s collection overall, but it rarely thrills me. Some of that is the passage of time – we lost Ritchie Benaud and it makes a big difference. Technically, it’s good camera work – but you can look at the highlights from 2005 and it’s obvious that it’s not actually that much better than the Channel 4 coverage. (I’ll note as a former professional with sport photography that some of the recent NZ series camerawork was below par.) Sky’s defenders always invoke BBC coverage from days gone by (we had some good youtube of 1971 Boycott in a comment thread, you can see the very big technical limitations there) but compared with Channel 4 of 10 years ago, the improvements aren’t large. Key point, I don’t think the technical advances remotely make up for the fact that I now have to go to the gym or the pub to watch coverage.
Hillel –  With the exception of Nick Night, Shane Warne complete with endless anecdotes about strip clubs and golf courses (kill me now if the word mulligan is mentioned once during this Ashes), and just about all of their pundits, Sky actually do a rather decent job. They employ some rather excellent voices of reason, Mike Atherton chief among them, and whilst we take it for granted in the modern game, the picture quality and coverage is actually incredibly good. With the exception of the odd silly gimmick (what’s the point of the rev counter if every spinner from Xavier Doherty to Muttiah Muralitharan is going to be in the orange zone), the analytical supplications they provide are genuinely quite insightful. Although I do begrudge the concept of handing over the rights of all English cricket to such an expensive TV package such as Sky, that is no-one’s fault but the ECB, and Sky themselves must be commended on excellent coverage.
PE – Don’t get to see a great deal of it here in Finland, but, from what little I’ve seen it does seem to have embarked on a road marked ‘despair’. The cricket itself is good, the adverts and commentary less so. I’m more disappointed by TMS to be honest. It was a lifeline for many years, charming, eccentric but vaguely inclusive and often very funny indeed. I find it excruciating now, patronising, craven and humourless. Thank goodness for Geoffrey, one of the few credible voices in the game.
 
5. The question on all lips it seems is the transfer of the ODI attitude over to the test team? Is it important, and if yes, do you think it will happen?

KC –  If they can transfer it, yes, it could be very important. But Cook is the skipper, and I trust him with the team’s attitude even less than I would with a spinner, so it in short, no it won’t happen.

OdB – Yes, the ODI series in 2005 was important as the attitude shown then was crucial and it carried forward to the test series, however the test and ODI squads were very similar then.  Unfortunately I think it will be lost in translation.  Cook hasn’t the capacity to play in that fashion, and whilst he should be the perfect rock for the more attacking players to perform around (and I hope he plays like he did against NZ as he appeared back to his unhurried best, it may be slow, there may only be 3/4 scoring shots, but it is mightily effective).  My issue is that he is a reactive defensive captain.  He makes poor decisions on the field which appears to permeate into the team and then as more things go wrong the worse things get.  Our fielding during the ODI series was average (which is a vast improvement on the test side  who’s fielding has been mediocre at best (Jordan apart)). Is this the fault of poor captaincy and poor decisions leading to lower morale, more frustration, and ultimately sledging the opposition?  Einstein once said that madness was doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.  Since India away, England have been in control of a lot of games in winning positions and thrown them away, day 4 at headingley (pick a year either 2014 or 2015 will do).  Cook appears incapable of learning from his mistakes and I genuinely think his captaincy will be the difference between the two sides.  Their bowlers are good but these are our home conditions, and I think both batting lineups are potentially brittle.  As with most 5 match series there will be a number of key points, if Cook has an ordinary day we might win some, if he regresses to the mean we will lose those and subsequently the Ashes.

Metatone – Of course it is important. Vaughan said it before 2005 and he proved it on the field (as indeed other teams have) – Australia are out of their comfort zone when the opposition don’t back down. Test cricket is not just about skill, it’s a mental game too. Will it happen? Probably not. Cook is by nature a grinder. We have some batsmen who can do it differently (Root, Buttler, Stokes) but our bowling doesn’t look set up to attack.

Hillel – It wasn’t too long ago the media proclaimed the same should be applied in reverse, and that England should carry forward their momentum from the Test series victory against India to ODI’s, and onward to the World Cup. We all know how that turned out. Not only is it not important to carry over the ODI attitude to the Test team, it is vitally imperative not to. There is no intrinsic flaw in the conservative methods employed by our Test team, and the media banging on about how Cook must be as aggressive as the ODI team will put undue, unnecessary pressure on him. The problems which the English Test squad encounter are those of poor tactical decisions during the game (such as field settings) and inconsistent performances of batsmen and bowlers, not the attitude to Test cricket itself. Whilst some will point to the radical development of how Tests are played, as exhibited by New Zealand, it is worth remembering that England did win that Test series. The sooner international teams are able to divorce the longer and shorter formats from each other, the better they will perform in both.

PE – I’m delighted by the transformation undergone by the ODI team. Demonstrable evidence that those criticising the decisions of the last couple of years are right. It just goes to show what can be achieved by a group of players with the right captain and the right coach. It’s all about mentality. I’d be very surprised if the form is transferred: to paraphrase Bill Clinton ‘it’s the captain, stupid.’

So – there you have it. A number of voices, with some great points (they rate Sky a lot higher than me). Chew on it and think along. Because you might be next…..