The Ashes Blog

Preview: This is a big, big Test match, as it’s only the fourth time in about 40 years that the result in the fifth Test will decide who wins The Ashes. I can’t see Australia losing, but you never know what impact someone like Freddie Flintoff could have.

The teams? Well, I think England has made a mistake by choosing Harmison instead of Onions. And I think Australia would have been better off picking Brett Lee instead of Stuart Clark.

England will bat first, and we all know what happened last time. This time they’ll need to score at least 600, and I’d consider that unlikely.

Day 1: England 307 for 8 (Bell 72, Siddle 4-63)

s

It was hardly a day of high skill, as Australia’s bowlers were ordinary and England’s batsmen gave their wickets a way. I posted a Tweet saying that I thought this might be Ian Bell’s day for a big score, and although not huge, his 72 was England’s highest individual score. So at least the decision to move him to number 3 for England seems to have paid off this time, but will it work again? He got there, but he didn’t fill me with confidence.

Australia played Clark instead of Lee, and although Clark was efficient he also failed to take a wicket. I still think Lee would have been a better wicket taking option, although this pitch looks like it’ll be a turner so perhaps the selectors should have included Hauritz. Mind you, if the wicket is a spinner’s deck, then Australia’s part-time spinners in Clarke, North, and Katich could probably take care of things.

Overall, the Aussies will be pleased enough. However, with the pitch looking a little dodgy they’ll need to build a 1st innings lead of at least 100 because batting last at The Oval could be tricky.

Day 2: England 332 and 58 for 3 lead Australia 160 (Katich 50, Broad 5-37, Swann 4-38) by 230 runs

Well, that was interesting. Dodgy umpiring decisions that went against both sides, dodgy batting by Australia and England’s top order, and a dodgy pitch that will unfortunately have the greatest impact on the game. Dodgy.

England is now well in control, and look set to regain the Ashes. Australia could conceivably fight their way back if they can dismiss England for less than 120 (which is possible), but then they’ll need to bat extremely well in very difficult conditions in the fourth innings. Doable, yes, but highly unlikely.

Day 3: Australia 160 and 80 for 0 (Watson 31*, Katich 42*) need 466 more runs to beat England 332 and 373 for 9 dec (Trott 119, Strauss 75, Swann 63, North 4-98)

England is now well in control, and The Ashes are almost theirs. Almost, but not quite. Although the pitch is deteriorating, and England has the bowlers to take 10 wickets, it is not a given that England will win at The Oval. This Australian team should fight hard, and if they put some pressure on England’s bowlers, anything could happen. Mind you, I only give the Aussies a 0.2 per cent chance of getting there.

Day three at The Oval was a great one for England. I said yesterday that if England could be dismissed for less than 120 then Australia would be back in the game. Clearly that didn’t happen.

New boy Jonathan Trott scored a century in just his second innings (and became only the second Englishman to score a century in this series), and looks the part. The lower order of Swann and Broad also added valuable runs, and really made the pitch look rather tame. The Aussie bowling was, however, pretty ordinary. They bowled wide of off stump far too often, and just made it too easy for the batsmen.

Australia now faces a massively monumentally hugely big total to chase, and it will be close to unattainable even for a pretty strong batting side like Australia. However, based on England’s effort, if the Aussies can get to 200 for  no more than two wickets down, then they are on track for a new world record. And watch out for Ponting. This is his last innings in England, and he does tend to play well in the big games.

Day 4: England 332 and 373 for 9 dec beat Australia 160 and 348 (Hussey 121, Ponting 66, Swann 4-120) by 197 runs

Congratulations to the England cricket team on a comprehensive 197 run win at The Oval. It was always the most likely result, though as an Australian fan I am pleased with the fight shown by our batsmen. To score 348 on this pitch (which is more than England scored in their 1st innings) is a great effort, and it ended up being a couple of run-outs that finished things off for Australia rather than the bowlers.

As I expected, captain Ricky Ponting batted brilliantly for 66, and it was only a poor call from Mike Hussey that led to his run-out. If it weren’t for that then he looked set for a really, really big score. As for Hussey, he might have done enough to keep his place in the side for a little while longer with a determined century.

So as England regain the Ashes, again, I suppose we can expect to see jubilant scenes across the UK. Last time England won their players were given an MBE. This time I suppose they receive a Dukedom. They might want to watch that they don’t overdo the celebrations, however, as the events that transpired after their 2005 victory inspired Australia to a 5-0 whitewash the next time they met.

When these sides meet again in Australia in 2010/2011, there will be some small changes but a lot of the personnel could be the same. There’ll obviously be no Freddie Flintoff, and possibly no Michael Hussey or Stuart Clark for the Australians. It will be an interesting series, as Australia will once again seek revenge on the old enemy. I’ll be booking my seat at the Gabba for the First Test for sure.

Preview: For England Flintoff is out, and Harmison is in. Prior has just injured himself during a warm-up, but will play. Their side has lost a lot of balance, and you get the impression that once the openers go, there’s not a lot there to add big runs. The Australians will be loving it.

For Australia Hauritz is out, and Stuart Clark comes in – a good move, that one, considering the wicket. I hope I don’t regret saying that. Brad Haddin is also back behind the stumps, although you have to wonder if he’s fully recovered from a busted finger.

So, what can we expect? England is definitely weaker, but will their batsmen finally stand up and perform?  Can Australia’s bowlers figure out how to take 20 wickets?

Day 1: Australia 196 for 4 (Ponting 78, Watson 51) lead England 102 (Prior 37*, Siddle 5-21) by 94 runs

Before the first drinks break of the first session I made the following comment on Twitter:

I wonder if this will be a 14 wicket day #ashes

It turns out I was right, as England, batting first, lost all 10 wickets and Australia lost 4. Absolutely amazing!! England really looked horrible right from the start, when Andrew Strauss should have been given out the first ball of the match. In my preview of the fourth Test, I wondered if England’s batsmen would finally play well – they didn’t. I also asked whether Australia’s bowlers could finally take 20 wickets in an Ashes Test – yes, they can.

Prior to this game I would have been happy to see Peter Siddle carrying the drinks, but today he stood up to claim his best ever bowling figures of 5 for 21. Apparently he received some helpful advice from England discard Darren Pattinson – perhaps big Darren should get a game!

What about day 2? England will need early wickets, something that is definitely achievable on this wicket. However, they’ll have to get through Clarke and North, the two guys who so brilliantly saved the game for Australia at Edgbaston. If they can’t do that, and if Australia builds a lead of over 200, then this Test would appear to be all over.

Day 2: England 102 and 82 for 5 trail Australia 445 (North 110, Clarke 93, Ponting 78, Broad 6-91) by 261 runs

This match is pretty much all over, and we’ve only had two days of cricket. Somehow, though, it seems like it’s gone on for much longer with 25 wickets falling in just 6 sessions. The Australians have obviously picked up some momentum from their successful final day in the Third Test at Edgbaston, and they have completely dominated this Headingley Test. England have not been in the game at all. They are either completely dependent upon the presence of Pietersen and Flintoff, or else they were never really in this series and it was only Australia’s inability to perform at 100% that gave England a chance. Now that Australia is getting back to operating at their best they seem unstoppable.

The Australians batted superbly on the second day, especially Michael Clarke and Marcus North, who put on 152 for the fifth wicket and took the game completely away from England. Then in came Stuart Clark for a nice little cameo of 32 from 22 balls (including 3 sixes).

England have only got 5 wickets left in the bank, and I can’t see them lasting too long on the third day. Matt Prior is still in and will probably go the tonk for a few quick runs, and one or two of the tailend batsmen might do the same, but England is a defeated team and will need to improve significantly if they are to be competitive in the final deciding Test at The Oval.

Day 3: Australia 445 (North 110, Clarke 93, Ponting 78, Broad 6-91) beat England 102 and 263 (Swann 62, Broad 61, Johnson 5-69, Hilfenhaus 4-60) by an innings and 80 runs

England: woeful, insipid, insecure

Australia: confident, accurate, perfect

After the previous three Test matches being relatively close (in so much as each team was in the game at some point, or at least performed well at times), this Headingley Test was decidedly one-sided from the very first hour of the first day. Australia was totally in control, and despite some late hitting from the tailenders on day 3, the match was always in their hands.

Stuart Broad and Graeme Swann did bat well on day three, but it’s nothing to get hopeful about. This was how England can perform when there’s no pressure, when they have nothing to lose. Australia’s bowling, too, became a little more wayward than it had been, again the result of not needing to apply any further pressure upon the opposition as the match was already in the bag.

So what can we expect in the final Test at The Oval? England will probably make some changes to their side, with talk of Robert Key, Mark Ramprakash, and Marcus Trescothick as possible players. Personally, I wouldn’t be making too many changes, as that would be far too unsettling for the side. Get Flintoff back if possible as a replacement for Harmison, and replace Ravi Bopara with a genuine number 3 batsmen. His ego is big, but his talent is not.

As for Australia, well they look confident and will be difficult to stop. However, England definitely remains a chance to win the series. When conditions are right, the England bowlers are very, very good. If their batsmen can perform to their ability, they could put some big runs on the board and get back on top. But with the momentum all Australia’s way, that’ll be tough.

Some interesting stats:

Innings and 80 runs
The margin of defeat – an innings and 80 runs – is England’s second largest at Headingley after the innings and 148-run loss to Australia in 1993. The margin of victory was also Australia’s largest since Shane Warne and Glenn McGrath retired.

16
Ian Bell, Ravi Bopara and Paul Collingwood scored 16 runs between them in the Test – the lowest-ever aggregate for England’s Nos. 3, 4 and 5 in Tests.

7-1
The century tally after four Tests is 7-1 in Australia’s favour with five of their batsmen averaging over 50. Andrew Strauss is the only England batsman with a series average higher than 40.

Preview: The Australian selectors have dropped Phillip Hughes and replaced him with Shane Watson. Not that I’m surprised, as I made this exact recommendation in a previous post (Northamptonshire v Australians). It’s made me think that the Australian cricket selectors are reading The Ashes Blog.

Unfortunately it looks like the rain could have the biggest impact on this game. The ground is soaked, and plenty of rain is expected to fall on Edgbaston for the next few days, so everyone is expecting a draw. Let’s hope it’s not that bad.

Day 1: Australia 126 for 1 (Watson 62*)

Australian captain Ricky Ponting finally won the toss and was able to bat first. Brad Haddin had to pull out after breaking a finger during training, so there was a mad scramble to replace him with reserver ‘keeper Graham Manou. That’s a big loss, as Haddin was Australia’s leading runscorer, although his wicketkeeping has been a bit ordinary at times.

The big talking point is the elevation of Shane Watson to opener, a move which I have previously endorsed. So when I awoke this morning to see Watson was undefeated on 62 I was rather chuffed. So many people said it wouldn’t work – and perhaps it won’t long term – but he’s got off to a great start and looks really solid. If he can hold down that position, continue to bowl as a wicket taker, and not get injured (that’s the big one for Watson), he could be really, really handy. I hope he can pull it off.

As for England, well their bowling was pretty ordinary. Maybe it was the sight of having a righthander open the innings for Australia that put them off, as that’s something they haven’t seen for quite a while. Anyway, they’ll need a vastly improved bowling performance on day 2 if they are to make any inroads.

Day 2:  England 116 for 2 (Strauss 64*) trail Australia 263 (Watson 62, Onions 4-58, Anderson 5-80) by 147 runs

Normality resumed on day two at Edgbaston. England remembered how to swing the ball, Australia forgot how to play cautiously against a swinging ball, and the umpires made some terrible decisions.

I’m not sure if it was a change in conditions (it was quite overcast), or that the ball finally became old enough to reverse swing, but the bowling from England’s Anderson and Onions was just brilliant. The ball was moving everywhere, and the Aussies had no idea what to do. England seems to be in the better position at this stage of the 2nd Test, but I just can’t help but feel that there’ll be yet another change in fortune in this game.  Can Australia possibly fight back with quick wickets? I think they can, if they bowl in the right areas. At least Mitchell Johnson is starting to look good again, which is a real plus.

As for Shane Watson, it was a shame for him that he couldn’t add further to his overnight score. However, he was the top scorer in Australia’s first innings, so he did the job he was supposed to do, and if he can bowl some handy overs as well then even better.

Day 3: Washed out by rain

What a shame. The match is well placed, but the rain just kept on coming and play was abandoned at 2:40pm.

So to keep you entertained, the opinionators have started to do what comes naturally to them. According to Sky Sports Commentator Shane Warne, “What is lacking is the aggression from the Aussies at the moment. That is glaring to me.” Warne goes on to suggest that perhaps the players are afraid of the consequences from Cricket Australia after being told not to sledge (as such activities were viewed negatively by the public), and he could be right. Although I think it’s more likely that the players are simply quieter guys. They’re not loud and confrontational – they just like to go out there and play the best cricket they can. Personally I think that makes for better cricket, and the fact they are underperforming is not the result of a lack of aggression but inexperience.

Another one complaining about the Australian team is journo Peter Roebuck, who is still disappointed by the elevation of Shane Watson to opener:

“Nevertheless, (Watson’s) previous performances suggested he ought to have been batting at six. Part of Watson’s appeal was he could bowl some probing spells.”
- Peter Roebuck, The Age

Watson himself is obviously keen to cement the role, and so he should. Whether it works out long term or not, I think it’s worth trying him out. Watson is a better player than he was a couple of years ago, and I think he could succeed as an opener. It’s unconventional, but sometimes the unconventional can work out for the best if the player is good enough.

Day 4: Australia 88 for 2 trail England 376 (Strauss 69, Flintoff 74, Hilfenhaus 4-109) by 25 runs

Flintoff is brilliant, and if this is his final Test (as has been rumoured), it’s been a good one. He took the game away from Australia today, just when England were in a bit of a pickle.

Australia had England down and out, but they just weren’t able to finish things off like they used to. I think they’re seriously missing the services of an experienced bowler like Brett Lee, who could charge in, send down a yorker or two, and finish off the tail. On this occasion, however, the Aussie bowling just wasn’t up to it and the England lower order had a fantastic time.

What will day 5 bring?  Australia will need to get a lead of 200 to stay safe. If they are dismissed with a lead of under 150 with a session or so to play, the English batsmen would give themselves a chance. The ball should start swinging for Anderson and his posse from early on day 5, which should make for an enthralling final day at Edgbaston … haven’t we seen that before?

Day 5: Australia 263 and 375 for 5 (Watson 53, Hussey 64, Clarke 103*, North 96) drew with England 376

That will give the Aussies a LOT of confidence. After being supposedly down and out, the Australians lost just 3 wickets on the final day at Edgbaston. England’s bowling unit looked En-bland, and were very, very ordinary. It seems they can only perform well when the conditions are ripe for extreme swing bowling.

Michael Clarke and Marcus North, however, were superb. They batted beautifully, and although they were a little lucky at times (Andrew Strauss dropped one at short midwicket), they took Australia to a position of safety, and perhaps even to one of strength. We can only wonder what might have happened if another day was available, and England were forced to bat last.

Preview: Australia is going with the same squad that dominated most of the Cardiff Test. England has made just one change, with quickie Graham Onions playing in place of Monty Panesar. England could have brought in Harmison, and frankly I think they’re nuts for not playing Harmy. The Aussies are a little scared of Harmison, and that’s a big thing. Don’t underestimate the relief this gives to the Australians.

So, this should be a fascinating Test. Australia seem to have the better squad, but that doesn’t always matter.  This game will be close.

As always, I hope you enjoy these exclusive Ashes photos.

Day 1: England 364 for 6 (Strauss 161*)

A big century from Captain Strauss was the highlight on day 1 at Lord’s, and it looked like England was going to post a massive total.  I made a prediction on Twitter that they would finish the day with over 300 runs on the board for the loss of about 3 wickets, but as so often happens after a big partnership the rest of the side crumbled.

Ravi Bopara showed he could score quickly, but I think the number 3 batting position isn’t right for him, at least not at Test level. Collingwood showed that England needs to be in a hole before he can do anything useful, and Kevin Pietersen can’t shake the “lone wolf” accusations.

Day 2: Australia 156 for 8 (Anderson 4-36) trail England 425 (Strauss 161, Cook 95, Hilfenhaus 4-103) by 269 runs

All I’ve got to say is this: Australia’s batting was woeful. For further information try these links:

“No sympathy for careless Australia” – Cricinfo

“Aussies as Rick as a parrot” – The Sun

“Jittery Mitchell Johnson tests Ricky Ponting’s patience” – Times Online

So, now what?  Well, I’m going to go out on a limb here and say that Australia’s final three batsmen will not, I repeat – not – add another 270 runs to the scorecard. So, if Australia is dismissed for under 225, should Andrew Strauss enforce the follow-0n?  As an Aussie fan, I hope it does, as I think that’s Australia’s only chance at getting back into the game. If England bats again, they’ll completely put Australia out of the match. Which way will Straussy go?

Update on Ponting’s wicket: No wonder Ponting was surprised when he was given out. It turns out that he knew the rules of the game better than the TV umpire did:

Ponting was given out caught at second slip off the bowling of Jimmy Anderson after a long-winded process that saw umpire Rudi Koertzen refer the matter to TV umpire Nigel Llong to check whether the ball had carried.

By the time Ponting had reached the dressing room it was clear the ball had come off his pad, but the assumption was that Llong did not have the authority to overturn the decision.

Australia’s captain and best batsman knew differently and the International Cricket Council has since explained that Llong should in fact have informed Koertzen that the television replays had revealed Ponting did not hit the ball.

Rule 3.2.3 governing clean catches reads, in part: “The third umpire has to determine whether the batsman has been caught. But when reviewing the television replay(s), if it is clear to the third umpire that the batsman did not hit the ball, he shall indicate that the batsman is not out.”
- “Umpires fluff Ponting wicket”: The Age

Day 3: England 425 and 311 for 6 (Prior 61, Collingwood 54) lead Australia 215 (Hussey 51, Anderson 4-55) by 521 runs

Things just keep going wrong for the Australians. On day three at Lord’s, Ponting missed a simple opportunity to run out Kevin Pietersen, Ponting also dropped a simple catch at second slip, Hauritz was ruled to have not taken a low catch at mid-on, and Mitchell Johnson continued to bowl all over the place. Johnson’s place is definitely in doubt for the next Test. I’d love to see him return to the form he showed in South Africa, but if that doesn’t happen then I think a change in the bowling lineup would be a positive step.

In other news, according to Dean Jones Kevin Pietersen will be unavailable for the rest of this Ashes series due to problems with his Achilles heel. Apparently KP’s only just hanging in there for this game, which might explain his placid scoring in the 2nd innings. Now Deano correctly called Flintoff’s retirement, so I reckon he could be right on this one too. That’s going to be a big loss for England. With Lee possibly coming back for Australia for the next Test, and KP, we could see Australia really come back well (if they do eventually lose this Test at Lord’s).

Day 4: Australia 215 and 313 for 5 (Clarke 125*, Haddin 80*) need another 209 runs to beat England 425 and 311 for 6 dec

Five Australian wickets fell today, and three of them were not out. Now, I understand umpires can make mistakes – I spent a season working as a cricket umpire when I was younger and it’s hard work. But three big whoppers in one day is terrible. Here they are:

• Simon Katich caught in the gully, but it was a no-ball from Andrew Flintoff
• Phil Hughes caught at slip by Andrew Strauss, but it may have hit the ground as Strauss grabbed it, and the benefit of the doubt should go to the batsman
• Mike Hussey caught at slip but he didn’t actually hit the ball – there was daylight between his bat and the ball

However, Australia’s still fighting hard, and I reckon they still have a chance to pull off a remarkable victory against the odds. I for one hope they have some better luck on day five.

So, what are their chances?  Here’s my odds:

• A 50% chance that Australia will fall short by 50 to 100 runs, and England win
• A 30% chance that Australia will be 1 to 49 runs short, and England win
• A 19% chance that Australia wins
• And finally, a 1% chance of a tie.

It really is set up to be a fantastic final day at Lord’s, which is exactly what we want. Good quality cricket, with both sides in with a chance at victory. I just hope that the side that plays the better cricket actually wins, rather than the side that is the recipient of fewer mistakes by umpires Koertzen and Doctrove.

Day 5: England 425 and 311 for 6 dec beat Australia 215 and 406 (Clarke 136, Haddin 80, Johnson 63, Flintoff 5-92, Swann 4-87) by 115 runs

Congratulations to the England cricket team, who were the better side in this game. Australia lost this Test due to their poor first innings effort in the face of some brilliant James Anderson bowling, and some wayward bowling by the Australians over the first couple of days. Did those poor umpiring efforts on day 4 have an impact? Australia lost this Test by 115 runs, and three batsmen were given out when they shouldn’t have been. If Hughes, Katich and Hussey had been able to add another 39 runs each then Australia would have won. Ok, so that’s a bit of a stretch, because you don’t know what else might have happened (they could have been bowled the very next ball, after all), but it does show that Australia wasn’t all that far behind. A bit of luck, some better decision making, and this Test would have been much closer.

To sum it up, I think there are some positive signs for Australia. I think Johnson – if he gets another chance – could be about to discover his lost form.  He has been woeful at times, but with a break, a practice game, and some confidence from his 63 run innings on day 5 at Lord’s I think things might start to come together for him. He’ll need to perform well in the game against Northants to ensure his spot at Edgbaston. I also wouldn’t be surprised to see Brett Lee or possibly Stuart Clark come back into the side, possibly as a replacement for Peter Siddle.

So, I expect Australia to improve significantly at Edgbaston, and to win the 3rd Test. I know, it’s a big call, but I sense a change in fortune for the tourists.

Preview: England have picked Panesar and Swann – smart move. Australia has picked Hilfenhaus and Hauritz – not so smart. Why would you pick Hilfy over Clark? I’m not quite sure, but I hope it works.

Anyway, England have won the toss and elected to bat, and that’s massive. A huge boost for England. If they lose the First Test, batting first with a team that is focussed on spinning, they might as well all give up and go and play darts. However, Australia still has the better batting lineup, and although England has a statistically stronger bowling group, Australia is ahead overall when you compare batting and bowling averages.

Day 1: England 336 for 7

(Pietersen 69, Collingwood 64, Prior 56)

That was an evenly matched first day, with each side delivering a counter-attack at some point. I thought Johnson was off his game early on, but he came back really well. Hilfenhaus surprised me with his effectiveness, and he may yet turn out to be Australia’s new Terry Alderman.

England will be frustrated with their day. Enough of their recognised batsmen had good starts (three half centuries and only one guy scored less than 30), and someone should have gone on to get a really big score. But the funniest thing was the sight of James Anderson, England’s number 10, coming out as nightwatchman ahead of Stuart Broad who bats at number 8. Why do you need a nightwatchman to protect your number 8??!

I mentioned in a Twitter post that this was a 400+ pitch, and I reckon England will be under par if they don’t make that. Let’s see what the second day brings us.

Day 2: Australia 249 for 1 (Katich 104*, Ponting 100*) trail England 435 (Pietersen 69, Collingwood 64, Prior 56, Johnson 3-87, Hauritz 3-95) by 186 runs

I think Australia’s back in this game, and I’m a little surprised at how easy it’s been. England’s spinners were supposed to destroy Australia because, well, if Nathan Hauritz could make the ball turn then anyone could. It looks like Hauritz got more out of the pitch than his (supposedly) superior English tweakers, who barely beat the bat all day. Yes, maybe Katich should have been out LBW, but England also had a bit of quick with LBW decisions (did you see Kevin Pietersen get hit plumb in front?) so it all evens out.

In the first session the England tail wagged, and gave a hint that perhaps this pitch wasn’t going to be as difficult to bat on as we were being told. But I don’t think anyone expected two centuries from Australia’s top order. One England commentator (was it Botham or Hussein?) at Sky Sport said that there wouldn’t be any hundreds scored in this Test. Yeah, right.

How many more runs does Australia need? I reckon they’ll want to be at least 100 runs in front, and that’s going to be tough. They’ll probably lose a few quick wickets on day three, and if England can stretch that out to 6 or 7 quick wickets for only a few runs, then the hosts will be right back in it. It’s not going to take much to turn this match on its head yet again.

Day 3: Australia 479 for 5 (North 54*, Haddin 4*) lead England 435 by 44 runs

England did pick up a few quick wickets as I suggested they would, but they’re now a long way behind Australia.  I think England’s bowlers have simply been ordinary. Sure, it took a lot of determination and class from Australia’s batsmen to put on so many runs, but the English bowling was pathetic. It was only when Anderson was getting the ball to swing around that they looked seriously threatening. Is it time to swing the axe and give a few other bowlers a chance for the 2nd Test at Lord’s?  With Andrew Flintoff they may not have a choice. Dean Jones is wondering if Flintoff might not be quite 100% fit, and that could be affecting his performance. Jones also put forward a rumour he’s heard that Flintoff is ready to retire from Test match cricket at the end of this series, and I reckon that could be right. Big Freddie isn’t playing as well as he used to, and I think his repetitive injuries might have a lot to do with that.  It might be time to join the other retirees in the IPL.

As for the Aussies, they’re all doing well. The only disappointment is Mike Hussey, who seems to be the weak link in the batting chain at the moment. He did play well at Worcester, but apart from that he hasn’t been great for the past year or so. Are his days numbered? Could he be replaced by his younger brother David Hussey? We’ll have to wait and see.

Day 4: England 435 and 20 for 2 (Strauss 6*, Pietersen 3*) trail Australia 674 for 6 (Ponting 150, North 125*, Katich 122, Haddin 121) by 219 runs

Things just keep getting worse for England, and Australia seems to have the Midas touch. Here are some facts for the Australian batting card:

• 674 for 6 (dec) is the nation’s highest Ashes total since 1934.
• four century makers in their first innings – the first time a team had done so in an Ashes battle since England did it at Trent Bridge in 1938.
• North and Haddin became the 15th and 16th Australians to score a ton in their maiden Ashes clash.

I’m increasingly surprised at how well things have gone for the Aussies, and totally surprised at how inept England is playing. Everything about them is wrong. I heard Geoffrey Boycott last night on the BBC saying that Andrew Strauss is a poor captain, and based on this Test I would have to agree. Not that now’s a good time to change captain, of course.

As for tomorrow, well England needs someone to stand up and get them through the day. The pitch isn’t as bad as people were saying it would be, so I think it’s possible for England to survive day 5.  One of their biggest obstacles will be themselves and their obvious lack of confidence. Oh, and watch out for Michael Clarke – he loves bowling late on day 5.

Day 5 – Match drawn. England 435 and 252 for 9 (Collingwood 74, Hilfenhaus 3-37) drew with Australia 674 for 6 dec

Well, England managed to hold on for a draw, much to everyone’s surprise. Monty Panesar and James Anderson held on at the end, much like Australia did at Old Trafford in 2005. However, it will be a hollow celebration for the England players, because they’ll know they were well and truly beaten in every way in this First Test.

The positives? I think one of the biggest will be the impact it has on cricket fans in England. If the Poms had lost, then a lot of people would have lost interest in the series. I even mentioned to my father-in-law yesterday that if Australia won this First Test, then it would be in the best interests of the game for England to win the next Test at Lord’s just to keep things close.  It was hard work for a mad keen Aussie cricket fan like me to say that, but I know that Test cricket needs an absorbing battle between the old enemies in order to grab back the imagination of the English and Australian public.

As it is, there’ll be a little bit of pride in England from managing to not lose.  England fans should be disappointed with the performance from their (supposedly) best XI, but they need to keep on supporting and keep on staying interested in this series. As Alex Brown writes at Cricinfo, the Ashes 2009 has all of the drama and intrigue of 2005’s epic battle, and is worth watching.

I’m thinking of trying something this year that I haven’t done before. I’d like to open up The Ashes Blog to allow anyone to provide our famous re-enacted photos for each day of every Test.

Don’t know what I mean? Have a look here … for the past two Ashes series I’ve gotten together with some friends and family here in Brisbane, and we’ve put together our own re-enactments of key Ashes moments. It’s been a little of fun, and it’s seen us get some mild media attention. That’s been cool. This year, though, I’d like to do it a little differently, but I want to know if anyone’s interested.

So, are you interested in sending in your re-enacted Ashes photos?

In the past photos from TheAshesBlog.com have appeared on the front cover of The Daily Telegraph’s Ashes coverage, Zoo Weekly magazine, and elsewhere.

So if you’re interested, please leave a comment below, and we’ll see if this can work. I’m not sure if I’ll get different people to supply each day, or get a different group of people to be the exclusive supplier of images for each Test match.

Your ideas are welcome.

England: 147
Australia: 0/46
Australia wins by 10 wickets

It is finished. Australia has won the Ashes in the most convincing fashion possible, with a 5-0 rout of what really is a pretty decent England team.

I previously mentioned the need for KP to bat through to the end of the England innings. Well, he lasted 3 balls, and with England’s leading batsman back in the pavilion, the match was all but over. Chris Read looked out of his depth, scoring just the one boundary before being beautifully caught by Ponting in the slips.

Harmison and Anderson delayed the inevitable with some solid defensive work, but a lead of just 45 was never going to provide a challenge for the opposition. Appropriately, it was Glenn McGrath who took the 10th wicket with his final ball in Test match cricket.

When the Australians came out to bat, the England team admirably formed a guard of honour for the retiring Langer. Ironically, the English bowling to the Australians in the second innings was amongst the finest we’ve seen all summer. Anderson and Harmison were bowling well, and Hayden and Langer had to tread carefully to avoid some good line and length stuff. They survived, and the emotion of the occasion was almost becoming too much for Langer. With 7 runs needed, he asked Haydos for a quick finish. His good mate obliged, hitting a mammoth six over mid-on to bring the scores level. The two batsmen had another brief chat in the middle of the pitch, with the Queenslander perhaps asking the retiring Langer if he would like to hit the winning runs. Langer obviously wasn’t too fussed, as Hayden flicked the next ball for four and Australia had won by 10 wickets.

For Ponting, this was a significant and emotional time:

“Even when we took the last wicket, to think that would be the last time we’d be walking off with Glenn and Shane …
I was hoping to get a chance to bat with Lang. To realise that was the last opportunity I was going to have, it’s a pretty emotional time.

I grabbed hold of Michael Clarke on the way around the ground and had a word about the next era. For the next few years, hopefully it’s he and I and Michael Hussey being able to be the leaders and win games for our country.

I told him to sit back and have a look around. It’s 80-something years since its happened and it’s a moment we should all savour.”
- Ricky Ponting

Australia: 393
England: 5/114

Earlier in this Test the Aussie press were praising England for finally giving Australia a challenge. That challenge ended on day three at the SCG.

The tourists started off the day pretty well, reducing Australia to 6 for 260. This was on par with England’s 6 for 258, but the final 5 English batsmen could add just 4 runs to the total, whereas Australia’s final 5 added 173. Australia’s success was in large part due to the batting of Shane Warne, who top scored with 71. If Warnie ever wins an Academy Award – and who’s to say he won’t – he will surely be thanking Paul Collingwood for giving him the inspiration to go on. Whilst Warne was batting, Collingwood started to give him a bit of his best sledging, and typically, the Aussie responded in kind:

“You got an MBE, right? For scoring seven at the Oval? It’s an embarrassment.”
- Shane Warne to Paul Collingwood

Warnie was smashing the ball to the fence, and Collingwood was giving him lip from the slips. The legspinner was loving it:

“It was making me concentrate. It was making me more determined. It was all a bit of fun.
That’s the way he wanted to play it and I was happy to play that game. It suits me fine.”
- Shane Warne

Trailing by 102 runs on the first innings, England’s top order batsmen needed to play well. They didn’t, and with a lead of just 12 runs and only 5 wickets in hand, they are looking down the barrell at yet another loss. They’ll need Pietersen to play through to the end, adding at least another 150 to the total. This would seem unlikely, but anything less than that should be too easy for the Australians to overhaul.

If Paul Collingwood’s MBE is an embarrassment, then 5-0 would be even worse.

England: 291
Australia: 4/188

It really was one of those days. England started off the day in a pretty strong position, then completely fell apart, but fought back really well to be on top once again, before allowing Australia to go slightly ahead by stumps.

Australia bowled pretty well in the morning session, with the final 6 English wickets falling for just 57 runs, which is almost as bad as their disastrous 2nd innings in Adelaide where the final 6 added just 56 runs to the total. This 2nd day Sydney wicket is a pretty decent place to bat. All of England’s recognised batsmen made a start, but only Bell (71) and Flintoff (89) were able to knock up half centuries. It shouldn’t have been that bad.

Or so it seemed.

Like England, Australia’s batsmen all put runs on the board, and seemed settled at the crease. Yet somehow the bowlers were able to strike back, and so far, none of the Australians have managed to get past 50. That may change on day three, with Hussey and Symonds looking to stick around for a while and give Australia at least a bit of a lead. However, as we saw today, there is enough in the pitch for the bowlers to trouble the willow wielders, so anything could happen.

England: 4/234

Neither side can really claim victory after the first day at the SCG. England won the toss, but they lost Matthew Hoggard with a side strain. He was replaced by the once rejected James Anderson, and the Aussie batsmen were smiling.

The Australians were led out onto the field by their 3 retirees – Warne, McGrath, and Langer. McGrath bowled the first over of the day, but Strauss and Cook survived to put on their most successful opening partnership of the summer. It didn’t last long, as they were both out caught behind.

In stepped Bell and Pietersen and they put on a useful 108 run partnership. Pietersen was trying all sorts of fancy footwork as he waltzed his way down the pitch to the bowlers, and looks a strong contender for the next season of Dancing With The Stars. Perhaps he had Skyhooks on his mind, because that’s exactly what happened when he didn’t quite get onto one and a nice catch was taken by Mr Cricket at midwicket.

Ian Bell followed KP back to the pavilion a few minutes later, but then Captain Freddie came in and whacked the ball around, taking England safely through to stumps. England will be hoping for more of the same this morning, and would be disappointed with anything less than 400. It’s a pretty decent batting strip, and I reckon the locals will be confident of putting on a large total themselves, so England will need to perform well. However, the Australians will have the new ball this morning and, if Clark and McGrath can get it to move around, they might pick up a couple of early wickets and then they can have a crack at this long England tail.