The Ashes Blog

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.

According to Aussie cricket writer Greg Baum, Andrew Strauss is turning England into a petty team that is bordering on cheating, and has taken over from Australia in the sledging department:

“At Lord’s, England again has been the uglier team …

… England’s bowlers have sledged more than Australia’s. From 20,000 kilometres, it scarcely matters what they are saying: it is a puerile look. England was unconscionable in the way it wrapped up Flintoff in cotton wool in the pavilion between bowling spells. England observed few niceties …

A cricket team takes its cues from its captain. Flintoff was more suited to leading by example than instruction, Pietersen was divisive, but Strauss’ appointment looked to be a vote for good sense. Counter-intuitively, Strauss’ England had revealed itself to be competitive, but manipulative and petty.

… In this series thus far, Australia has carried itself with greater dignity.”
- Strauss’ style is unappealing – The Age

Greg Baum might be overstating it here. Perhaps he’s reading a bit too much into a few minor incidents. I’m prepared to give Strauss another go before labeling him in such a way. Perhaps the events mentioned in the article were a few moments of weakness. I agree that Australia has carried itself “with greater dignity”, but I’ll have to wait and see what the Third Test brings us before calling England’s current cricket team “manipulative”, “petty”, and “ugly”.

Have a read through the article in full, and leave us your thoughts in the comments box below.

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 thought I’d put up a couple of different angles on how things are shaping for The Ashes 2009. First up is a review from my father-in-law, a keen English cricket fan now living in Brisbane, Australia:

I think it will be close. Neither team looks a dominant force to me, though both are capable of playing winning cricket. If the wickets favour spin, I think England will probably win, though I rate Michael Clarke and Katich as good spinners, probably better than Hauritz. But it is unlikely that more than a couple of the pitches will help spinners much.

The weather is very good at the moment. It was hot for Wimbledon. But English weather ….

Here are my thoughts as an Australian fan:
Read the rest of this entry »

I’ve done a stats analysis before, at the start of the last series, so I thought I’d do one again for the 2009 Ashes.

I wanted to compare player averages to see which side was statistically more likely to win. I could just add up the batting averages for the eleven players in each side, but that doesn’t take into account the quality of the bowling of the other side. So what I’ve done is add up the batting averages for each team, and then add to that total the bowling averages for the opposition, to give me a total team score (ie. add up the batting averages for England’s eleven batsmen, and then add to that total the combined bowling average for Australia’s five bowlers). So if a side has a very good, and therefore low, bowling average then they won’t be adding too many runs to the oppositions total batting average, so it seems to me like a fair comparison. When I do this, I get the following result:

Australia: 594
England: 510

This would suggest a comfortable Australia win, with the Aussies ahead in both the batting and bowling averages.

You can also have a bit of fun with this concept. For example, a team of eleven Simon Katichs would defeat a standard England XI with Strauss, Pietersen, Flintoff and Co. Don’t believe me? I’ll show you how you can try it out for yourself, using any combination of players on both sides. Read the rest of this entry »

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.

England: 159
Australia: 2/48

The series is all over as far as a final result is concerned, but the Boxing Day Test in Melbourne is always special, and with the forthcoming retirements of a couple of old Aussies this one’s particularly ’shuper’ (thank you, Richie). Around 4 million fans turned up at the ‘G today, and although not quite a ground record, it certainly added a bit of atmosphere to the place.

England batted first on what turned out to be a bowlers wicket. They started off ok, although the scoring rate was dreadfully slow, chugging along at just 2 runs an over. It looked like Adelaide all over again, especially once the wickets started to fall. Warnie picked up his 700th with a ripper of a delivery to clean bowl Andrew Strauss for 50, and from there it was all Australia. Pietersen continues to impress with the bat, leaving most people wondering why he doesn’t come in at number 3 or 4. Glenn McGrath didn’t get amongst the wickets today, but his solitary dismissal of Mahmood gave him 150 wickets against England. Well done, Ooh Aah!

Chris Read came into the squad as replacement for Geraint Jones, and immediately had an impact. He made just 3 runs, but that’s, like, 300% more runs than Jones made in two innings at Perth. Someone has mentioned that the England bowlers don’t really like the new guy, so we’ll have to watch out for any signs of team disharmony over the coming days.

The Australians started off really well, but with the late dismissal of Langer and nightwatchman Lee, England were able to get some positives out of the day. If the tourists can grab a few quick ones tomorrow morning then they might be a chance. But, as seems more likely, Australia put on a bit of a run feast, then it’s pretty much all over.

I thought it would be interesting to do a statistical comparison of the two sides to see how they will fare against each other, statistically speaking. What I’ve done is add up the batting averages for all 11 players in each side to give a team batting average. I’ve then added up the bowling averages for Australia and England, and this gives us a team bowling average. To the Australian batting averages I added the England team bowling average to give a final total (and vice versa for England). So if a side has a very good, and therefore low, bowling average then they won’t be adding too many runs to the oppositions total team average, so it seems to me like a fair comparison: Read the rest of this entry »

Here’s a brief overview of England’s recognised batsmen. Most of the input is from Mike Atherton, with a little bit of help from his good mate Steve Waugh:

Andrew Strauss: Loves to cut and pull off the back foot, so get him playing forward and force him to hit down the ground – Mike Atherton

Alastair Cook: Tends to fall across his crease, so pitch it up and look to trap him LBW – Mike Atherton

Ian Bell: Doesn’t play the horizontal bat shots too well, so may struggle to score – Mike Atherton

Paul Collingwood: Likes to drive, but isn’t good with the cut or pull, and tends to hook in the air – Mike Atherton

Kevin Pietersen: Loves to drive off the front foot, but doesn’t always get hold of the hook, so look to have him caught in the deep. – Mike Atherton. Don’t talk to him, block off his boundaries with an in-out field setting, and bring Warne on as he may find the leg spinner’s extra bounce on Australian pitches difficult – Steve Waugh.

Andrew Flintoff: Stop his boundary hitting by starving him of the strike and having in-out field placements – Steve Waugh.
Tends to hook in the air, so bounce him and place a couple of fielders in the deep – Mike Atherton