Is anyone really surprised? Before the series began I predicted that Australia would win 4-0. I was probably being a tad optimistic. It didn’t take a genius to work out that genuine pace and high class spin bowling win matches down under, and that our four right-arm medium-fast seamers weren’t going to cut the mustard.
As for England’s batting … well, I think we all expected Joe Root to score a few more (although I did express doubts about his technique on Australian pitches) but other than that it’s all been pretty much as advertised. How thoroughly predictable and utterly depressing.
I’m afraid I can’t comment too much on the specifics of days four and five at Perth. The truth is that I didn’t even bother watching it. A few of us predicted that England would lose by an innings after our collapse on day two, and things played out precisely as expected. The exchange below was pretty typical of the prevailing mood:
Aus 600+ Eng 2nd dig 180? Could happen.
— Paddy Briggs?? #FBPE (@PaddyBriggs) December 15, 2017
I’ll be surprised if it doesn’t
— The Full Toss (@thefulltoss) December 15, 2017
However, although this humiliating defeat – and I think this definitely qualifies as a total humiliation – isn’t unexpected, it doesn’t stop it from hurting. England cricket supporters generally care more about the Ashes than anything else. And to lose so limply AGAIN simply isn’t acceptable.
Yes there’s the argument that most test teams struggle away from home these days, and that we may well beat Australia at home to regain the urn in two years’ time, but this defence can’t obscure three (likely) 0-5 whitewashes within the space of eleven years. It’s not just bad; it’s absolutely lamentable.
No major nation performs worse than England in Australian conditions (South Africa have generally competed well down under for example), and the Aussies are always a lot more competitive in England than we are in their backyard. How can anyone be happy with this state of affairs?
However, before I continue my critique of England’s inadequacies, a few words about Australia. Basically I take my hats off to them. They might not be a vintage Australian team, and they’re certainly not as good as they were in 2006/6 and 2012/13, but you can never write off a side that boasts the world’s No.1 ranked batsman and a very potent bowling attack.
Yes this Australian side does contain a few flawed cricketers – the fact Peter Handscomb gets anywhere near the team shows all isn’t well with Australian cricket either – but how many sides in world cricket are what you’d call ‘complete teams’? The answer is none. They’ve all got players like Khawaja who don’t wholly convince.
Australia have proved themselves to be (yet again) a formidable outfit in home conditions. And they’re quite entitled to ride the ‘Smith and the bowlers’ train all the way from Perth to Parramatta. We all used to respect the West Indies when they were the Lara, Ambrose and Walsh show, so it’s time we gave the Aussies their props too. Well played, guys.
As for England what irritates me the most is that the ECB did nothing, absolutely nothing, after the 2012/13 debacle to make sure this never happened again. They just ignored the warning signs, hoped for the best, and focused on white ball cricket instead.
Because the ECB have completely botched the four-year cycle since the last Ashes series, I firmly believe that heads must roll: the selectors must go, Andy Flower should (belatedly) collect his P45 as we simply aren’t producing test quality young players, and although I have great sympathy for Andrew Strauss’s personal circumstances – some things are more important than cricket – he needs to take a long hard look at himself too.
And then we come to Harrison and Graves. I expect we’ll see a few developments in the coming weeks that arguably make their positions untenable. The bottom line is they’ve spent the last few years trying to implement an unpopular and unworkable city T20 tournament which, if my sources are correct, is about to implode. It has been reported that the counties aren’t exactly happy with the current arrangements, but my understanding is that open revolt is very much on the cards. Let’s see how things play out.
In the meantime, of course, Graves and Harrison have left Rome to burn. The domestic calendar is a shambles, the championship has been criminally sidelined, and the result is a test team in decline and no prospect whatsoever of improvement. What on earth is the batting going to look like now that Alastair Cook has been exposed again? And, worse still, what kind of attack will we be able to field when Jimmy Anderson hangs up his boots? Stuart Broad and Chris Woakes have been toothless.
The ECB, of course, will try to attribute this monumental failure to poor discipline. Why do you think Tom Harrison publicly wrote to the England team (when he was actually writing to the media and the more naive supporters out there) on the eve of the Perth test?
My best guess is this was another pre-emptive PR move designed to frame the post-series narrative in a way that obscures the real problems with English cricket – and, in the process, get the ECB off the hook. Why else would Harrison write to the team when he did? Surely he knew the players wouldn’t be going out in the middle of a test match, and that Strauss and Bayliss had already warned them previously?
Although it’s true that Ben Stokes’ absence has played a role in England’s defeat, the discipline story has otherwise been a complete red herring. This tour has been nothing out of the ordinary in terms of behaviour – Steve Finn has said that the hijinks were worse in 2010/11 when we won – and one of the main perpetrators, Jonny Bairstow, has been a shining light on the field.
My plea to England supporters is therefore this: please don’t let the ECB get away with this poor discipline narrative. Play it down. Explain to fellow supporters why it’s nonsense. Tell them that the so called drinking culture is just this year’s scapegoat – just like Kevin Pietersen was last time.
It’s vitally important that the powers that be actually face up to the problems facing English cricket. Why? Because we’ll all be back here in four years’ time desperately frustrated at yet another Ashes shellacking unless things change.
James Morgan
After three Tests…
Cook: 83 runs at 13.83
Root: 176 runs at 29.33
Ali: 116 runs at 19.33 and 3 wickets at 105.33
Broad: 57 runs at 9.50 and 5 wickets at 61.80
That not the ECB’s fault. That’s not the selectors’ fault.
England’s senior players shat the bed. That’s on them. There’s no shifting the blame onto “management” or the selectors. Should they have not picked those four players? What could they have done to make them perform better? Root is England’s captain and best player but has done SFA. He needs to wear that. But English fans prefer to scapegoat “management” because it’s less painful that way.
By contrast, the likes of Stoneman, Malan, Bairstow and Overton pulled their weight. Again, it’s the senior players who have dropped the ball, Anderson aside. That’s the bottom line.
If you want to know why Handscomb was picked, consider that he averages 47 in Test cricket. Khawaja averages 44. They’d both walk into the English team.
Handscomb and Khawaja would not walk into the England team because they wouldn’t (and haven’t) score(d) enough runs in county cricket. Their techniques aren’t good enough. Handscomb averaged 33 for Yorkshire last year and impressed precisely nobody.
Moeen Ali is only playing because we can’t produce a good specialist spinner. That’s on the ECB.
Stuart Broad and the other seamers are playing because we don’t produce fast bowlers. We only produce guys that need assistance from the pitch … because we play the lion’s share of our first class cricket on green tops in April / May / September. That’s on the ECB.
I agree we’d all expect more from Root. As for Cook, many would claim that he’s mentally fatigued after playing an insane amount of cricket – over 150 tests by his 32nd birthday. That’s on the ECB too. Our schedules are the daftest in the world.
Both Handscomb and Khawaja have better FC records than Stoneman, Vince or Malan. And they both average 40+ at Test level. But if those are your crumbs of comfort (‘Khawaja and Handscomb are shit’), then I guess you’re welcome to them.
The Marsh boys are pretty average as well, but that didn’t stop them scoring a century apiece, compared to Cook and Root combining for two half-centuries from 12 knocks, with a HS of 67. If only England had average players like the Marsh brothers, the result may have been different.
Your knee-jerk reaction of blaming “management” when senior players don’t perform is a cop-out. Cook, Root, Ali and Broad are in England’s best XI. They had to be picked. If they don’t perform, that’s on them. Blaming “management” is just the more comfortable excuse for English supporters.
I can assure you, if Australia went to England and capitulated to go 3-0 down, with four of their five most senior players doing SFA, the blowtorch in Australia would be on those players. No one would be shifting the blame to CA. It’s a soft excuse.
Your senior players have to carry the can for this result.
Tom
I don’t think you are aware of the situation of England’s cricket.
There aren’t that many players to replace the ones who have failed, senior or not. Why?
Because the ECB do not allow enough proper championship cricket to be played in the best conditions, therefore no replacements or new blood is coming through.
They have concentrated so much on getting players to play the mickey mouse crash bang wallop that nobody knows how to bat more than 2 hours or can bat time. A Test match is 5 days long and you only have 4 innings maximum
As for spin bowlers, how do you expect to train/improve spinners when our championship matches are played predominantly in April, May and September-really helpful conditions.
Also, test players rarely go back to their counties to play 4 day cricket because the ECB won’t let them for various reasons.
So, the head honchos at the ECB ARE to blame for the situation England are in as there is a dearth of new blood ready to step up due to the farcical fixture set up.
Tom is right to an extent. The senior players have not stepped up to the plate. But that does not detract from all of the above that Keith and James has said. Anyway Cook is past his best now and his poor run in Australia was predicted. Root and Woakes have been my two main disappointments. Ali was always going to struggle in Australian conditions. He needs to be dropped now.
But the likes of Cook, Root and Broad were automatic selections. They wouldn’t have been replaced. Ali is less of a walk-up start but I still think he’s best XI.
You guys are determined to blame the ECB when the real issue is senior players not performing. It’s rubbish.
You should probably read this, Tom http://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/21805721/ecb-decade-errors-led-ashes-failure explains the full context in more detail.
Top trolling fella. Where is my pat on the back ?
Good article this. Sadly i thought george had got too close to the players and ecb but this piece is at least very accurate.
It’s a shame he doesn’t call out the players for not specialising in red ball
Cook has one fine Ashes series in Aus. He’s got pretty much one fine Ashes series all up. He should be left for S/C tours from now on.
Don’t feed the troll James.
Most convicts would be happy to win, this item needs to whinge about something he clearly doesn’t understand.
Mike, I think your reference to Australians as convicts is insulting and demeaning, and it’s not the first time you have mentioned it either.
Pull your head in and get with the times.
Top trolling
Of those four, only root is anywhere near the quality required for test cricket.
The fact that they are anywhere near the test team tells you that the system for producing test class cricketers in this country is fundamentally broken.
Don’t blame the players, in any previous era they would have been regular county stalwarts at best. It’s not their fault that they’re being asked to play at a level significantly about their abilities
I’m amazed by the simplicity of your thinking here. If you’re not a troll, you’re easily the stupidest commenter we’ve ever had on this website.
This really is unacceptable, and not the first time. Not sure why these kind of comments have had a free pass until now.
Play the ball, not the main.
I’d echo this. Please keep it polite fellas. Thanks.
Why is the troll not banned yet, despite being repeatedly called out as a troll by about 20 different people. He completely ruins the discussion.
He probable not even Australian. I bet you 200 quid that if England were winning, he’d be on an Aussie cricket forum pretending to be a smug pommie and generally being idiotic and offensive to try and wind everyone up.
I agree Tom!
Top trolling again, this lad is a good troll james. We obviously like this troll
Good trolling again, this kid is good. Can I have my pat on the back yet ?
Your news that the T20 takeover is about to go tits up is far more interesting and important than the entirely predictable events in Perth.
Here’s an idea. Find People who predicted a 5-0 whitewash, and ask them what to do, because they clearly have a far better handle on the situation than the ECB.
Great news about the T/20 takeover. I hope it happens.
Troll
I don’t think they would pick Handscomb, I don’t think they would have picked Smith either, and if he had been picked up early in his career they would have turned him into a perhaps an average player with “good” technique.
Cook and Broad have seen a test series too many by the look of it. Cook made a double hundred against a woeful opponent (the same one who did so much to push Adam Voges Average to 100), but has done little else for ever. He has averaged 26 across the last 3.66 series against Australia (since Ryan Harris worked him out) with slightly more of those games played at home. He’s technique is flawed and Australia knows how to get him out.
Broad I expected to do better but seems bereft of how to bowl in these conditions despite playing here several times.
Ali was always going to struggle with the ball in Aus. Root has only scored 3 of 13 centuries away from home, so we can expect some lovely fifties but for whatever reason he doesn’t seem to be able to make a match winning score, rather than a useful contribution overseas with the regularity you would expect from someone with his talent.
Look at the positives Malan, Stoneman and Vince all look ok, and have outbatted their more senior partners in the whole. Overton is both a good bowler and a fighter he’ll end up popular down under if he continues in that vein.
Are there any other candidates for skipper? It might be that pressure that is screwing up Root. He’s a fine batsman and needs to be given some breathing space for now maybe to just concentrate on that. Not sure who else can captain though with the revolving door of the other batsman.
This is a fair point: you don’t automatically pick your best player as captain (would you have Ian Botham, Andrew Flintoff or Mike Brearley as your captain?). Strauss wasn’t our best player.
One really disturbing point is that, up to about 15 months ago, if I have my facts correct, only twice in test history had a team scored 400+ first innings, then lost by an innings. England have now done it 3 times in a little over a year. They’ve probably scored 400 on 600 pitches, but that speaks of considerable mental fragility.
That’s a symptom of toothless bowling rather than the bats not going on.
Doesn’t matter how many you make first innings if you can’t bowl them out.
Bit of both. If you make 400 when you should make 550, you put yourself at a disadvantage.
I agree, Mike.
it’s a fairly remarkable statistic; if you’re making over 400 and losing so easily, then you need better bowlers.
Smith might have been picked for Indian tours as a legspinner who can bat a bit.
The problem is either :-
A) The reduction in 1st class championship games, with no championship cricket in high summer. Along with the mad
idea of the T20 franchise, overseen by clueless ECB personnel. Or:-
B) KP was whistling too loud in the commentary box.
B b b always b
Take 5 medium pacers, no left-armer, no quick bowler, no reserve opener and no spinner would ever actually consider picking. Plus a number 3 with a marked tendency of nicking off. Against Josh Hazelwood.
Add to that that one of your medium-pacers is a debutant, another averages 114 with the ball (he still does, which speaks to his consistency) and one of your ‘gun’ bowlers is carrying an undisclosed injury and… hey presto!
Plunkett, Rashid and Burns/Browne/Robson would at least have given us the option of changing the team after Brisbane, when it was clear what we had wasn’t going to work.
We probably wouldn’t have won. But that squad would at least have offered options.
What should the XI have been?
The reality is that Anderson and Broad were automatic selections, while Overton did a reasonable job once picked.
To be fair, the rookies did well enough to justify their selection, it was the seniors that let the team down. Cook was never really great to watch, but he had the ability to stay at the crease for long periods of time, a trait he seems to have lost. The pressures of captaincy seem to be taking their effect on root, his captaincy on the field wasn’t great, he somehow didn’t or couldn’t tell his senior bowlers to stop bowling filth, and failed repeatedly with the bat. Bairstow was fine, but for some reason he had to bat at 7 for 2 tests and therefore couldn’t do anything before the aussies blasted out the rest of the tail . Ali has been disappointing as well, I would drop him for the next 2 matches because he is clearly not fit.
Anderson only bowled well when the match was already lost, and Broad has been persona non grata on the tour so far, he has been the biggest disappointment. The ECB deserves all the brickbats it gets for being utterly incompetent, but the players also have to share the blame.
Also cough cough Rashid cough cough would have been a option as a spinner, but for some strange reason the ECb & especially root don’t seem to like him, instead he brought his mate Ballance along.
“I’m still the man for the job”…. Bayliss:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/42395083
Fire him, the post match talks alone mean he’s eithe rin denial or not willing to be honest. This group of players and management needs clearing out and a totally new culture creating
I’ll be doing a piece on the players and Bayliss – one of my ‘stick or twist’ articles – in the coming days. Will be interesting to see who everyone thinks should stay or go.
Cook -earnt the right to go when he decides… as long as it’s at the end of the winter. Thanks but you’re not the player you were and there is no point flogging a dead horse. Might as well play hammed and fail.. at least he could improve.
Broad – thanks but bye.. again after nz
Anderson – bye again after nz. Don’t give him a swan song of easy wickets on green tops in the summer (same with broad)
Moeen – just get lost.. you’re not good enough with bat or ball
Stoneman, Vince and malan should be told that they are to bat long, look to leave All bar genuine bad balls and stop paying one day flashy shots as that’s why you keep getting out
I don’t care who you bring in, just give some young players a go. Can’t go any worse
Like losing to New Zealand?
I actually think this English Test team might get worse before it gets better.
I’ll predict now that there won’t be a single managerial sacking or resignation because of this. A drubbing in the ODI series as well might change this but I wouldn’t be certain of that either.
You might be right, Simon. The excuse (discipline) has already been made. What’s more, the ECB are currently scrambling desperately to save their beloved city T20 tournament. Are they capable of doing two things i.e. making personnel decisions and patching together their T20 vision at the same time?
Aussies aren’t the best one day side now. There’s a good chance of England not being flogged.
I think you’d be mad to get rid of Anderson based on this tour. He can still make it sing in England and he’s the best at that. Sure, he hasn’t come up trumps when it’s been needed in Aus but he’s never bowled that well out there apart from one tour. It would be cutting off your nose to spite your face if you ditched him for the English summer.
Cook is vastly overrated and the most impressive thing about him is his longevity, not his record. He’s a good player, nothing better – as an average of 45 in this era suggests. 6 hundred in 92 Test innings since the start of 2014 is particularly mediocre. That said, if he doesn’t retire, then I’d really like to see him bat at 3 next summer. He looks so tired (has done for years) that not having to spend the last 2 wickets in the field thinking about batting might just help refresh him a bit.
I’ve been impressed with Stoneman though. It’s a tough ask against the Aussie attack with the new ball, and he’s dug in well. Reminds me of Carberry in 2013-14, who also kept getting starts. I really hope he doesn’t get the same fate if he doesn’t kick on in the last 2 Tests, because he’ll have learned so much and Test Match cricket will seem a hell of a lot easier next summer after his experience on this tour. I’d open with him and Hameed next summer.
As for Vince, he’s basically a liability at 3 but the way he played in the second innings here, you can see why the selectors went back to him. He looked very good indeed. I probably wouldn’t have him in my starting 11 next summer (assuming Stokes isn’t banged up…), but I’d certainly keep him in and around the squad. If he can learn to be a bit more discerning around off stump, then he could still have a decent Test career. A better bet than Ballance in my view, who seems to have no inclination to change anything about his technique even though good bowlers can virtually knock him over at will.
Root – a worry. Often England captains who are batsmen have a purple patch at the start of their captaincy, but it hasn’t happened for him and he looks knackered already. I wonder how long he can continue in all 3 formats.
Malan – great to see someone working really hard and reaping the rewards. What he’s done is an example to everyone. Last summer his main focus was staying in. Now he’s starting to flourish as a result of some really hard graft.
Bairstow – still a jolly good all rounder. His keeping has improved no end – how come we’re so good at producing keeper/batsmen in England?
Ali – going backwards and not fit in my view (not just his finger, his body shape is different when bowling, too). Might as well give Mason Crane a game or two in my view and give Ali and rest, because he’s a Test-class all-rounder when fit, particularly when he bats at 8.
Woakes – not been the same bowler since the side strain, but worth persevering with in the absence of others if he can get the pace back reliably that he had before his injury, rather than just for the odd ball. A very good number 9.
Overton – encouraging start for someone who I thought would be cannon-fodder. Hopefully his brother will be fully fit next season, too.
Broad – looks all over to me. One 5-for since his 8-15, and that was nearly 2 years ago. Never gets the bounce I expect for such a tall man on Aussie pitches. Reports suggest his body’s giving up. A liability with the bat these days too, sadly.
Anderson – I thought he’d break down (and I suppose he still might), but he’s actually been pretty good on this tour. Another summer of cheap wickets beckons….
So yes, we’ve been stuffed out of sight, but it would have been closer if the ginger tosser hadn’t been such a ginger tosser (hate crime?) and, let’s face it, Aussie have been flattered by having a legend in their ranks. I doubt the Marshes would have made their big scores without the reassuring presence of a batsman who basically looks like he’s never going to get out at the other end. Steve Smith, you are getting right up there with Richards, Lara and Sachin (though not in style terms!). Well played Sir – and from 3-0 down on tosses, too.
Whilst I agree with most of your article James, I must come back to one point I have made before. It has been widely reported that Woakes has been bowling a shorter length as part of a plan hatched by Bayliss and the bowling coaches. Even assuming they need someone to do this (which is not clear), it makes no sense to give this role to Woakes, the fastest – but also shortest – of our seamers. Everyone in English cricket (apart from the coaches) knows that Woakes is most effective bowling full length with a new ball. So what do they do? They get him to bowl back of a length – and with the old ball, having given Broad the new ball to use at barely 80mph with no movement. The only time Woakes has had a new(ish) ball in decent conditions he outbowled Anderson in the second test.
It is very difficult to judge England’s bowlers (except, perhaps, Broad – whose physical woes seem to have caught up with him) when the coaches (and captain) seem to have no idea how best to use the resources available to them. On the basis of their decisions I assume Stokes, if he had been on tour, would have been asked to bowl leg spin.
It’s a task they seem to delegate to the less senior bowlers as a matter of course, irrespective of their suitability (ironically, I remember Broad complaining about this in an interview about a year ago…), and I guess they thought Overton a bit too slow.
The truth is that we simply did not have a bowler both tall and quick, and Australia had three.
We shouldn’t underestimate the loss of Ottis Gibson. We often seemed to bowl better when he was around.
Good point. We are missing him.
Completely agree.
You certainly get the impression that the ECB have been taking lessons on cricket management from N Srinivasan. It was also blindingly obvious to anyone with half a brain (which appears to exclude our selectors) that taking no fast bowlers and no mystery spinner (or at least no mystery spinner you were prepared to play) was idiotic. Rashid was practically player of the tournament in last year’s Big Bash (yes I know it’s a T20, but it shows he can bowl in Australia). However, that does not excuse the lamentable performance of the senior England pros, as listed by Tom. I think before this tour many of were expecting Cook and Root to get the runs, and were worried about Stoneman, Vince and Malan. Stoneman has shown he’s up for the fight, Vince has looked really good on a few occasions, and was bowled in Perth by something that looked like a Monty Panesar ball at 90mph. Malan played really well in Perth. All 3 have outplayed Cook and Root. Cook can’t get in, and Root too often gets in then gets out (the main difference between Root and Smith is that Smith converts about 50% of his 50’s to 100’s, Root less than 30%: this has to be down to concentration).
We all know that Broad bowling full at 85mph is a top class bowler. Broad bowling short at 80mph (as he’s done so far this series) is a pie chucker. He and Anderson wasted our best opportunity by bowling short with the new ball in Adelaide. Anderson has done OK in this series (given that conditions don’t suit him). We know that Wood would have been selected if fit, so why was Plunkett not taken?
Stokes undoubtedly went too far outside the Bristol nightclub (and probably shouldn’t have been there in the first place, but (as I understand it) he was standing up to bullies, so could be commended for that. You get the impression the ECB may have been getting their excuses in even before the tour started.
On Khawaja, it’s fair to point out that he has a test average of about 65 in Australia. I don’t think the selectors just look at runs in County Cricket (or James Hildreth would play test cricket). Michael Vaughan, for one, had no special county record.
Can we get (say) Ian Pont in to help with the bowling?
Ponty is a transformational technical coach, international cricketers should not require transformational technical coaching.
He’d be better utilised working with the next generation of pace bowlers, 16-22 year olds, as they are developing their actions.
Surprised? The reality was I was pretty resigned to something like this happening for the reasons that you extrapolated above. I guess one thing that we couldn’t have predicted was the Stokes debacle, but others like the predictability of the bowling attack, the flakey batting were highly predictable.
Where do we go from here? Some knives are out for Bayliss but for me he can only deal with the tools he’s been given by the selectors and they can only deal with the talent that they deem can be ready. No, I’m more on the development and the identification of talent over the last four years. For me the two architects are Andy Flower, the discarded senior coach who is responsible for managing talent of developing players and Mr Trust himself, a certain AJ Strauss. What has he done in his last 2 and a half years exactly? What has he done to the coaching centre at Loughborough and weeding out the dead wood that largely hasn’t been very good at bringing in good young players since Joe Root 5 years ago? Answers on a post card please. it is under their watch that they’ve decided to go for a white ball first policy and neglected the test team most markedly.
No mention of Root not performing.
He’s your captain and best player yet he went missing when it mattered. He should be first in line for the blowtorch. But you guys give him a pass because that’s easier.
These are mostly my thoughts, but the answers on the postcard elude me. I also have concerns about Root. It’s early days in what is a a snake pit for him, but he does not seem best suited to captaincy when the chips are down. I have no answers to that either. We can only hope he settles into the role and that it does not take too much of a toll on his batting.
If I were conducting an annual appraisal of the collective known as England I would tick the box marked “met expectations’ and under Future Potential I’d say ‘limited’. That’s the top and bottom of it. OK, I may have expected the experienced guys to do better and the newbies to be blown away but that’s a mere point of detail. I understand that Root doesn’t think that England were blown away. Denial is not good, Joe.
If, and it’s a big if, the counties really do revolt and Graves and Harrison get the boot, I will be delighted and consider that an Ashes series defeat (although not directly related) is a small price to pay for the removal of the odious duo.
Not a lot I can add here, I think all the main points have been covered. I would hope heads will role at the ECB but I doubt it: it’s almost impossible to get them out short of employing a hit man. Public pressure following this shambles perhaps may just help. Something has to give though otherwise Test cricket will fade away.
Bayliss has to go now though. Useless, doesn’t watch 4 day cricket.
Need to get new blood into the team: Cook and Broad, thanks, but no more. Jimmy is 35. Woakes doesn’t do it for me at this level, Moen is not fit and out of form. Time for Crane. Forget Rashid he bowls too short anyway. New captain after this series otherwise Root is lost.
Malan and Stoneman have done well considering. Vince and Overton OK.
But well done Australia. Not bad for an”average” team!
Not sure what that makes us though.
Whilst I agree with much of what you say (apart from Woakes who should have been given the new ball, which he uses much better than Broad), I cannot believe Crane is ready. A bowler who could barely buy a wicket in the CC is not likely to cut it in tests. He may develop into a test player but he is nowhere near ready.
England’s spinner problem is obvious and the reason is equally obvious. Whilst I welcome overseas players in the CC, they have a particular impact on the development of English spinners, simply because most teams only play one main spinner (and, perhaps, a spinning all rounder). This means any county taking on an overseas spinner virtually denies a development opportunity for any youngsters on their staff (unlike with seamers where they play 3 or 4). This can be seen very clearly at Warwickshire (with Jeetan Patel), Essex (with Harmer) and my favourite example, Derbyshire. A couple of seasons ago I saw Matt Critchley bowling his leg spin and thought he had the most promising action I have seen from a teenager in years. This year Derbyshire took on Imran Tahir and Jeetan Mendis. The result was that Critchley (who is a decent bat) only played 5 games and bowled only 10 overs in those games. Another wasted prospect.
Woakes saw plenty of the new ball, ahead of Overton and Ball who both looked more threatening.
He was awful. Not quite as bad as Broad but still woeful.His figures for the series thus far flatter him due to the pink ball under lights.
What are his figures with the red ball? 2 wickets for 250 runs or thereabouts?
I don’t recall him seeing the new ball at all – and that is critical with a kookaburra which after 10 overs is like a Duke after 40 overs. As for awful. What do you expect when he is ordered to bowl back of a length when his entire career has been based on bowling full length. The bowling coaches should be sacked and if Root cannot stand up to them then so should he.
Only if you are defining new ball as one that is either one or two overs old.
He was first change and usually on within the first 10 overs as I recall. Twice, famously, Anderson was off within 3 overs.
Now feel free to say that that isn’t bowling with the new ball but semantics isn’t really helpful given his woeful returns.
What have you seen over the past few tests that makes you think he’s a new ball bowler???
His 2016 performances when he did get the new ball are the obvious pointer. However, the fact that he is a swing bowler means he will obviously benefit from a new ball (whereas Broad looks more for seam movement).
Perhaps I should not focus exclusively on the new ball issue. At the start of the last day at Adelaide, when Australia were 4 down for 50 odd and Anderson and Woakes had put them in that position, what did Root do when play restarted? He tossed the ball to Broad and 10 overs were wasted before Woakes came back and took more wickets in circumstances which clearly suited him.
Oh I have no problem with Woakes in more friendly conditions. He’s a fine player, just not down under.
Any player who drops out of the last two Tests shouldn’t just walk back into the team in NZ or against Pakistan back in lovely home conditions (excluding genuine and serious injuries). Those who front up when the going gets tough should get the first chance when the going gets slightly easier (not that beating NZ in NZ should be under-estimated).
England are not a private club owned by the senior players and dedicated to preserving their stats.
As per usual with every latest Ashes disaster down under there is the usual taking over of what went wrong. What did we actually expect though? Root and Cook to score centuries in every game and Anderson, Broad & co to conjure up 20 wickets with magically swinging 82mph bowling? The reality is our batting against 3 x 90 mph crackerjack bowlers probably coped and produced as much as could be expected – could any batting line up in world cricket have done much better? History tells you as soon as a bowling attack boasts 3 outstanding fast bowlers batting line ups, whoever they are, rarely produce more than the odd decent innings here and there and scores of 260-400 are what you get. Reality is if fast bowlers get it right for 50-80 overs then they will bowl any side out more often than not. The issue in my mind was in not recognising either how we should be bowling with our front line of anderson, broad, woakes, overton/ball – ie full length & discliplined/ defensive fields a la 2010/11 or recognise that as a way of bowling in Australia will not yield consistent series results and pick/ find 3 fast bowlers of our own perhaps with an anderson in tow for the day/ nighter and unleash them on Aussie batters who are no more capable of resisting fast bowling all day than England’s are; they could hardly have done any worse than the current 3/4 guys. Then pick steady swing bowlers for home series; why should a certain type of bowler be capable of performing in all conditions? Very few in the history of the game manage this. I don’t subscribe that there aren’t any fast 90mph in England – there have been quite a number over the last 3/4 years – but through combination of counties preferring 80mph swing/ Seam bowlers to hit a length/ not go for many runs in the pursuit of either a championship/ promotion or staving off relegation and “selectors / coaches” looking at bowling figures and regarding someone who has gone for 5 an over as “too loose” for international cricket – instead of looking at the potential of what they might offer on faster Test pitches where the creation of wickets are worth a few boundaries; these guys don’t get a look in when it comes to international selection. What both methods require is a decent spinner to bowl 10-20 overs; and yet again I hear – no spinners in county cricket; well for starters there’s a couple of guys in leach and Bess down at Somerset. But guess what – we get the “they only take wickets because it spins at Taunton”; conveniently forgetting where a certain Mr Swann learnt his trade…. on raging bunsens at Northampton. We love putting up an excuse not to pick people in this country instead of finding a reason to pick people- and perhaps look past pure stats which sometimes don’t give much indication to someone’s capability in the level above.
I expected Root to average more than 29 and for Cook to average more than 13. I also expected Broad to do better than 5 wickets at 61. How about you?
Is that kind of under-performance the ECB’s fault?
Really? Suggests you don’t really know what you’re talking about. Last time round, Root averaged 27 and Cook averaged 24. Cook has visibly deteriorated since then. A sensible prediction might have been for averages of 30 and 15.
Yet you expected much improved performances this time round? Do you even watch English cricket?
“Is that kind of under-performance the ECB’s fault?”
Picking players who are clearly not up to the job is the ECB’s fault, yes.
Getting themselves in the situation where these are, sadly, literally the best players England have got is very much the ECB’s fault as well.
Not having the bowlers is one thing. But totally mismanaging them on the field (whether through the demented plans of the coaches or Root’s lack of captaincy nous) is another.
Monday to Thursday each week play 4 day county cricket. Wickets are to be sporting not flat roads or green tops!
Friday nights 2020
Sunday 50 over thrash
Money from All formats pooled and distributed to a weighting.. aka for being a red ball player you get more than 50over, which gets more than 2020. Prioritise money to red ball Cricket (large bounty to the county who produces a test player each game they play)
Top 5divisons in amateur Cricket to be 60 over draw Cricket – those red ball players not involved in the one day crap are required to play in club Cricket. Rest plays 45over win lose
Run alongside this a 2020 league but give it no coverage, not big trophy etc.. just let it be there for casual players
Cricket can stay behind a pay wall as that pays the bills but rights to screen comprehensive highlights via the ecb website each evening and on national tv are a must. No one shouldn’t see some Cricket. I’d also televise nationally the 2020’s each Friday evening and the Sunday 50over stuff. Televise it or at least have each game running on the ecb website .
Get rid of stupid things like clubmark, focus clubs etc.. pointless.. I’d also state no club can have more than one age group team and no more than 3 Saturday league teams. Why??because we want to get rid of big clubs just sucking up players and annoying them into quitting the game ! We want them to be at clubs where they will get game time which is the whole point
ECB should build facilities jn all major towns and cities. 2x 5lane indoor facilities which are used to provide CHEAP coaching to juniors during weekends and holidays. Also use these to run indoor games for kids, adults and veterans weekday evenings
Scrap the ecb coaching courses.. utterly pointless ! Literally learnt nothing and I’ve done lvl 3..literlaly pointless
Agree with many of the principles here, particularly in cracking down on big clubs sucking up all the juniors from an area.
However I see little point in the 50 over thrash. Its not popular with spectators, and its not necessary to prepare players for international cricket.
“Top 5divisons in amateur Cricket to be 60 over draw Cricket – those red ball players not involved in the one day crap are required to play in club Cricket. Rest plays 45over win lose ”
Why don’t you ask amateur players what they want to play? Your suggestion would move our 1st team from playing 40 over cricket (which we enjoy) to playing 60 over cricket. We’d simply leave the league, as would probably 90% of the teams we play against.
So leave. The idea is to make it a breeding ground for high quality cricketers which feeds counties. You don’t learn the skills necessary in win lose Cricket as we see evidenced out in white ball techniques and mentalities. Bowlers bowl for economy rather than wicket taking.. capts don’t have to think even half as much tactically in win lose and the batters don’t have to be able to adapt.. chasing 300 and you’re 100-6 and it’s game over.. with draw both sides still have it to play for
Anyway, too dovs are there to be a breeding ground for pro Cricket. If players genuinely want to jut play win lose then stay in the lower divs or play in the 2020league if people just want a thrash. The principle is to be where the best players aim to play and as many pros play in it as possible to raise the standards.. that way, any junior wanting to ‘make it’ will etc etc
“So leave.”
lol. What do you think happens to the league if all the clubs leave? I’m sorry to break it to you, but amateurs are going to play whatever fucking format they like, regardless of your personal opinions.
Leagues can’t impose changes without them being voted into place by the clubs, otherwise all the clubs would leave the league and the league would fold. Clubs won’t support changes that their players don’t vote for at the AGM, otherwise all the players would leave and the club would fold.
Ultimately, the players are in charge, and the players don’t want to play 60 over games, thanks very much.
And so the decline in standards will continue. Oh well.. AB has spoken so it must be the truth.
I don’t think the decline in standards at professional level has anything whatsoever to do with the format played by recreational cricketers.
40/45 overs is an old, old format. I was playing that back in the 1990s in league cricket in maybe the 3rd amateur division. Its a good format – it gives you plenty of time to get your eye in and score a ton at a run a ball, and you get a good chance to bowl a decent spell and pick up a 5-fer as a bowler.
You really think people are suddenly going to agree to play 60 over cricket when they’re already struggling to commit to 40 over cricket due to the time it takes? You’re mad.
If you create a top tier league system where the best amateur players play, the youth prospects who want to make it play and county pros play etc.. you remove the pointless 2xi and minor counties system and you remove the county age group stuff as your good young players should be playing in these top divisions and you then judge on results
Yet another humiliating defeat. As one of the others on here said, this is now the third time England have score 400 first innings and still lost the match. The fifth day’s play was much shortened by rain, and yet still our batsmen couldn’t hold out. It’s just the lack of fight from some of the players that gets me down.
However, Malan, Stoneman, Bairstow, Overton and even Vince on occasions have done well at times, and Anderson’s bowling stats are decent in conditions which don’t suit him. I suspect Broad is nursing an injury and if this was known about before the tour started, then he shouldn’t have been picked. I do think it was a mistake not to try Plunkett, who does have some pace, even if he’s no spring chicken at 32. Cook has been dreadful, totally out of form and you wonder if there’s anything left for him now. Root has had starts, but often got himself out, and his captaincy has been strange at times: just why was Anderson taken off at Brisbane after just a couple of overs with the new ball and Australia 7 wickets down ? Was it wise to bowl first at Adelaide ? Moeen has had a terrible series with bat and ball, he’s had no control and his finger injury must have hampered him considerably.
Given that the Ashes are gone, I would be inclined to try one or two other players for the last two Tests. Poor Overton will presumably have to come home because of the rib injury.
I’d be interested to know what changes if any Australia made after they lost at home to SA 2016-2017 ? Clearly having the three pace bowlers all fit and firing at once is a huge bonus and Lyon has backed them up with control and guile.
I hope we do get a shake-up in the team management of England and at the ECB, I agree with all those who feel it is appalling that there is no cricket on terrestial TV. The way the ECB are going, cricket really will vanish from the national conscience one day.
Re changes after the south Africa series. We (oz) made five changes for the third test and won. Debuts to renshaw maddinson hanscomb and wade and bird back in. None of the five played in perth.
I suspect Overton should be fine for the 5th test. I cracked a rib (many years ago) and was ok after 3 weeks. It depends which rib is the problem. As for Broad; he has had knee tendonitis for years which has to be managed. I assume it is worse on pitches made hard by heat and sun.
If we’re going to avoid a whitewash, aside of a sympathetic weather system, we have to give the rampant Aussies something to think about. Surely it must be obvious to everyone out there that going into the next test with the same attack is about as likely to do this as a Koala appearing in your Xmas stocking.
We have Curran, Crane and Foakes kicking their heels on the sidelines. I am assuming they were brought along for some reason apart from making up the numbers. Now we’ve lost the series let’s set about using them in some constructive capacity, that is giving them some game time, playing Bairstow as a batsman. How else can we assess if they’ve got the necessary. I suppose Wood is still an option, but his fitness needs confirming.
Broad has been living on borrowed time for a while now, whilst Woakes, whom I am a big fan of, has yet to recover his form after last season’s injury and Ali has done nothing with bat or ball to warrant further inclusion. I know these are 3 experienced pro’s and replacing them with untried youngsters is a big risk, but having the enthusiasm and positivity of new blood in the dressing room would seem to me to be the ideal way to counter what must be a sickening feeling of inevitability.
Root can come out with all the platitudes under the sun, but do any of us believe it’s more than damage limitation?
The only issue here is you only have 4 front line bowlers, which England have done many times before, so you could play Ball and carry on with Bairstow as wicket keeper. I guess Foakes was only taken as emergency cover. This leaves a long tail, but you could say we have one of those now. As you have to bowl a side out twice to win most test matches, 5 seems the better option.
As for the batting, there’s only Cook to consider, but this would be a major blow to morale. The way the Aussies celebrate his wicket clearly shows he is a key man for them.
I’m not saying these suggestions would alter the course of events, but at least we’re learning something positive whatever the result.
” Curran, Crane and Foakes kicking their heels on the sidelines. I am assuming they were brought along for some reason apart from making up the numbers”
No.
The EXACT reason was to make up the numbers.
If you’d taken Rashid, Plunkett and Buttler (not that I think Buttler should be there), there would, by now, be a clamour for them that was unstoppable. Before Perth.
You take uncapped players to prove the cupboard is bare, and that the coach really is dealing with the hand he’s been dealt. Which is bollocks. We chose to leave experienced players, who weren’t totally useless when they actually played, and pick uncapped players. And Jake f-ing Ball.
This, remember, is the selection team that took Gareth Batty to India. And picked Liam Dawson. Liam Dawson. Test cricket. India. Liam. Dawson. Just let that sink in. Liam. Dawson.
If a problem is pace then Curran is no answer. He barely averages 80mph. I would be inclined to risk Wood for Broad.
It is a myth that English cricket does not produce 90mph bowlers. Apart from Wood (and Mills, who is out for obvious reasons) I can think of at least 3 others who can reach 90mph+ regularly. George Garton is interesting but not ready. Stuart Meaker is genuinely quick (and, as his Normandy ex-clubmates say, genuinely wild). And Olly Stone could be anything and should be easier to evaluate if he gets a full 2018 season. I am sure there are others. Our problem is developing these natural speed merchants to test standard.
Might as well just regurgitate analyses from the previous two tours really, which tells us that it isn’t the player’s socks that smell.
Yes it’s the structure, the intent and inability to learn rather than make excuses.
The two current excuses are lack of pace and having a beer after work. Neither sadly are credible. You certainly need a pace bowler in Oz though we’ve gone down there before now with multiple 90+ quicks and had our arses handed to us. Tremlett, Finn, Harmison, Flintoff, Silverwood, Rankin, Jones, et al. Bresnan was to my mind one of the most effective bowlers we’ve taken down there, but he wasn’t what you’d call quick.Anderson too has been effective, well once the game is already lost.
I’m sure before the tour started many would have scoffed at the idea that Broad wasn’t a pace bowler and would be slaughtered mercilessly.To be fair to him was was reasonably pacey in the first test first innings, or at the beginning of it anyway. The outstanding stat here though is that the convicts have swung the ball more than we have. Yup, despite having the king of swing in Jimmy they’ve beaten us at our own game.
Our fastest bowler, Ball, was dropped after being given the old ball. The 4th seamer seems to have a dog like existence whether they’re the best of the lot or not. Thou shalt be given a tattered rag after we’ve wasted the new ball and thou shalt take wickets against batsmen we’ve played in. Overton overcame it but was Ball really that bad given the role he’d been given?
It matters not as the biggest gulf in ability came with the spin bowling. Lyon achieved 50% more turn than Ali during the test series, despite bowling mainly top spinners at slow medium pace. To be comprehensively outbowled by a very average bowler is not a good thing, though for the management and captain not to notice this is… Concerning? Malan, given 6 overs at about the 150 overs mark, looked better than either of them. Despite, I think, bowling purely to show the others how to block an end up.
Ashley Giles was a bit better than many gave him credit for though did someone look at our previous tours and decide, based upon evidence, that a finger spinner with low revs was the answer? Is there somewhere an Ali fan who thought he might spin us to the Ashes? Are we really meant to believe that they had a look at the first two wickets and thought, nah it won’t turn when Accrington third XI’s skipper could have told them otherwise?
We came prepared, with a young leggie. Is he good enough to play? Looking at the way people tend to give him the ball in tight situations I’d say hell yes. If he isn’t then why pick him? We’ve done this before, took Scott Borthwick and decided to give him a game once the series was already lost. He’s turned himself into a No 3 instead now but you’d have to rate as better than an occasional bowler and regularly thumps a thousand runs in the championship. Not this year admittedly. So it isn’t as though we lack a wrist spinning all rounder, or a part time leggie, or an exciting proper leggie. Two of whom are on tour.
But it’s Oz where we think finger spin might finally be the answer. It was with Emburey and Edmonds though they weren’t part timers. They both played at the Waca in 1986 and we drew it.
So after watching the complete inability of our seamers to take wickets when it mattered we left the leggie out. After watching Starc hit Broad for 6 and Lyon take the piss out of Woakes and Cummings look completely comfortable against our seamers they thought the answer was more of the same. How could anyone watch Cummings’ innings at Brisbane and think that a different seamer was the answer?
No matter how well or badly they played on the field this is rank incompetence. It made no sense. Could see it coming a mile off.
I remember watching MacGill bowl on the 98 tour. He was hooking it, not bowling well at all. Still got wickets. Several years later I think it was Waugh that said he couldn’t land it, had lost his action a bit. But… They picked him anyway for some variation.
I think we need some variation myself. Both on and off the pitch.
Keep telling yourself Lyon is Average. He may not be Warne or Murali but he’s a lot more than average. He holds down an end and takes wickets in both innings.He’s at least the equal of Swann.
The pre-series wrap up was loaded with this stuff. You need to take the opposition seriously to beat them.
“We’ve heard it all before about their bowling attack, but are they that special? Hazlewood is a line and length bowler inferior to our own openers, Starc is an excellent one-day bowler with a good yorker, but a very expensive five day operator.”
“hyped bowling attack is mostly held together by sticky tape. ”
“it’s a different prospect to the Aussie bowling attack spearheaded by a rampant Mitchell Johnson chucking down 93mph rockets with Ryan Harris at the other end.” – Yes it was different, possibly better overall with Lyon much improved and Cummins better than Siddle.
He looks average to me.
We’ll have to agree to disagree.
I never underestimated their quicks, though I’m morbidly gutted at the way we played an average finger spinner.
14 @ 26.1 Ashes (vs 19, 15, 11; best economy at 2.5, most 146 overs bowled vs 126 (Cummins))
60 @ 22.9 Tests this calendar year (best avg amongst all Australian bowlers, next most wickets Hazlewood @ 31)
That’s a heck of a look, s’ all I gotta say.
People keep underestimating Lyon and he just keeps on taking wickets (not to mention bowling over maidens on and off the field.)
Lyon isn’t the equal of Swann because he doesn’t have an arm ball.
Neither did Swan
In 2017, Lyon has taken 60 wickets at 22.92.
England wishes they had a “very average bowler” like that.
In Graeme Swann’s best year, he took 64 wickets at 25.97.
But nah, Lyon is very average, isn’t he?
You guys still can’t get your head around the idea that some of these Australian players are better than you realised. Hence, the denial deepens.
Tell me again how you’re 3-0 down because of “the structure”. What a load of rubbish.
Were Lyon bowling alongside England’s seamers, I’d bet he would look a great deal more ordinary, good bowler though he is.
Malan can be useful with his part time leggies. It might not have changed any outcome but overlooking his bowling ability was a mistake.
I’m not so sure of that.
If Malan had bowled 100 overs thus far rather than Ali do we think we’d have seen the same results?
You realise that you HAVE to put topspin on the ball to get turn on hard tracks? Hence the reason the spinners that traditionally do well in Australia tend to be legspinners and offspinners with high arm actions.
I thought you bowled spin?
It isn’t just about turn though I have no issues with Lyon’s stock delivery.
We’ve allowed Lyon to bowl whatever length he likes without trying to knock him off it. At times that length has been unthreatening yet our bats have played every ball as though it’s on the stumps. I think Root figured it out, though in general I’ve seen remarkably little back foot play against him. If the ball is bouncing over the stumps or turning wide of them then why are you on the front foot? This has been premeditated by many of our batsmen, particularly but not exclusively Ali and Cook. I can’t think of a finer example than KP’s 186 against Singh and Ashwin of how to play. Suspect I could count the number of back foot drives payed against Lyon’s 150 overs on my nob.
A high arm action does help with topspin though on a really flat deck it’s easy for the bat to pick the line. Going slightly more round arm and varying the drift combats this, especially against set batsmen. How could Ali not pick Lyon’s straight toppie in his last innings? Granted it gives U13 cricketers hope that they too could bowl in test matches, even before they grow up!
If you want an off spinner to hold up an end then they’ll bowl one way, to take wickets then they’ll bowl another. England have played the former like the latter.
Playing back to spinners on fast, bouncy tracks is fraught with risk.
“I can’t think of a finer example than KP’s 186 against Singh and Ashwin of how to play”
It was a great example of how to play spinners on slow, low sub-continental tracks. But Lyon is not bowling on slow low subcontinental tracks.
The tactics required to play spin on hard bouncy tracks where length balls are getting up into your ribs, making backfoot driving virtually impossible, is completely different. Your best option is to try to get down the track – but the topspin and dip that Lyon gets makes that challenging.
George Dobell seems to agree with a lot of this.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/21805721/ecb-decade-errors-led-ashes-failure
It’s pretty clear where the problem lies.
Whatever the difficulties of our putting together a settled top order, it’s very hard indeed to image England having lost this series had we been able to swap Broad, Woakes and Anderson for Hazlewood, Cummins and Starc… or even just the first two of the trios.
That four years on from our last shellacking we went in with essentially the same attack as last time – the same two senior bowlers, showing rather more wear and tear, plus a couple of new medium pacers and an utterly ineffective spinner – is a massive condemnation of England’s planning.
That there are no realistic alternatives in the squad – more of the same on the seamers front, and a spinner so inexperienced that introducing him now could seriously hamper his future development, when we actually have a half decent leggie with test experience and some success in bowling on Australian wickets sitting at home – is a joke.
But even in hindsight, what attack should have been picked?
I mean, surely Broad and Anderson remain automatic selections, and Overton did a decent job.
Planning is all well and good but I’m not sure who you might otherwise have picked.
Maybe you should reread the Dobell article which you dismissed so flippantly ?
I salute your pace bowlers; your comprehension not so much.
I’ve read it. He makes some reasonable points. But he doesn’t explain the shoddy performances of Cook or Root.
And, as I asked previously, was there any real chance of Broad and Anderson not being picked? I wouldn’t have thought so. They’re automatic selections and Overton has been OK. I’m not sure who else you might have picked. I’m asking.
Surely you can’t simply answer every query by pointing to Dobell’s article.
The only reason people like Broad and Cook are still in the team, despite clearly being completely mentally and physically/technical shot, is because the system has failed to produce genuine competitors for their spots.
Which is the fault of…
You seem deliberately to be missing the point. Of course one can argue the details of selection, but rather more important is the development of players for selection.
Again, why did we think four years ago that it would be sensible to bring the same attack four years later and expect any different result ?
And what did we do about it in the interim… ???
Plunkett, Rashid. One faster bowler, with Test experience. One leg-spinner with Test experience.
Add Robson opening, and shift Cook down to 3.
I don’t expect we’d have won the Ashes. We /might/ have been more competitive.
I doubt the convicts would have clawed their way back into it in Brisbane against a leggie, and their tail certainly wouldn’t have made any runs.
Adelaide looked lie a wrist spinners paradise to me.
James, I thought your blog is about people sharing views and debate, not for racism?
An Australian who knows a thing or two about English cricket appears to agree with me: the dearth of bowling options is the biggest problem –
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/dec/18/tale-of-two-ashes-captains-steve-smith-joe-root
If you are good enough for the NSW squad then you are likely to be good enough to play for Australia. Crane was drafted into the NSW team for Sheffield Shield cricket over the heads of their own domestic spinners after playing a season in Oz club cricket.
How would introducing him hamper his future development? Lets say the worst happened and he went wicketless for 140, he’d still have done better than Broad, an England great over the last decade.
If England treat him as they have many past spinners, as in give him a few overs and expect him to tie up an end then take him off and unleash the clueless ex England commentators on him, then yeah it could hamper him. They have to play him as a frontline bowler, put him on, keep him on.
The BBC look at England’s problems, and conclude that… it’s the senior players not performing:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/42401032
As if the solution might be to ensure that Cook and Broad play better next time around….. clueless as our administrators.
Piss poor planning not mentioned.
We took a knife to a gun fight. This, apparently, was not a big deal.
I think the failure is caused by a combination of factors and not just one thing. Clearly poor management, as James says, is one issue but senior players not performing to their best is another, no variety in the bowling, favourable conditions for the Aussies, and Stokes’ absence all play a part.
I agree with some of the comments that both Cook and Broad look ready for retirement and Ali needs a rest. I would drop all three for the next match and bring in Wood (if considered fit), Crane, and Balance (no other option). The key question is who would open with Stoneman? However I doubt anyone out there has the balls to drop Cook!
Does anyone know if Wood is fit? Surely with his history and the series being lost, we would be better to save him for next summer at home?
I so hope they make the right decision. I’d be interested to know if they’ve improved the medical support since last time, who failed to spot Trott and Monty had issues, Swann wasn’t fit, KP and Rankin were carrying injuries. Made me suspect all they had was a bloke with a thermometer.
But can the medical staff prevent a player form playing if they feel he is unfit? Or do they just make recommendations and then the selectors have the final say. Also players lie to medical staff because they want to play.
Utterly disappointed with England’s performance! I had been waiting so long for this but England’s seniors have let everyone down!