After our abject defeat at Headlingley – our second loss in as many tests at Leeds – Alastair Cook claimed England could still win the Ashes as long as the team “makes that step forward as a side”.
You can’t blame Cook for trying. What exactly was he going to say? I doubt he really believes England can beat Australia though. Sure, he’ll believe England can win – in the same way it was technically possible for Aston Villa to win the FA Cup final – but everyone knows we only have a slim chance at best.
The bleak reality is that Australia are better in every conceivable way. They’re better at batting, bowling and fielding. They’re also more confident and have a better captain. What’s more, they’re currently making mincemeat of a West Indies side we struggled to put away.
Significantly, Australia are also a more settled and experienced team. The best you can say about England – who have won just one series out of four since the last Ashes – is that we’re a developing side. You notice I said ‘developing’ not ‘improving’.
Before I continue I have a confession to make. I’m a Villa fan (don’t hold it against me). Because I’m not as passionate as I once was – I think money has ruined club football by making it impossible for all but the richest clubs to compete – I was able to assess our chances in the cup final objectively. As a result, I backed Arsenal to win 3-0. It very nearly paid off.
Because I find the ECB’s recent behaviour abhorrent, I also feel somewhat ambivalent about the England cricket team at the moment; therefore I’m not going to let cockeyed optimism get in the way of objectivity. My cricket betting tips for the summer are for Australia to win the Ashes 3-0, with two of the victories coming inside three days. I sincerely hope I’m wrong, but I expect their bowlers to blow us away.
Ask yourself this: when was the last time a ‘developing side’ beat a settled and confident unit in test cricket? It can occasionally happen if the established team is declining – as happened in 2005 – but I’m not sure circumstances are the same in the upcoming Ashes series.
For starters, I don’t see any decline whatsoever in the Aussie ranks. Rogers, Haddin, Clarke and Johnson are all well into their thirties, but they still look like top cricketers to me. They’ve just won the world cup at a canter.
What’s more, I’m not even sure it’s accurate to call England a developing side. We’re not that good yet. New Zealand are what I would call a developing side: they’re full of improving players with world class potential and they’ve been building something special for a long time. To my eyes, the Kiwis look better equipped to tackle the Aussies than us. The likes of Kane Williamson and Trent Boult are ready to take their careers to the next level.
England, on the other hand, are simply inconsistent. Many of our so called ‘developing’ or ‘improving’ players aren’t actually improving at all. Just look at Gary Ballance and Moeen Ali, who were two of the main success stories of last summer. They don’t look in any kind of shape to tackle the Aussies. Perhaps only Joe Root, and maybe Jos Buttler, stand out as a players ready to take that next step. Ben Stokes is still too erratic I’m afraid.
Meanwhile, there are question marks against several of England’s established players. Ian Bell is having a horror show at the moment, Stuart Broad’s performances oscillate from the sublime to the subterranean, and Jimmy Anderson doesn’t look comfortable when batsmen attack him.
Then there’s the Alastair Cook conundrum. As I’ve said many times before, Cook is a prolific scorer of runs against good, average and poor bowling, but often goes missing against the very best. He’s failed badly in the four out of five Ashes series he’s played in.
The good news is that he finally looks comfortable with his game. Most importantly, he’s leaving the ball superbly again. His trouble, however, is that his batting is still very easy to bottle up. If Australia pitch the ball full outside off-stump, Cook won’t be able to score.
Ryan Harris has played this game with the England captain before. I wouldn’t be surprised if Australia settle for stalemate against Cook and go hard at the batsmen at the other end. They know Cook won’t be able to hurt them, and while he’s scoring at 30 or 40 runs per one hundred balls, England will be going nowhere.
With Cook at the crease, the onus will be on the batsman at the other end to provide impetus. Can our younger players handle that responsibility? Unless Bell rediscovers his touch, or Root has a purple patch, Cook will eventually have to start driving at good length balls outside off. That’s when the Aussies will fancy their chances against him.
It’s also worth noting that Trent Boult bowled almost exclusively left-arm over the wicket to Cook. What’s more, he could only ever swing the ball away. Cook’s troubles will come when Harris, and perhaps Johnson and Starc too, begin swinging the ball back into him. This will make it a lot more difficult to leave the ball with confidence and regularity.
When it comes to England’s bowling there are question marks everywhere. Whenever batsmen attack us – and you can bet your bottom dollar that Australia will be extremely proactive at the crease – we generally fall apart. We seem to have very few cool heads.
England lack the containing bowlers they had back in 2010/11. Wood and Stokes take wickets but can both be expensive, as can Broad and Anderson. As for Moeen Ali, I think he should retain his place, but I suspect the Australians will make mincemeat of whichever spinner we pick. Graeme Swann averaged just under 40 in the Ashes, so what hope has Moeen got?
The Aussies, on the other hand, have a locker full of weapons: left arm pace, right arm pace, swing, seam, height, plus skiddier bowlers. Their spinner is genuinely improving too. England’s new batting line-up hasn’t faced anything this hostile yet. Let’s see how Jos Buttler likes it when the ball’s whistling around his ears.
Unfortunately there are very few question marks when it comes to the Aussies. We all expect Warner, Rogers, Clarke, Smith and Haddin to have decent series at worst. Deep down, we probably fear that Shane Watson will score a few too (he usually does). The only real question mark is whether the remaining specialist batsman, probably Shaun Marsh or Adam Voges, scores any.
When it comes to the bowling, I suppose it’s possible that Johnson might have a nightmare, but I severely that doubt Harris, Starc, Hazelwood and Siddle will all have shockers simultaneously. At the end of the day, they should have enough firepower to beat us even if they play averagely. Shane Watson also bowled extremely accurately in the last Ashes series. There’s no weak link.
Because Australia have so many consistent players – or rather enough players with a track record of performing relatively well in big series over time – England clearly have their work cut out. Our team of unknown quantities will need to play at their very best, and surpass expectations, just to be competitive – let alone win the series. It’s going to be a tough.
In recent Ashes history, England usually only succeed if they have a settled side that’s comfortable with its methodology. The only possible exception was 2009, when Andy Flower cobbled together a team that played above expectations – thanks mainly to the leadership of experienced cricketers like Strauss and Flintoff.
This time, however, I see a vacuum of leadership. Most significantly, however, the Aussies themselves were in transition in 2009. It’s a different story this time. They’ll be desperate to pummel us and recent history suggests they probably will.
James Morgan
Written in collaboration with FreeBetOdds
I thought england still had to play 5 ODIs against NZ before the ashes – or don’t they matter?
ron – substantially different squad for ODIs, with perhaps only 1 space in Test side up for grabs (initially…)
We’ll take a look at the ODIs in the coming days, Ron.
You may need to do that from cowering behind the sofa James! A bowling attack of Finn, Plunkett, Jordan, Stokes and Rashid against this NZ batting line-up? It might be helpful to have a book of ODI batting records handy….
I’m not the only one (Silk made the point on a recent thread) suspicious of some of the motives behind the selection of that bowling attack. Are Broad and Ali being rested – or protected?
I think Rashid is in the ODI side to fail. So the selectors had post hoc justification for not playing him against Windies or NZ.
James, thanks for that – it just has the appearance of following the media and focussing on the ashes – as if that has happened enough already – it could also highlight a disrespect for this good NZ team – knowingly ‘smaller’ than england – I know you don’t mean that but I’ve been reading this blog for sometime now – others may not have – it irks me and I am angry enough about the state of english cricket, cook , strauss, graves , the bloody lot of them with no apparent sign of change or renewal despite the eforts of the dissenting outsiders – plus of course the one day side in pure cricketing terms unburdened from the weight of ecb trauma actually looks quite good
Thanks Ron. I’m looking forward to the ODIs. There are quite a few players I’m looking forward to seeing. There are several players in the England squad I rate, but a few I don’t. Time will tell.
Ron,
In an Ashes year? No they don’t :)
It will be interesting to see how Adil Rashid bowls in the ODI’s. I still believe that he could “develop” into a test match spinner.
I can’t wait to see Moeen Ali taken apart by some batsmen and thereby demythologise the notion that he’s anything more than a stock bowler – as for Rashid, we’ll have to wait and see – but there’s no doubt ecb are desperate to ‘make’ Ali a spinner and will be favourite for the ashes irrespective
I agree, James, that there is a vast gap (maybe even a chasm) between us and the Aussies at the moment, but in the coming Ashes, we will have something the Aussies have never faced in an England team before – an Australian coach. I’m not suggesting that he wil come in and wave an Aussie magic wand and all our players will turn into world beaters overnight. However, I DO believe that we will see an England side, taking on the Aussies and playing them at their own brand of game. I think we are mostly agreed that this MUST happen, if indeed, England is to “develop” into a modern cricketing nation.
In my mind, Moeen is at rock bottom with confidence, with both bat and ball, and in my opinion, following his injury. he should not have been rushed to the Caribbean this spring. Let’s remember that post injury, he only batted for his county, and hardly bowled an over in anger he was whisked away and thrown in with no practice. Worse still, as he was in the West Indies, if he had to play, he should have opened, and in hindsight, this would hav been the better option than the Trott eperiment. Instead Moeen has been shunted down and down in the order, suggesting that the ECB “Powers” don’t rate his batting as important, whilst placing huge stock on him DEVELOPING as a front line spinner.
With Cook’s phrase of the month being “developing team” why then, is the developing spinner sent back to his county, instead of facing The Kiwis in the one day series? Is he likely to face better batters when paying for Worcestershire than he would against NZ? No – he won’t. The best bet is that he won’t do very well with his bowling for his county, and will therefore be “rested” against The Aussies. To me, this would be extremely poor cricket management, and should ring alarm bells in Bayliss’ ears.
Whilst on bowlers, waht do we make of th Bowling Coach situation? Saker slipped out of the system without any great fanfare, and conveniently, WI had just sacked our previous BC, Otis Gibson. TBH, I think England bowlers as a group look a lot sharper under Otis’ guidance, certainly pace has been restored to Anderson and Broad, and the latter seems to have shaken off the shackle placed on him under Saker, by bowling bouncer after bouncer, only for his figures to suffer horribly. The quetion is, have the ECB re-appointed Gibson on a permanent basis, or are they waiting for Bayliss to come up with his own fast bowling coach? Apart from the recently retired Brett Lee, who else is as well suited to that position thn Otis Gibson? Again, the ECB appear to have stuttered instead of getting on and appointing Gibson, and telling Bayliss, “you come, he stays”
All we can do is wait for “developments” and Cook’s further use of that word, in or out of context.
I’m pretty sure that Gibson only has a temporary contract for this series. It was a similar story in the WIndies.
James…3-0? Seriously? How are we going to play out the other two tests, or are you assuming the weather will help us out? I cannot see anything past 5-0 at the moment, we are so deficient in every department.
The weather will probably ruin one game, and I expect England will do relatively well in one of the other matches. Injuries might also come into play. The Aussies won’t be so strong if Harris cannot compete the series.
Hazlewood has been their best bowler so far in the West Indies – he has been very, very impressive. I’m not sure Harris would be in their first choice XI at the moment.
They are doing everything possible to enable Harris to play. Wrapped in cotton wool etc with a very specific training programme. He isn’t playing in this series (and didn’t play in the world cup) specifically to keep him fit and available for the Ashes. I agree Hazlewood looks pretty good though!
That’s why he missed the WC and half the Shield season, but not the WI tour:
“Australia fast bowler Ryan Harris is likely to miss the tour of the West Indies in June this year, as it will coincide with the birth of his first child. Harris said during a radio interview on Monday that coach Darren Lehmann had urged him to stay home with his family. ”
http://www.espncricinfo.com/australia/content/story/820165.html
I read yesterday that he would have skipped the WI tour anyway as they don’t want to take any risks. Here’s a little more info. It’s not what I read yesterday though.
http://www.perthnow.com.au/sport/cricket/ashes-tour-ryan-harris-sitting-out-windies-tour-to-concentrate-on-battle-with-poms/story-fnhq5ybi-1227381348085
I think it’s fair to say they don’t have a problem with him missing whatever cricket it takes, as long as he’s fit for the Ashes. It’s clear they’ve earmarked this as his last hurrah. Anything they get from him afterwards would be a bonus.
Despite recent bursts of form from the likes of Hazelwood and Starc, Harris remains the best fast bowler in the world when fit. He’s amongst the most underrated players I can recall.
They’ve got a lot of good bowlers around at the moment, but he’s the one who can examine a player’s technique ruthlessly. He’s the guy who will really cause problems for an in-form Cook or Root. He’ll keep bowling wicket balls on the front foot without giving them release balls.
He might not be needed, in fairness, but if England perform I suspect he would be the difference.
Excellent analysis as always James. Could this be Cook’s last series as captain ?
There is a rumour going around that Cook might relinquish the captaincy at the end of the series, regardless of the result.
Whatever happened to ‘always look on the bright side’. :)
I fear you are right James. A very good analysis highlighting some of our biggest problems and my worst fears.
You made an interesting point about the bottling up of Cook and the likely Aussie attacking strategy. Any chance of victory could be heavily dependent on Cook knocking up big scores. He does need effective attacking partners but he is of more benefit to the team than a hindrance. Where would a ‘developing’ side be without his stability. That’s my view and I’m sticking to it for the moment.
More than one batsman has gone missing against best bowling :(
I fear for Moeen Ali, I really do. Not being a front line spinner he is in an unenviable position. An awful lot is being asked of him – more than he can realistically deliver. It’s not at all fair. Memories of Kerrigan at the Oval have never left my mind. It would be tragic if Moeen went the same way. He deserves huge credit for having come this far.
We have five ODI’s against New Zealand ahead of us. A new team very much on the line. Let’s see how it all goes.
Thanks as always to you and Maxie for an excellent blog.
You’re spot on re: Cook. I’m in no way saying he isn’t extremely valuable. He held the team together against NZ. I’m just saying that he won’t be able to do it on his own. Even against NZ his scoring rates were quite low, despite his runs. The opposition usually fears players that can accelerate and take the game away from them.
Cook’s recent revival is mostly down to him suddenly figuring out where his off-stump is (due to finding a better balance at the crease). Therefore he’s simply leaving most deliveries outside off. However, a batsman repeatedly leaving deliveries also gives the opposition a stranglehold and that elusive control that England so often miss.
I have an interesting anecdote for you. When I was at school I was coached by two ex-county players, Roger Tolchard (a batsman keeper for Leics and England) and Andy Murtagh (a bowler for Hampshire). I was an all-rounder so I got some individual coaching by both.
When I was batting, Tolchard encouraged me to leave the ball as much as possible (within reason). He said “Morgs, the bowler has to run in hard, from 10-20 yards to deliver the ball, he’s expending energy, and he’s not getting you out; meanwhile he’s getting tired.” His key message: a leave-alone is a win for the batsman.
Murtagh taught me the exact opposite when I was bowling. He said “James, the batsman is there to score runs. If he’s not playing a shot you’ve got control, can find your rhythm, can bowl maidens, and the opposition is going nowhere”. His key message: a leave-alone is a win for the bowler.
Basically, a batsman repeatedly leaving the ball can be interpreted as a win for both teams. Cook’s approach is keeping his wicket intact (which is obviously a huge plus for him after his struggles over the last two years) but he’s still vulnerable when he actually plays at full balls outside off because he’s not a natural driver and has to really concentrate to bend that front knee and transfer his weight forward.
Most of the best players can punish bowlers off the front and back foot. Cook might think that leaving the ball is a win for him, but the Aussies might also see it as a win for them too. Of course, it depends what’s happening at the other end. If Bell / Root are playing with freedom and the scoreboard is ticking over, then it’s great having someone stodgy at one end who can grind the bowlers down. But if wickets are falling with regularity, and the bowling side is completely on top, it become very difficult for the batting side to inject momentum and establish a winning position.
Seems to me Lyth has a lot on his shoulders.
Lyth is an exceptional player but has a tendancy to throw it away, which is why it’s taken him so long to find the consistency that finally got him a call up.
Ballance isn’t going to dominate scoring against the Aussies and Bell is all over the place. A replay of 2013 from Bell seems unlikely.
So what will the Aussies do? Well I’d be looking to tempt Lyth with plenty outside off, swinging away from him, and some short stuff for him to go after. Basically the high risk, high reward option. Take out cover and invite him to drive. Put in deep square and dare him to hit it over him. Don’t give him any easy singles to keep the scoreboard ticking over.
If Cook is marooned at the other end Lyth is going to want to go for it, I suspect. If it comes off, England could do well. Otherwise there is a hell of a lot riding on Root.
i think Lyth will do ok. At least I hope so! Doubt he’ll tear up trees etc, but I can see him making a few scores.
Thanks so much for this. A fascinating story. I will be looking at Cook’s batting and the Australian bowling attack through different eyes. I’ve learned a lot from you today. x
Yes I have too!
That’s an interesting story about your old coaches. Reminds me a bit of that interview where Ian Chappell has a go at Boycott, stating that it wasnt Boycs who kept him awake worrying at night but guys like Sobers or Richards. If Boycs made 150 (so says Chappell) then the game would probably end up in a draw whereas a Sobers 150 probably meant a demoralised bowling attack.
I remember that interview– “I never lay awake at night worrying about Boycott… In fact he used to send me to sleep during the day!”
2009 was a fluke. A real smash and grab job.
I don’t think /this/ Aussie side will let us off the hook if we get into the position we did at Cardiff in 2009. And if you compare the bowling attacks now and then, there’s no comparison. Hazelwood replaces Hilfenhaus. That’s like having Simon Jones replace Mark Ealham.
The Aussies won’t be stupid enough, this time, to drop their spinner in the last Test. Lyon will be a real handful.
And finally, no Swann.
It basically all comes down to Swann, for me. England were brilliant when Swann was at the top of his game. (Swann wasn’t match fit in 2013 and the Aussies were rank awful, but we /still/ only won because Ian Bell had a series for all the ages).
With Swann, Strauss (and Cook) had a bowler who could contain, and attack, at the same time. Captaincy was easy. You started with Jimmy and Broad, had a decent (or very decent, in Tremlett) 3rd seamer, and then, if wickets weren’t coming, turned to Swann. Hey presto.
(Vaughan had Flintoff at the top of his game, who could basically make something happen if he needed it)
Aus could easily have batted out a draw at Lord’s in 2009. But Swann ran through them. Ali is unlikely to do that.
People talk about Strauss’s captaincy, Flower’s coaching etc. The reason were were (briefly) number 1 in Tests and ODIs is because of Swann. And ten other guys who were good. But mainly Swann.
If it were me, I’d drop Bell and Ballance and send them back to their counties to get some runs. I’d move Ali to number 3 and bring KP back at 4. I’d pick Rashid at 7
Cook
Lyth
Ali
KP
Root
Stokes
Buttler
Rashid
Broad
Wood
Anderson
That bowling attack has everything. Pace from Wood, swing from Anderson, seam and bounce from Broad. Leg spin from Rashid, off spin from Ali. I’d use Stokes sparingly to keep him fresh.
It’s a show of confidence in Ali’s betting which I think will help him.
There’s been a lot said about ‘taking positives’ from defeat but in 2009 after losing 3-0 Australia (hardly packed with youngsters) received more than their fair share of plaudits… I wonder if England lose 3-0 (and it’s quite plausible) but came close in a few of the games will the praise be so forthcoming?
On ‘developing’ players, does anyone remember a popular argument a year or two ago that the start of a Test career was the easiest it was going to get? No mental scars. No lurking physical injuries. No opposition data bank of your strong and weak areas.
Strauss scored a hundred on debut. Trott scored a hundred on debut. Prior scored a hundred on debut. Cook made a hundred on debut. Some got ground down or found out (or a bit of both). The first two averaged considerably higher in the first half of their careers. I think the idea that players start is ‘young and promising’ and then reach some optimum peak five years down the road is a dubious one at best.
Also, Nasser Hussain has been banging away at his ‘difficult second season’ argument for a while on Sky. In the CC it is well-known for players sometimes to struggle after a good first season as the word goes round about weak areas. Ballance and Ali might be in that place right now. Hussain’s point is that good players fight through that while others fade away.
A very good argument for dispensing with central contracts, dispensing with the ‘elite’ team and making them all play the game like everybody else instead of all this nonsense and mollycoddling!!! – and then picking the best team, no favourites, no entitlements
KP was at his best in his early career, too. Bell, well, with Bell it’s hard to know because it’s all mental. But if you look at the way he batted in Pakistan on his first tour, he already had the full package.
Vaughan was excellent early on. Ballance won’t end up with a career avergae over 50. Root … well, we have a lot of hope invested in Root.
The quickest bowlers are probably best young because it’s all about the body, but pretty much every swing bowler gets better with age until the pace drops. Broad got better, Anderson is miles better, Flintoff got better etc. etc. (Bresnan is another one who improved a lot with age. When I first saw him at Headingley he looked desperately ordinary, but he learned how to get the most out of what he has)
I’m astonished at the pessimism of this article. The assessment of the Aussie test team as strong in all areas and settled is quite obviously inaccurate. Consider the following…
Nathan Lyon has averaged 38.64 with the ball in tests over the last two years and they seem poised to replace him with the uncapped Fawad Ahmed against the West Indies.
Ryan Harris (age 35) has just had his worst two test series in his career, averaging 33.40 with the ball over the last 12 months in tests.
Shane Watson’s test bowling average over the last 2 years is 48.75.
Brad Haddin (age 37) has averaged 19.33 with the bat in tests over the last 12 months.
Adam Voges also looks set to make his test debut against the West Indies.
Mitchell Starc’s test bowling average over the last two years is 37.55.
Mitchell Johnson’s test bowling average over the last 12 months is 33.63 (and career ave is a good but not brilliant 28, don’t forget).
Mitch Marsh has a first class bowling ave of 29.30 and test bowling ave from his first few tests of 164.00.
As a team, they’ve won 3, lost 4 and drawn 2 since the last Ashes. Meanwhile England have (admittedly against opponents not including South Africa) won 5, lost 4 and drawn 3.
And this series is a home series for England, with several of the Aus squad having never played in England before.
England’s main weakness, it seems to me, is their catching. In all other areas they have plenty of good players waiting in the wings – Hales as spare opener, Taylor and Bairstow as middle order, Bairstow or Billings as keeper/batsmen, Tredwell and Rashid as spinners, and Woakes, Finn, Plunkett and others as swing/seam options.
I think it’ll be a close contest, similar to Eng vs NZ, with both teams dominating for periods and collapsing in others and both teams winning some matches.
I’m going for 2-2 or England to edge it again 3-1.
Connection to Twitter doesn’t seem to pick up my Twitter name. That was posted by me: @ballsintherightareas
You obviously haven’t been following the cricket over the last 2 days.
Voges /has/ made his debut, and scored one of the best ever debut tons. He’s the oldest player to make a debut ton.
Lyon bowled, and bowled well. Ahmed didn’t make it, and won’t feature in the Ashes. Starc bowled well, Mitch bowled well, and Hazelwood bowled extraordinarily well.
Australia are all over a team that we struggled to put away. An innings victory by 5pm today is by no means out of the picture.
Aus batted poorly in the main, but that’s because it was a turning pitch and the Windies have a leggie. Ali isn’t going to run through Australia, and Taylor appears to have caused them far fewer problems than he caused us.
Hales has never played a Test, James Taylor can’t buy a run, Tredwell is meh, Rashid has never played a Test and won’t play in the Ashes, Woakes isn’t fit, Finn isn’t close to being back to his best (unless you are Mike Selvey), and more importantly Ali, Ballance and Bell look utterly out of sorts.
If you want to throw stats around, Anderson averaged 43 with the ball against NZ.
Lyon actually took 1 wicket on a pitch on which that Bishoo then took 6, but actually I do think he’s a decent bowler. His long-term record is not bad. He’s not a great bowler, though.
No-one expected Moeen to run through India either, but he did.
You need to compare England’s reserve players to Australia’s reserve players. I reckon England has at least as much strength in depth.
Anderson’s averaged 43 over two tests. Ballance and Bell had a few low scores in a row. This often happens to all players in all teams. It is a completely useless predictor of how they will perform in upcoming matches.
I think England’s reserves are irrelevant, as I can’t see England going to them. Who are they going to drop? They don’t drop people. I genuinely can’t see us dropping Bell for Bairstow, I can’t see them giving Hales a chance, and Taylor can barely buy a run. Rashid won’t make his debut in the Ashes and Monty iss unplayable. So The top 8 is the top 8
Bowlingwise Jordan is first reserve and he’s ordinary. Australia, meanwhile, have a real choice to make, which any 3 from Mitch, Mitch, Hazelwood and Harris. That Siddle is 5th choice shows strength in depth.
Finn or Plunkett might make a difference, but Broad and Anderson are nailed on for 5 Tests baring injuries.
As for stats, well I see them as irrelevant. England have had it about as easy as it’s possible to have since the Ashes. Windies away is a banker for every other touring side. Aus, meanwhile, have had to travel to Pakistan (well UAE) and South Africa. Those are the two toughest tours out there.
So, on the one hand you’ve got a team that won in SA, got hammered in UAE (less badly than England were hammered there) and beat India at home more convincingly than England managed. And is currently mullering the Windies.
On the other hand you’ve got a team that lost to SL AT HOME, beat India at home (but in the process gave up India’s first overseas test win in a long time), failed to beat the Windies and failed to beat NZ at home.
If you compare those team performances, you can easily see which side starts the Ashes as favourites. IMHO England are no better today than when they lost 1-0 to SL.
‘That Siddle is 5th choice shows strength in depth’
Also Cummins and Pattinson haven’t even made the squad. What does that say about strength in depth!
Absolutely. Cummins and Pattinson are excellent prospects and they’d walk into the England squad, and probably the full team too.
In terms of bowling depth consider this. At prsent in the Windies the Australians are without their best bowler (Harris) and their attack still looks pretty good. Imagine if England faced the same problem (ie Anderson injured).
In fairness, both those bowlers have been struggling with injury. Cummins is being eased back in via limited overs cricket. Pattinson much the same – he remodelled his action recently and was playing some Grade to get back to form and fitness. Both of them are considered fragile and neither really had enough red ball cricket under their belts coming in to the selection period.
Well, I’d look at Bell’s more long-term form than that. He’s been a bit meh for some time. When was his last ton?
His last ton was in the Windies. But the last series he looked like he was in form in was the 2013 home Ashes, where he was excellent. And before that he was on the verge of being dropped before a (match-saving) ton in the final Test of the India tour.
Ooops…Adam Voges obviously did make his debut this week (in somewhat spectacular fashion) – had copied part of my comment, having previously posted in elsewhere.
I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see England win. Clarke is on the downhill slope, you never know how much his back is going to effect him. He might not play all matches.
The Aussie tail is the big difficulty for most teams these days. Cracking open the top order never seems to be that hard.
Lolly, I take it you haven’t been watching the action from Dominica where Clarke has held three blinding catches?
Yes, I have. I’ve watched some ot it and followed the tour. You never know when Clarke’s back is going to go. He knows that. The coaches know that and the selectors know that.
You would argue that the sky is green if I said it was black :-)
I’m afraid you’ve got a few things wrong. Australia’s record is not won 3, lost 4 and drawn 2 since the Ashes. It’s actually won 4 (about to be 5), lost 3 and drawn two. Two of the defeats were in the UAE. They’ve also beaten South Africa, the number one team in the world, away from home in this period! England have played the lower ranked sides.
Mitchell Starc will possibly be their main threat. He is a different bowler now than he was a couple of years ago. He was the best bowler in the world cup, and possibly the IPL too. He’s also now the fastest bowler in the world. Plus I was referring to Shaun Marsh not Mitchell Marsh.
The Aussies have a settled opening pair: Warner and Rogers.
They have two world class established middle-order players: Clarke and Smith.
They also have a battery of excellent, established bowlers, some of which won’t get into the team: Harris, Johnson, Siddle. Then there’s Starc and Hazlewood. Therefore, to suggest that England have talent waiting in the wings, but Australia haven’t is very curious.
Australia have four batsmen in the world’s top 20 (England have two). Two of these average over 50. They have three players that average more than our best player, Cook.
They also have four bowlers in the world’s top 20 (England have two). Nathan Lyon is one of them FYI. And he’s playing in the WI.
Hales hasn’t played a test and has a very ordinary ODI record. Taylor is unproven and looked ordinary in his test experience to date. Barstow played poorly and was dropped. Tredwell often isn’t first choice for his county, and Rashid has yet to play a test but has a first class average well over 30.
I can understand the urge to be optimistic, but it’s not based on anything solid like rankigns or statistics. Australia are not perfect, but they have a lot more pedigree than England atm. Therefore the Aussies are justifiably favourites.
Australia are 5/2 favourites to win the Ashes.
England are 7-2 outsides (not much different from Villa in the FA cup final).
Have the bookies got it wrong? I’d be ‘astonished’ if they have.
Root, Ballance, and Buttler all have higher averages than Cook don’t they?
They have, but Cook (if a certain other person isn’t around) is our best bat.
Root might become our best bat. Too early to say.
Anyway, stats are pretty meaningless as Rogers, Marsh (whichever), Smith, Voges, Starc and Hazelwood (test batting average 71!) plus Lyth, Ballance, Root, Stokes, Buttler, Ali and Wood have played very few tests. There’s insufficent data to make any strong inferences on.
What matters is performances. Aus went to SA and won. We went to WI and drew. No contest.
Yes, easy to cherry pick stats (and performances) to suit an argument. Would agree that Aus are favourites, but I was making a point about James’ reference to basing his points on statistics,
I don’t think the evidence is there that Australia’s batting is better than ours actually.
I think our batting is probably better, actually. Aus look a little fragile, and despite his strong scoring against England in both Ashes series, Haddin has struggled against everyone else and looks way past it. If Watson is still getting picked that doesn’t say much for Mitch Marsh.
I rate Warner , Smith and, if fit, Clarke. Rogers is hard to dismiss but unlikely to make huge scores. The Marshs don’t look much cop, Voges should do well if selected, and Watson is creaky and shouldn’t be playing. I don’t understand why Burns isn’t there.
BUT
Our bowling and fielding is miles behind where Aus are right now. And that, IMHO, will be the difference.
Agree with your Aus player assessments to the man actually.
Agree on the bowling and fielding too and the former is what I will watch with the most interest.
I think the form of Anderson and Broad this summer will go a long way to deciding how competitive England are. If they fire (like they have done in the past) then they can even up the bowling scales too, as I think Wood will provide good support. If not, I fear we will make Australia’s batting look better than it is and we could be in for a long summer…
I forgot about Root! Not sure we can really count Ballance and Buttler. They haven’t played long enough and the former is in terrible form.
Just for fun I’ve totalled the batting averages of the 11 players to represent Eng and Aus in their last two tests. Obviously a rudimentary measure of a team’s batting ability, but an insight nonetheless.
For Aus I gave the new chap who scored a century a “50” as he doesn’t yet have an average. Even with that, Eng came out on top with 409 to 390.
I don’t think we can really count Ballance and Buttler’s averages. The world rankings is by far a better guide than averages against mediocre sides over a short period.
Don’t necessarily agree. It seems to me that both systems are imperfect; averages can be skewed by good starts to careers but equally it takes ages for the rankings to reflect a batsman’s ability. For example Adam Lyth is currently below Stuart Broad…
“Mitchell Starc will possibly be their main threat. He is a different bowler now than he was a couple of years ago. He was the best bowler in the world cup, and possibly the IPL too. He’s also now the fastest bowler in the world.”
Will Starc even be in the Test side?
He was great at the World Cup but that’s not Test cricket.
He looked pretty awesome in their test side yesterday!!!
Really? Knocking over the No9, No10 and No11?
I’d still have him behind Johnson, Harris and Hazlewood
Can I raise the point that seems not to have been raised regarding English cricket at the moment. Rightly or wrongly, we judge the side on the Ashes. And courtesy of the schedulers we’re running into the Ashes every year at the moment.
That’s leaving very little time for what is essentially a raw, unpolished side to sow their cricketing oats, so to speak. Were we on the old four year cycle of home-and-away series you’d say this side would be in excellent shape going into a 2017 Ashes at home…
“Were we on the old four year cycle of home-and-away series you’d say this side would be in excellent shape going into a 2017 Ashes at home.”
Really? Why’s that?
The defeat last summer against Sri Lanka and the drawn series against the West Indies and New Zealand would be just as poor without the Ashes looming.
While the usual Mainstream media has taken every little chance to spew bile on pieterson one of the bests of this generation, here is a nice little ode to him i found on a little forum.
http://www.planetcricket.org/articles/2015/06/5759-how-we-should-remember-kevin-pietersen/
Another gem form peterson on the county system
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/cricket/kevinpietersen/11652998/Broken-county-system-is-damaging-our-national-side.html
plus his sad application to represent eng again, just reading that makes you sad.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/cricket/kevinpietersen/11652984/New-Zealand-have-shown-England-the-way-to-be-positive-again-now-use-that-approach-against-Australia.html
My you are a pessimistic lot aren’t you? Personally I think this article overstates the distance between the two teams and I expect England to do better than most people suggest on here.
I don’t really get the points about Cook’s batting – I’ll take runs the way he gets them all day long. Eng have other players that can pick up the tempo well, but we have no one who prizes their wicket as much as him. Seems like nitpicking to criticise a strike rate of 40 when he scored the most runs against NZ.
For me Australia have the edge on the bowling but the batting is about equal (although the form of Ballance & Bell is a concern). Aus remain the favourites but who knows, home advantage could be the leveller.
Not criticising Cook’s strike rate against NZ at all. That’s the way he’s always played. I was commenting on the fact that he’s easy to bottle up, and Australia did this brilliantly in 2013/14. This has generally been their modus operandi against our skipper, and I expect them to try it again ie consistently pushing the ball across Cook full, and not particularly caring if he leaves the ball all day if they’re picking up wickets at the other end.
On the question of experience, the current Australian side are on average older than the England side that played NZ (by three years – 30 to 27) but they are not as a whole more experienced.
The current Australian XI have 423 Test caps between them whereas England had 461. England have four players with 75+ caps – Australia have one (Clarke). If Australia bring in Rogers and Harris for Marsh and Hazlewood (by no means certain) the two teams would be almost equal in experience. England’s experience in England is of course much greater.
On a specific match up, Lyon is younger than Moeen Ali and although he has bowled more f/c deliveries the difference isn’t as huge as some may think it is (16k to 12k).
Rogers, Watson and Marsh are all fairly fragile batsmen. Marsh in particular just looks like a good batsman and if Harris doesn’t return with form we are going to be relying on two good but inexperience pace bowlers and Johnson who – despite his run of 2013-14 performances is always a risk for total loss of form. Lyon is useful but he’s not going to be remembered as one of the greats.
As an Aussie I wish I had the confidence in winning that you do in losing! I do think we will win I would be surprised if England don’t win one at least – it could be quite a close series. You are at home after all.
No, wai,t what am I saying!
We’re gunna run you into the ground ya useless bunch of pommie bastards.
Watson is very fragile with the bat in hand in test cricket. Can’t see him ever playing the type of innings that Voges did. He hasn’t got it in him. Hope he proves me wrong in the Ashes now that i’ve said it as we all know he’ll be in the starting line-up.
I agree Australia are stronger but this article is really pessimistic.
Some points I would like to raise
1) Will Ryan Harris actually be fit to play? I certainly don’t think he’ll play all five tests. He isn’t playing against the West Indies at the moment. He is genuinely world class but he is 35 years old and has always been prone to injury.
2) Mitchell Johnson has never done it in England with the red ball and if his radar goes he can be a liability. If he starts to get it wrong you can guarantee the crowd will start singing that famous song and it could snowball from there. Also, although Mitchell Starc has been in the form of his life he has never done it in Test matches to anywhere near the same extent.
3) Australia’s batting lineup isn’t all that. The West Indies had them 178-8 in the first innings, before they let them off the hook and Voges on debut marshalled the tail to get over 300. Rogers, Voges, Watson, Marsh, decent players but England should not be scared of any of them.
Michael Clarke has been a superb player but he is on the way down and again is injury prone. Steve Smith has been unbelievable the last 18 months and is a real threat. David Warner is the ace in the pack, he’ll either get out cheaply or blast 100 at a run a ball. We don’t have genuine world class players like those three in our team but the Aussie batting line up can be fragile. Clarke’s captaincy is of course vastly superior to Cook’s.
4) And on a final note can someone in the England set up please devise a plan to get Brad Haddin out cheaply. I don’t think I can bear to see him play out of his skin to get the Aussies out of trouble at 5 down yet again.
1 – Doesn’t matter. Hazlewood is good to go, as is Starc. Harris and Siddle are backup. Some backup!
2 – True, but you might as well say Cook has never done it in the Ashes in England. MJ has never faced an England batting lineup as fragile as this one.
3 – England should be scared of Warner, Smith and Clarke. Who in the England lineup will worry Aus? Root. Buttler maybe.
Clarke is on the way down in the same way that Anderson is. His performances on tour to SA were nothing short of collosal.
4 – Yes please.
I think it will be reasonably close to be honest. I’m interested to see how it plays out. Maybe I’m an eternal optimist but I don’t see it being one sided. Mitchell Starc is the player I’m most concerned about, he has a scary amount of talent.
What the last two home Ashes series have shown though is that when you are on top you must take your chance and really drive home the opportunity. In 2009 the Aussies probably played the better cricket overall but lost 2-1. And in 2013 the 3-0 scoreline hugely flattered England who got bailed out by Ian Bell several times.
Michael Clarke is still top class. His knock in the World Cup final showed that, but he has a lot of problems with his back. Over 5 matches let’s see how it plays out.
The bookies are rarely wrong. They have Australia 5/12 to win. England 7-2. That says it all.
I didn’t say that I think England will win, just that I think it will be close.
Australia haven’t won the Ashes in England since 2001. The players who’ve had some experience of playing in England have only known defeat. Also, since WW2, Australia without Bradman or Warne have only thrashed England once in England (1989).
These are some straws to clutch at – there are probably others.
Lowest form of wit.
I too think it’s a bit pessimistic, but I’m also think to make a good showing more than one player will have to be firing at any one point. That, to me, has been England’s biggest problem. They seem to be able to do only one thing at a time, whether its field, bowl, or bat, and they usually get a stellar performance from only one or at best two players at a go. Sometimes, like the Stokes/Cook partnership at Lord’s, it comes off beautifully, and others, as in Headingley, it doesn’t. So to my mind, it’s all about the partnerships, both batting and bowling. I think Wood has been really good for the attack, bringing something new in, and firing up both Broad and Stokes. So we’ll see.
As for development, honestly, I think losing the Ashes 3-0 is fine, so long as they go down fighting. This is still a transitional year, and there’ll be other Ashes series. So I’m not too bothered about the scoreline, but I do want to see England make a real fist of it. It the Aussies are going to win, they should have to sweat for it. And I’m not just saying that because I have fourth-day tickets.
Must agree. Test cricket is most enthralling when it’s a tough battle and I hope that’s what we see. Not too worried if Aus win so long as there’s plenty of good cricket.
England have been “in development” 18 months now and will line up with half a dozen who got pummelled in the last Ashes, two players in their 3rd Test and still no front line spinner. Not impressed
Best England learn how to catch or you’ll need 30 wickets per test.
And I can’t see where you’re going to get 20 at the moment
Nonsense. We’ll have taken 20 by the end of the Lord’s Test!
Lol, I would think so but would either of us put money on it?
I sense that the consensus is that Cook is now gold plated and has put all his batting woes behind him.
I think this is a little optimistic as he has yet to face a concerted attack that will not give him much respite.
With all due respect to NZ and I respect them mightily they didn’t have the depth of bowling Cook and the other English players will face next month. So an opportunity to see if Cook really has turned a personal corner or if was more a case of if I bat for two years I will eventually make a score.
I’m also not fully convinced that Root wont be shown up against a constant barrage of pace. He still seems to favour the back foot and the Australians will be keen to push him back.
I tend to agree with James’ prognosis and think Australia will win fairly comfortably..but it is test cricket. :)
Stats get me yawning from minute one. They mean nothing, other than being the fuel for a cherry picked argument, because they completely lack context. Looking at our batting and bowling over the last two tests with wide open eyes…we are mediocre in the main, but with good isolated cameos. Will that win the Ashes? I go with the bookies!
ps…we’ve been a team in transition since 1992…when the hell is some bugger gonna get it right??
2004 – 2005 we had a team.
And 2010 – 2013 we had a team
Anybody fancy the England batsmen’s chances against Johnson/Harris/Hazlewood/Starc?
That’s what I’m getting at. England’s best two players, who we have relied on massively in recent times, are Cook and Root. Neither has a good record against Australia and both failed quite badly in 2013-14. The skipper has performed well in just one out of five Ashes series, and that was when Australia were at a low ebb and their attack was being led by Hilfenhaus and a decidedly off colour Mitch. These two will need big performances if Eng are to compete. It’s not beyond the realms of possibility but history suggests there are reasons to be pessimistic.
Like a few others on here, I am a bit surprised at the negativity on here. I am feeling quietly optimistic for England’s chances this year. England definitely play better when they are the underdog and , let’s face it, we are the underdogs here.What I haven’t seen anybody mention too much is the arrival this week of the Wizard of Oz, he comes with a massive reputation of creating a winning environment. One of his biggest prerequisites, according to Farby, is a good fielding side. If England had held all their catches at Headingley, the result would have been a lot closer and maybe there would be more optimism.
If Bayliss can get Belly believing in himself again and playing like he did in 2013, if he can get Broad to grow a brain and pitch it up and start one of those amazing bowling spells that he does from time to time and if he can encourage Stokes to ‘express himself’, well then you just never know. Let’s face it, Ashes series are where legends are made…look at Warnie, look at Beefy, look at Freddy, look at KP. Someone is going to do something special and hopefully he will be wearing 3 Lions on his shirt.
Wow, Sir Gary, are you some sort of Nostradamus or something? You mentioned Broad bowling one of his amazing spells, England fielding a lot better and Stokes expressing himself. You are indeed a legend!! (wink)
We have the Ashes back !!!! Woohoo!!
There you go. England must now give Adil Rashid a decent run. I have watched him since he was a kid and he has real talent. He needs experience and there is only one way to get it at the highest level. Play. He will make a few mistakes but this lad will take wickets.
Yes :-)