Ham-fisted and Hamstrung (It Was Always Likely To End This Way)

So there was no miracle this time. Just inevitability. Our batsmen did their best but the mountain was insurmountable. Another team, with another batting line-up, might have saved the day. But our guys were ultimately undone by their own frailties. They showed tremendous fight, and made Australia work hard, but unfortunately they weren’t good enough.

Jason Roy’s innings yesterday summed it up really. He battled hard. One can’t fault his effort. But eventually technical flaws get exposed in test cricket. It was only a matter of time until a ball nipped back through his porous defence. The same might be said about his ODI opening partner Jonny Bairstow. He’s a talented player too. But he can’t defend well enough for long enough. There’s always a ball with his name on it.

The fact that Craig Overton and Jack Leach batted for so long showed what was possible on that pitch. Paul Collingwood might have batted for two days on it. But England aren’t particularly adept at batting time these days. They can’t defend like teams of old. Jos Buttler showed admirable resistance once again – he’s batted for longer than 100 balls on several occasions since his recall – but one always sensed that the defiance was impermanent. And so it proved. Australia’s bowlers are better than our batsman. And nothing can disguise this sorry fact.

Unfortunately England have been fighting a superior force in this series. Our squad is inadequate, largely because our county schedule doesn’t facilitate the development of quality red ball cricketers anymore. What’s more, we haven’t even been able to experiment with fresh players once Roy and Co were exposed because – you guessed it – the county schedule essentially prohibits it.

The debates on social email (and this blog) about team selection are all great fun. But they’re always glazed in futility. There’s little point parachuting in a Sibley, Crawley, or Northeast mid-series when all they’ve been playing for the last month are T20 slogfests. Our domestic schedule is a ham-fisted embarrassment. And it’s only going to get worse when Harrison’s Harebrained Have A Hit starts next summer. How on earth have the ECB allowed this shameful situation to arise? They really couldn’t organise a booze up in a brewery.

As Australia celebrated on the outfield at Old Trafford we should never forget who did this to us. The Ashes were sacrificed for the 50 over World Cup – a format the ECB have now bizarrely undermined at domestic level – so English cricket deserves this horrendous result. When the chickens came home to roost in Manchester yesterday we can hardly say their arrival was unexpected.

Many people will blame Ed Smith. I blame Ed Smith too. We said at the very start of his tenure that his test philosophy was completely wrong and would eventually lead to disaster. The problem with clever people is that they sometimes have absolutely no common sense. And this particular cap fits Big Ed rather nicely.

Smith was incredibly arrogant to assume that conventional wisdom – that test matches are generally won by specialists and that technique matters more than the ability to hit sixes in T20 tournaments – was flawed. He thought he knew better than everyone else who has played the game and watched it for even longer than him. He was a mistaken. He’s not a genius maverick. He’s just a common contrarian.

However, Ed Smith is a culprit not the culprit in all this. After all, who was it that appointed him? What’s more, Smith’s England have been hamstrung not only by the scheduling problems identified above (which have left the cupboard of quality red ball cricketers rather bare) but also by a series of cruel injuries. Losing Jimmy Anderson for the whole series was particularly sadistic. And then there was Mark Wood, who transformed England’s attack in the Caribbean earlier this year, and Olly Stone too.

Many people wanted England to play Australia on green tops this summer but I always doubted this strategy. It would’ve helped Cummins, who is brilliant on all surfaces, and the metronomic Hazlewood (not to mention the likes of Siddle and Pattinson who were taking championship wickets for fun during the World Cup) just as much as our bowlers. What’s more, it would’ve given our fragile batsmen even less of a chance to post competitive totals.

I would’ve preferred England to prepare flat wickets with a bit of pace, which might allow our white ball specialists to hit through the line and play attacking cricket, whilst peppering Australia’s batsmen with a pace attack that included the likes of Archer, Wood (with Stone in reserve) bowling in tandem. Unfortunately it wasn’t to be.

Whereas there was no weak link in Australia’s attack at Old Trafford, Root was unable to keep the pressure on once Broad and Archer became weary. Paine could chuck the ball to Starc and Lyon. England only had Craig Overton left standing. It was a similar story in previous tests too as Chris Woakes didn’t look one hundred percent fit either.

However, moaning about England’s misfortune does Australia a disservice. The Aussies have been comfortably the better team this summer. Had it not been for Ben Stokes’s brilliance, some poor umpiring, plus a Nathan Lyon’s inability to gather the ball and remove the bails at Headingley, they’d be 3-0 up heading to The Oval. England might have pulled one back at Lord’s (weather permitting) but Australia have been all over us for most for the series.

What’s more, Australia have triumphed without even picking their best side. It’s taken them until the 4th test to field their best attack, they curiously preferred Wade and Head to Khawaja at Old Trafford, David Warner can’t buy a run, and their captain is essentially a passenger. One could argue that the Aussies have beaten us ten men plus no contribution whatsoever from one of their two star batsmen. It’s a remarkable achievement really, especially when one considers that Nathan Lyon hasn’t been at his best either.

What worries me is that England don’t seem to realise how badly they’ve been beaten. Yesterday Joe Root was still talking up the positives, praising his side’s resilience, and emphasising what a great series it’s been. Earth calling Joe! We’ve played poor cricket all series and been thoroughly outclassed. Your team would be better served by admitting its glaring inadequacies and taking remedial action. You’re not pulling the wool over this long-suffering supporter’s eyes.

One wonders whether this is the end of the line for Root the captain. I personally wouldn’t cry for him if he stood down. I miss Root the world class batsman. Yes he’s been unlucky to receive a few jaffas in this series but he still doesn’t look like the confident free-scoring talent he was a couple of years back when Alastair Cook was the team’s lightening (iron) rod for criticism.

I’m afraid that Root neither looks like a natural leader nor an astute tactician. Burdening him with the captaincy does neither him nor the team any good. England should probably look elsewhere now. But who should step into the breach?

I’ve heard people suggest that Ben Stokes is the man but I’m wary of simply anointing the next best player. I’d look for a senior statesman with brains and brawn who’s form isn’t likely to suffer from the extra responsibility. The only player who currently ticks those boxes is Stuart Broad. It wouldn’t be a long-term appointment but I’m all out of other ideas. Possible alternatives like Jos Buttler and Rory Burns still have too much to prove at international level as players to be viable candidates as captain.

I’d be interested to know where you think England should go from here. It has been a strange summer. We won the World Cup – yes that’s true – and the excitement generated by a series of close finishes has reignited broader interest in the game. This is fantastic news.

However, without that flukey deflection off Ben Stokes’s bat on 14th July at Lord’s, this summer would have been an unmitigated disaster for the England cricket team. We would’ve sacrificed everything to win the World Cup, failed to achieve the board’s primary aspiration, and then meekly surrendered the Ashes to boot. What’s more, with the widespread (almost unanimous) discontent with The Hundred simmering in the background, cricket’s authorities have never been so at odds with its fanbase. This is terrible news.

We live in strange times my friends. The next couple of years could be very interesting indeed. And I doubt the England test team is going to improve one bit during this period. God help us in the 2021-22 Ashes. They’ve already got 0-5 written all over them.

James Morgan

72 comments

  • Perfectly summarised James.

    I can’t remember a better bowling attack visiting these shores in the 25 years I’ve been watching cricket. 5 world class quicks perfectly rotated to account for fitness and conditions. Mercilessly attacking the stumps with pace giving away nothing and relentlessly working over the technique of each English batsman.

    In home Ashes 2005-2015 there have always been 1 or 2 Aussie bowlers our batsman have profited from, not so this series, we’ve had to scrap hard for every single run.

    I think they would have exposed the flaws in the techniques of more established batsmen so I don’t think selecting the young run getters in the championshp would have made any difference. Selection isn’t the issue, it would be arrogant to assume the result would be any different with the addition of any other English qualifying batsman.

    The Aussies are carrying passengers in their side, including the captain as James points out, but when you pair that bowling attack with the most prolific batsman of the modern era (in his prime and with a point to prove) you’re going to win more games than not.

    If a chap coming in at 4 scores at least 82 every innings you only need 1 or 2 batters to stick with him and you have a nailed on 280-300 every innings.

    Perhaps Jimmy would have found a way to expose Smith, it’s a shame we were robbed of this contest but in truth we probably would have been out bowled even with him.

    In truth the only facet of the game we’ve excelled at has been our use of the review system and that holds little weight in the grand shake up.

    • I’ve been watching cricket long enough to remember a better attack. It usually involved the likes of Marshall Holding and Garner! In recent years, only the SA attack (say Steyn, Morkel, Philander Rabada) would come close. Seriously, though, Hazlewood and Cummins in particular really don’t bowl bad “hit me” balls. That’s the problem, especially if you pick batmen with an “attacking mindset”.

  • It would be interesting to see if the Aussie batsmen could cope against the Aussie bowlers!
    We have missed Anderson. I didn’t see the point of playing Overton – a county trundler – when Sam Curran would have at least given some variety, and also strengthened the batting (though Overton did do well in this aspect of the game). Sure Curran isn’t a consistent test-class bowler, but he does have the knack of picking up wickets.
    And now “no change” for the last test. Surely an opportunity to experiment with/blood new players?

      • Given the fact that most warm up games are usually just a game against a division 2 county side without the best players actually playing. A warm up game putting your own 22 best players to play against each other makes far more sense.

  • No quarrels with any of that to be honest. I picked Australia before the series started because of the fragility of England’s top order. To be honest the Australian one wasn’t much better – has someone crunched the stats to find the last time an Australian opener did worse i an Ashes series than Warner? – but the Australian pace attack was formidable and they also had the second best batsman in Australian history (arguably world history too), which makes a world of difference if the series is otherwise low scoring. (Waugh in 89 also couldn’t be dismissed but the team didn’t rely on him anywhere near as much as the 19 side relied on Smith, Mark Taylor for eg scored mountains in the 89 series).

  • The Aussies have Steve Smith, the best batsman in the world. We have Ed ‘the future’s so bright, I gotta wear shades’ Smith, a man who irritates me most severely. He should be forced to share a cell with Boris Johnson when the latter is inevitably imprisoned.

    But we’re at fault most of all. The great England cricket supporters allowed the lunatics in the ECB asylum to create a monstrous schedule, to relegate CC cricket to bookending the season, to throw everything at the World Cup and to screw the game for years to come by inventing a new format, which nobody wants for a non-existent audience. We bitched, we whined, we pleaded and occasionally shouted but the ECB took no notice. We should have marched on their HQ with ancient cricket bats and balls and pinned ’em down to a nearby pitch before crunching ’em with a heavy roller. If ever I have grandchildren and they ask ‘ what did you do in the Great Cricket War?’ I shall have to say “I failed you and all future generations’.

  • Australia had a much better attack, despite Broad having probably his best series so far in terms of consistency; there wasn’t much between the sides in terms of batting apart from Smith – but that’s some ‘apart’ – and we were outfielded and out captained.

    I remember once when we were struggling before, Trevor Bailey saying that anyone getting a County century or five wickets was being talked of as a potential Test player. Now I guess it’s fifty and three wickets – or rather it would be if we still had County cricket. The red ball cupboard is bare for reasons we all know. There is no one to turn to with any confidence that he’ll do better than any incumbents.

    Like you, James, I want my world class number 4 back, but don’t think I’ll get him whilst he’s captain. Again there’s no obvious solution. The only England qualified County captains are Vince, Ballance who can’t get into the side, and Burns who needs to concentrate on fulfilling his promising performances with the additional burden of the captaincy at this stage. I think Broad is the only option in the short term. He has experience, a decent cricketing brain and hasn’t shown his earlier petulance recently.

    We have Australia again in around 14 months time. Interesting to speculate on what that side might look like.

    • Despite the fact that he isn’t really established in the side yet, I think Buttler would make a good England captain.

      • Butter has always been marked as captaincy material. Shame about the batting. He is on the skids, not establishing himself in the side.

  • Is it the ECB’s fault that Smith scored 670 runs from 5 innings?

    Is it the ECB’s fault that England simply don’t have fast bowlers the quality of Cummins and Hazlewood in their prime? Seems like they did their best to address this with the latest cynical ring-in in Archer. Does he have any little brothers who can be recruited?

    You guys love to sheet everything home to the administrators but maybe we’re just seeing a regression to the mean of the past 30 years i.e. Australia tend to produce more players of higher quality than England. Australia had the world’s #1 batsman and #1 bowler and those stars played accordingly. In light of that, what right did any Englishman have to expect they’d reclaim the Ashes? Australia are patently a better team, and that’s the ECB’s fault? Australia have better players, as they have for most of the past 30 years. Are you surprised?

    Yes England had their little “golden era” in that 2009-15 period, sandwiched between two humiliating Ashes whitewashes. But now that’s come and gone, maybe it’s just a case of Australia being better at cricket generally?

    Maybe that’s too painful for England fans to concede. Easier to keep carping about the ECB.

    • Nice try Tom. But England haven’t lost the Ashes at home since 2001 (not 2009) and if Australia generally produce better cricketers than England then how come it was England that won the World Cup? What’s more the overall score in Ashes history is Australia 33 (series) and England (32) series; so for you to argue that Australia are usually far superior is way off the mark.

      Australian cricket clearly has its problems too – only one Aussie batsman did well this series (Smith) and your other hero Labuschagne was a ‘cynical ring-in’ (at least Jofra has an English Dad) – but to ignore the domestic structure and administration of the games in our respective countries is idiocy. All sports teams are a product of their structure and they way they’re administered.

      England were a good test team a few years ago but a terrible ODI side. We prioritised white ball cricket as a result and took the test team for granted. That’s why the fortunes of our sides have reversed so spectacularly. This really isn’t rocket science.

      I’m not sure how often you read this blog these days but we’ve been carping on about the ECB for years (way before this defeat) even when the test team beat India last year. The warning signs were there. We could see there were no good players coming through, and it was a direct result of the marginalisation of the county championship. You simply can’t produce test class batsmen if you play red ball cricket in April, May and September. The weather simply isn’t good enough. It’s why we probably have our weakest test batting line-up of all time. This isn’t coincidence.

      This has been a long running debate in English cricket for years. I can see why some might say “Steve Smith” and shrug their shoulders but it’s laziness. Smith has nothing to do with the fact that England only have one test class batsman (Root) and one test class all-rounder. Meanwhile, Broad and Archer have had just as much of an impact on this series as Cummins. The latter is a fine bowler but he hasn’t won games on his own. He’s yet to take a 5-fer in the series.

      • Are you seriously disputing that Australia has England covered over the past 30 years?

        England won the World Cup at home, after an umpiring error gifted them a draw. And they were then gifted victory via a technicality. And that’s some glorious achievement? Hallelujah. OBEs all round?

        How many World Cups have Australia won, by comparison?

        You’ll note James, I said “a regression to the mean of the past 30 years”. Yes England had a wonderful run in the 1800s but what’s the H2H in Ashes series since 1989? I think it was 12-5 to Australia before this series?

        So yeah, over the past 30 years, Australia has generally produced better players and generally been better at cricket. Is that in dispute?

        England were a good Test team briefly in 2009-15, between two whitewashes, but now we’re back to the mean of the past 30 years i.e. Australia being better because they produce better players.

        You can’t stomach that, so you’ll carp about the ECB instead. That’s the easier option.

        • Let’s concede, hypothetically, that you’re right and Australia do produce better test players. Why do you think that is? Is it down to DNA? Australia’s beaches? Australia’s indigenous flora and fungi? It’s the system and how it’s administered. Duh! What else could it be? So to leave the ECB out of this is more than a little odd.

          I’d also like to say that your selection of ’30 years’ as the criterion seems a bit convenient and random. I guess you wanted to just about exclude England’s win in 1986/87 to try and prove your point. But still your argument is somewhat flawed because for nearly 20 of the 30 years you mention, Australia couldn’t actually beat England at home whereas we managed to win away in 2010/11 as you point out. What’s more, you still haven’t actually won this series yet. It may still end in a draw.

            • Let’s take the last ten Ashes series (played over 19 years). It’s England won 5. Australia won 5. That’s the very definition of level pegging. I suggest that it’s you, my antipodean friend, who has repressed the memories.

              Australia won 8 series in a row before that 1989-2001 but that was very much a golden period not the norm. England won 5 of the 6 series before that between 1977 to 1987! So you can cut the stats selectively to prove whatever you like. But it will still be selective. As I said, the overall record is 33 plays 32. You can’t argue with history and facts.

              • So you don’t actually dispute that over the past 30 years, Australia has been better and has produced better players. I mean, that’s obvious so it’s not a big concession.

                So why would you be surprised when we revert to that?

                Still, it’s clearly too painful for you to acknowledge directly. It’s easier to blame everything on administrators, rather than accept that Australia, on average, is simply better at cricket.

                When England lose to Brazil at football, do you complain about the FA? When England lose to the All Blacks, do you complain about the RFU?

                Sometimes you just lose to a country who is better at something. Maybe it’s time for you to come to terms with that instead of scapegoating the board at every turn.

              • On average, Australia is better at cricket.

                We see further evidence of that in the way England have been hammed 5-0, 5-0, 4-0.

                Even the weakest Australian sides have avoided that.

                You might like to pretend this is meaningless but it in fact reveals something about the difference between the countries and resilience of their cricket teams.

                When England come to Australia and it gets too hard, they go to water and get humiliated. Even weak Australian sides avoid that.

                Like I said, Australia are, on average, simply better at cricket.

                But nah, it’s the ECB’s fault.

              • The bigger point is that England have a far worse record in Australia than Australia has in England over the last 15 years (not even counting this series). Yes you won a series in Australia during a low point in Australian cricket and a high point in English cricket, but that is the ONLY 3 games they’ve won away in the period. Australia on the other hand has lost 3 series away by 1 game and only the one series without scoring a single win. Australia has won 29% of non-drawn games in England. England has won 17% of non-drawn games in Australia and all of them in a single series.

                Its not down to weather or anything else its due to Australia being generally a better side except in that period in the middle of 2010-2013. Yes we weren’t far enough ahead to score a win in England but the home and away scores tell a story.

                But I agree with you about it being the system. Long term I think Australia has a deeper base and interest in cricket and for a long time had a better development system. Cricket is all over Free to air TV (terrestial) in Australia – essentially every night during the school holidays kids can watch BBL on TV, and all tests are also on. Junior cricket is booming and it has a broad base, with many of the communities who didn’t play cricket learning it into the 2nd and 3rd generation (many of the best kids in my son’s club have Greek or Lebanese surnames). Yes adult cricket still struggles to hold numbers. First class is marginalised outside the BBL period, but the summer is a lot longer here so its not a totally different game.

                Living in England in 2012-15 if was a strange experience not being able to watch cricket as we didn’t have Sky and would have to go to the pub (that’s not all bad of course!). For me I fear that this is the most serious issue with English cricket loss of interest in the next generation leading to fewer players and a decline in talent. We always want to beat England but we want it to be a contest.

        • Is there another solution to the lack of red ball specialists by having more tours for the lions and/or more developments set up for touring youngsters playing in conditions where they have to adapt against the very best other countries can put out on the field. Maybe the CC is not the only place to develop our younger players and cannot be relied upon on it’s own. The grounds for four day matches are empty so surely hardly any money is going through the clubs in this format. How can any of them really invest in training for those longer format skills if that’s the case?

          Clearly test cricket is 100% alive and needs servicing from the ecb or they lose the original fans of the game and risk it all. I just wonder if they can do it through a different way of developing different players to those who are developed for the shorter format. After all it is only the VERY best talents who can excel in T20 50 overs and tests and for the vast majority doing well in one means sacrificing another. See bairstow broad and anderson as examples. Broad and Anderson have got better since not playing one day stuff. Bairstow is now world class one day and ruined as a test batsman. We have split the captains for the formats. Is it time to split the development and set ups completely for both also??

      • As for Marnus v Jofra, look at their ages when they moved countries.

        Marnus came to Australia aged 10.

        Jofra was 19 or 20 when he turned up in England?

        And then England slashed their eligibility rules from 7 years to 3 years.

        So don’t talk to me with your false equivalence on cynical ring-ins.

        At least have the good grace to be suitably embarrassed by the stunt you pulled with Jofra i.e. taking an adult male from another country and then scrapping your own rules.

        Standard practice for England, I realise.

        • Jofra Archer has possessed an English passport for his entire life. “Taking an adult male from another country” … as if we forced him onto a boat against his will. Do me a favour.

          • Who said you “forced him onto a boat”?

            I noted that an adult male repatriated from another country, and then represented England after you scrapped your own eligibility rules.

            You should be embarrassed by that.

            You’re not, though, because ring-ins are standard practice for England. You need the ring-ins because you don’t produce enough good players on your own. Unlike Australia.

            • Labuschagne, Usman Khawaja, Moises Henriques, Fawad Ahmed, Matt Renshaw, Hilton Cartwright, Steve O’Keefe … all Australian cricketers born outside of Australia. Yes England have had quite a few imports but Australia do it too. And what’s your problem with immigration anyway? Those in glass houses …

              • And how old were they when they moved to Australia?

                Are you still pretending to not grasp the difference between a child emigrating with their parents and an adult male being fast-tracked to switch sides? Read that again slowly if you must.

                I have no problem with immigration. I do, however, think it’s embarrassing for a country to rely on cynical ring-ins as heavily as England.

              • Yes we were, but he’s the only adult transfer I can remember – I’m sure you’ll remind me if there is more. Generally I think you should play cricket for where you were developed as a cricketer – countries are not simply clubs you get drafted for.

                Its more the Tony Grieg, Alan Lamb, Caddick, Hick, Pietersen, Trott, Archer, Morgan to name some more significant one’s off the top of my head that I question.

                No one thinks a Strauss or Stokes is a problem, they are clearly players raised and brought up in the English system despite where they were born. For all that I don’t think it should be banned – people should be able to switch if they really need to but its been a massive prop to English cricket over the years.

            • This maybe a duplicate post, but are you not embarrassed by Keppler Wessels. As far as I know England have never selected anyone who has played Test cricket for another country, let alone captained one.

              • Yes, that was silly. Australia shouldn’t have picked him. It was clearly a sign of Australia’s desperation at the time, just as England’s dependence on ring-ins is a sign of their desperation.

      • Bit harsh and just untrue to call Marnus a ring in. His family moved to Qld when he was ten. Have you heard him speak? I think England fans should stay away from the topic of ring ins.

        • Hi Shane. I have no problem with any country bringing in players from overseas. I just called Labuschagne a ‘ring-in’ because this was the phrase used by Tom to criticise England’s selection of Archer. It was tit for tat.

          • Ok James. We have another potential player born in Pretoria and also moved to Australia at ten. Michael Neser. You will see more of them as well as their descendants as the Africaans people continue to flee to Australia. I welcome the seriously hard bastards. I fear for England

          • James, it’s dishonest of you to not acknowledge the difference in circumstances between Marnus and Jofra.

            Marnus came to Australia aged 10. Jofra repatriated once already an adult and England then scrapped their eligibility requirements.

            Stop hiding behind an obvious false equivalence.

            You probably think KP was “English” as well.

    • No it’s the bloody ECB who are responsible for the wholly mess that is cricket in this country. Don’t blame the players who were not suitable, the system, like Parliament at the moment, is not fit for purpose. It needs a complete rethink, wedding out and restructuring.
      James I think you’ve made all the points, and I read no changes for the Oval. Not surprisingly this lot are so far up themselves they’d never admit that have had it wrong all series.
      Was it worth it to”win” the World Cup? No certainty not.

      • The players are responsible for their own performance, and the English players were outplayed by the Australian players, who are better overall, as has been the case more often than not over the past 30 years.

        You guys simply prefer to blame the administrators because it’s more palatable and you prefer to give Australia as little credit as possible. You can’t acknowledge that Australia are just better at cricket generally, despite that obviously being the case.

        Basically, you’re in denial.

  • Whenever I hear about “The Hundred”, I think of that movie “Adaptation”, starring Nicolas Cage.

    Cage plays Charlie Kaufman, the screenwriter, and his imbecile twin brother, Donald, who also decides to try his hand at screenwriting.

    Donald writes a terrible script … a psychological thriller about a serial killer. It’s called “The 3”.

    I’m sure “The Hundred” will be just as good.

  • James
    I agree with all you have written. The ECB have ruined the game I have loved since I spent a summer with my dad watching the west Indies demolish England in the summer of 84. I find it hard to understand how they have got away with it, any other sporting body would have been replaced by virtue of not being fit for purpose.
    However I will let others much more knowledgeable than me debate that problem.
    One thing I can’t agree on, however, is Broad to replace Root as captain. Would we just be exchanging one member of the cabal for another? In my opinion we need wholesale changes to the test team with a group of players that can be moulded into a proper test unit under the guidance of somebody like Dave Brailsford from cycling who knows how to build a team and is not afraid of ruffling a few feathers. Coming from York the more Yorkshire men in the team the better but I feel the likes of Bairstow are punishing the team with their intransigence. I for one would be pleased to see a new system for the test team with a strong captain and leadership, even if it means losing a few matches in the process. What that system would be is beyond my skill set but I’m sure there is someone out there who has the knowledge. To give them a start might I suggest as a start getting rid of Smith and his lap dog. They have wound me up all summer with their saville row suits and shades!
    Finally (through gritted teeth) congratulations Australia, the better team won

    • I’m not enthusiastic about the prospect of Broad being captain but I simply can’t think of anyone else. Unless, of course, it’s someone not currently in the squad.

      By the way, for what it’s worth, I fully expect the ECB to appoint Eoin Morgan as test captain if Root was to stand down. It would be a ridiculous decision but would tick a lot of PR boxes. It would be incredibly ECB to do something like this.

      • I’m not sure having a front line bowler(Broad), coming to the end of his career and more likely to suffer an injury could seriously be considered a on field captain.

    • I’ve mentioned Dave Brailsford before Ian and totally agree. The one thing he has done is he picks riders purely on form and most recent at that. To be fair to the Aussies they do that too. Starc has only played this last test. It would probably mean that you wouldn’t pick Anderson without challenging games behind him and good form too.

  • I don’t know who would be a good captain, but I certainly wouldn’t pick Broad. He’s part of the Bairstow and Anderson alliance that run the show and I doubt would be a popular choice with the players. Best bowler on our side in the series though.
    The main reason you can’t route out the imbeciles running the ECB is that the counties for some odd reason gave up their right to vote them off some years back. I have run local governing bodies of sport, albeit on an amateur basis, but the ECB is by far the worst: it actually seems to be deliberately trying to ruin the sport it proposes to represent, with no consideration at all for the fan base.

  • Population of Australia – 25.3m
    UK – 67.6m
    The UK should therefore be producing over two and a half times as many test-standard cricketers as Australia.
    What is Cricket Australia doing that the ECB isn’t?

    • Australia has the luxury of selecting Australians.

      England, on the other hand, is mostly confined to picking Englishmen … along with the odd South African and West Indian, thankfully.

      Not really a level playing field when you think about it. Decked is stacked in favour of Australia.

    • Not sure Max, but something as simple as the weather might play a part. Week after week, month after month of fine dry weather might give them an advantage. I’m no expert on Australia and it’s weather but it always seems from afar to always be sun shining in their summer.

      • I think its cultural we draw from a broader base. Also facilities far more fields/person. Almost no private school educated people end up playing test cricket for Australia. If you wonder why the average Australian cricketer is a bit rougher than Alastair Cook that’s why – they wouldn’t pass the family test. Even though all the private schools play cricket it because the strongest competitions are outside of those schools and the schools make them play their own competitions rather than grade cricket.

    • and when you add the population of countries where players can qualify for England, the difference to Australia’s population is even greater, well over the almost 3:1 at the moment.

  • I think they should have asked to have this Ashes series put back a year.

    I recall the Aussies did something similar just a few years ago, which resulted us playing them at home and then away the followng winter in Australia (2013 possibly?). So presumably, that must’ve been an option but instead the ECB went for the glorious summer double and it just proved to be too much of an ask in the end.

    As far as the series has gone, I’m naturally disappointed we lost, but I don’t go along with the whole narrative that we were really badly beaten. Although I would say they’ve been the deserving winners without a doubt, I think Australia were very clinical in this series and had a little bit of luck along the way; winning 3 out of 4 tosses, numerous injuries to England bowlers – Anderson, Wood, Stone, T.Curran, Concussion substitutes being in play to save the day etc…

    In my opinion England had presentable chances in every game that we didn’t win; Australia were 123-8 at Edgbaston and we couldn’t get rid of Peter Siddle, we had Australia 4 down with about 90 minutes to go when Jason Roy dropped a routine chance at slip to get rid of Travis Head and at Old Trafford we had Steve Smith out for (only) 108, only for it to be a no ball.

    Of course, we may not have won those games, but those were opportunities we squandered and what is especially disappointing is the fact 2 out of those 3 moments weren’t grasped becase of our own mistakes. We were sloppy and lacked the killer instinct that they generally found in this series – especially via Steve Smith, Pat Cummins or Josh Hazlewood.

    Overall though and this isn’t just a point about this series, what I find most frustrating is England’s continual lack of strategy.

    Last summer we hosted and beat the number 1 side in the World and while it should be said that (unlike this summer) we won the majority of tosses against India, the makeup of our side was very different. Our bowling attack was Anderson, Broad, Woakes/Curran, Moeen and Rashid (plus the all rounder, Stokes).

    One year down the line we’re playing a key Ashes test match and 1 of those players in the 11. One out of Five! (2/6 if you include Stokes). Yes, Anderson is injured, but such a change in strategy in the space of just 1 year with an Ashes (the pinnacle series) is peculiar, right?

    We went to the West Indies and saw the home side pick a bevvy of tall fast bowlers and reacted by selecting 5 foot 7 Sam Curran ahead of 6 foot 7 taker of hundreds of test wickets, Stuart Broad. That’s also peculiar, right?

    I don’t know who is driving the direction of this side but it’s like we should be going down a straight road, but we’re swerving all over the road from one side to another – and that’s just with the bowling.

    Batting wise, I think we need to look at the World Cup as a big detrimental factor (hence my view we should have asked this series to be postponed and put back to 2020).

    Key players like Root, Bairstow, Stokes, Buttler and now Roy were all involved and while people won’t like to hear it, maybe they were just all programmed that much into the ODI game, they struggled to readapt and were basically frazzled mentally.

    Whether we should be selecting 5 out of our test top as 7 ODI players is another debate entirely, but personally, I put their collective poor performance (with the exception of Stokes) more down to the huge, high pressure intensity of a 2+ month long ODI block that a home World Cup brings – rather an outright lack of batting ability.

    Switching to test match cricket in the form of the Ashes no less, with no red ball warm up barr the Ireland 4 day game (which a couple of players even missed) was just a frankly ridiculous ask in the end.

    It’s like the ECB went for glory with an outswinging yorker bowled from wide of the crease, slanted into leg stump with the intention of moving late to clip off – but as is so often the way, they don’t swing and inevitably get clipped to the leg side fence by Steve Smith.

    • You’re right Harry, we played back to Ashes test series in 2013/14 to avoid this very thing happening. World Cup & Ashes series in the same summer a crazy situation.

  • An Ashes test series always gives an opportunity to chew the fat on how things have panned out. We’ve still got one test to go and I hope that even though we can’t win we can give a good account of ourselves and win at the Oval and draw the series.

    I am genuinely fearful for Test Cricket’s future in this country if we allow the white ball game to completely dominate the summer schedule.

    I have said more than once on this blog that to allow playing a World Cup and have a Ashes series in the same summer after playing back to back Ashes series in 2013/14 to avoid this happening is a terrible indictment of how the game is run. Heads should have and should still roll for it, as well as the marginalising of the red ball game.

  • Australia have a good bowling attack who know how to bowl as a unit. We didn’t have Anderson, Wood or Stone to provide penetrating back up to Broad and Archer.
    Australia had a cheat who shouldn’t have been playing. 1 year out is not the punishment to fit the crime. He scored over half his team’s runs and even with Laburschane playing in his stead would they have got themselves into winning positions, it’s debatable.
    It’s easy to criticise the present set up and we have been well beaten in the end, but to suggest somehow that the Aussies are producing better test players doesn’t hold water when you look at the best X1 for each.
    Their batting has been as vulnerable as ours. To suggest that an ordinary test player like Collingwood could have batted for 2 days against this Aussie attack is ludicrous. He had as many technical flaws as the present crew, just different ones and would have been found our just as quickly.
    We all know nothing will change with the present set up in charge as it would be admitting defeat for their inter-format theories. For me the dumbing down of the game to attract non-cricketing punters shows a contempt amongst the game’s administrators for the core cricket fans who appreciate the game in all its forms. Test crowds in this country show there is still an appetite for the long game, but unfortunately when you see stadiums abroad they are often cavernously empty for tests but fill for the white ball stuff. There is a definite appetite for seeing a result, which to me could spell the death knell for the red ball game pretty soon.
    No other game in the world takes place over this period of time and clearly the advent of modern technology has increased the general pace of life and red ball cricket doesn’t seem to have a natural place anymore.

    • I don’t see the ashes going away anytime soon mate. Test cricket will remain the pinnacle to players and fans

      • The Ashes is a special series that receives more publicity than any other and when we play India or Pakistan here the grounds are full of opposition spectators. However would we sell out for the rest? When we travel abroad the Grounds are full of spare seats, even in Australia.
        I would dispute that there are enough fans brought up on test cricket as opposed to those brought up on a surfeit of one dayers and 20-20 to sustain future interest in the long game. As for the players, they might see test cricket as the pinnacle but they have no real say in the way the game is run.
        Cricket has always reflected the times better than any other game as it goes on longer and test cricket has only become a world wide phenomenon post war, hardly an ancient tradition. Now it has to compete with formats that guarentee a result for the paying public, as all other games do. Going for one day out of 5, which is all most can afford, only works if you are an intrinsic lover of the game, otherwise it’s just a day out with your mates like any other with cricket happening to provide the backdrop.

        • Far more people go to watch tests in Australia than England, yes there is empty seats but the MCG is 4 times the capacity of Lords, SCG double, Adelaide and Perth now almost triple, 1.5 for Brisbane. All these grounds sell out on day 1-3 for Ashes, the empty seats are during the week on days 4-5.

          Also its costly to travel to venues outside They are also all at least 1000kms away from each other All the English grounds are conceivably a day trip away (maybe not Durham)- 3 hours down the motorway from each other.

          I was shocked when I lived in England that I had to enter a ballot to see a Test. Sure I’ve missed out on day 1-2 before but never the entire thing.

    • As opposed to OBEs to people who write in their biographies that they cheated?

      As opposed to MBEs to people who attempt to grievous bodily harm to an opponent’s hand on the filed of play when the ball was dead?

      Yeah, upstanding Englishmen those.

    • Oh for goodness sake Marc, let go of the cheating bullshit will you and move on. I guarantee you if Smith was English and did the same thing, England would be purring over his achievements in this series.

      Cricket has been riddled with cheating and unsporting behavior since dot, and that includes your darling Dr Grace and the well respected Michael Atherton. Whatever.

      Marc, I suppose you were one of the boneheads booing Smith every time he walked on and off a field, and probably when he was escorted off in the 1st innings at Lord’s.

      He’s not going away anytime soon so deal with that in your perfect world.

    • Had Smith played for any other country, he wouldn’t have been banned for a year. He’d have missed far less cricket.

  • Clear out the deadwood. Going forward we need

    Jennings Lyth Ballance (capt) Malan Root Stokes Buttler(+) Wood Bess Archer Crane

    Sorry. Couldn’t resist.

  • I’ve been in utter shock this series. Im not entirely sure how we lost. We had them 120 odd for 8 on day one of the series and despite an Australian comeback we went into the the 2nd innings with a pretty healthy lead. We had 2 opportunities to win the first test, could have won the second if it was not for rain. Admittedly we won the 3rd by a miracle but that test match was set up by Laburshane and we missed so many chances to get him out the target should’ve been much less miraculous
    This Australian team have been there for the taking yet we have had to show a serious amount of heart, desire and bottle to simply remain competitive.
    I’ve struggled to understand what’s happened during this series more than any other I’ve seen

      • Tom in order to calm you down, congratulations on Australia retaining the Ashes. You were the better team, full of intent and determination, two words that seem to be missing from the mindset of our team. All the above posting and arguing is really a waste of time and effort.

        You say we blame the ECB. We blame it for its running down of Test Cricket,yes we do, because they have. But it is more their intransigence, their total lack of engagement with those who love the game, ie us customers, those who watch, those who buy the tickets, that gets up our collective noses. We are lower than the dust beneath their chariot wheels. A few years back, Ashley Giles, who is now the Director of Cricket, called us “stakeholders” which just about sums up their attitude.

        So really you cannot blame us for getting riled with the ECB after another series down the pan. I am not sure if the players know whether they are coming or going most of the time.

        But, once more, congratulations. The last two matches have been nail-biting and I have enjoyed watching them.

        • I’m perfectly calm. Please don’t presume otherwise.

          You revert to blaming the ECB because that’s more palatable than acknowledging the more fundamental cause i.e. Australia are just generally better than England at cricket – that has been the case generally for the past 30 years and we’ve now reverted to the mean.

          It’s too hard for English fans to concede that point, so blaming every defeat on administrators becomes the default response.

  • The result at Old Trafford was very disappointing particularly after the miracle of Edgbaston. The pundits comments concerning the momentum being with England were completely wrong. Australia are a better side and bounced back well. They have Steve Smith and a very impressive seam attack. They are also very focussed and cohesive. The result would however have been even closer were in not for Leach’s no ball.
    It baffles me that we select batsmen at the highest level who are technically flawed. The Roy experiment has failed.
    Root lacks tactical awareness. He allowed Australia off the hook post tea on day 4 at Old Trafford not bowling Archer and Broad. It does rather amaze me that Archer has his sweater tied around his waist and appears to be playing for a village team. Doesn’t look good. Root should tell him so.
    In the future we do need a new captain with more tactical awareness and hopefully this will allow Root to thrive again as a batsman. The choice is however difficult. Ben Foakes must come in and Roy and Bairstow should stand down. The younger up and coming batsmen in red ball cricket should now be given a chance.
    I was thinking of going down under for the next ashes series and if I do will ensure antidepressant medication has been packed in advance!

  • The whole balance of the England team seems to be out of kilter, too many “all rounders”, wrong bowlers and too much emphasis on white ball players trying to smash 300+ in a day. Test cricket doesn’t, nor will it ever work like that.

    Burns is a good opener and will get that breakthrough hundred sooner rater than later, most likely in NZ
    Denly, defo not a long term option, but seemed to of adapted well enough at 2
    Root, not a 3 or captain
    Roy, the most ridiculous selection of the summer. “Hide him at 4, soft ball, tired bowlers, that will suit him” – welcome Jase, it’s 30-2, here’s Cummins…………
    Stokes, should be captain, batting at 6
    Bairstow – bat at 5, no gloves, give them to Foakes
    Buttler, goodbye
    Woakes, sadly the only bloke that doesn’t rate him is his captain, should not of been dropped unless he was injured but we were never told that
    Overton, is he seriously a better cricketer then Sam Curran? NO
    Archer, defo talent there, but what a piece of work he is. Honestly, if your team management you have to keep him away from interviews. His trash talk before the 4th test blew up in his face. Seriously, after Lord’s he was fairly ordinary and his 3 wickets in the 2nd innings in Manchester were because Australia were in a hurry.
    Broad, best series in a while. Some say he should captain, but his reviews would be terrible because when he bowls everything is out
    Leech, not quite test standard, but not many other options around plus he has some steel. Rashid is quite good, but sadly for him Root doesn’t rate him
    Ali, don’t think England will go down that path again
    Jimmy, good career, some spots up for grabs in the Sky box after this series. Enjoy!

  • Some really good points on here and in terms of Oz retaining the Ashes they have thoroughly deserved it and have players who seem more mentally attuned to the situation.

    As with many above my on going issue is with the ECB leadership, the leaders of this organisation are paid extremely well for running an organisation with an income well in excess of £100m per annum, this is a significant organisation. As one of my old bosses once asked ‘Tell me which part of this organisation management isn’t responsible for?’

    The WC followed by the Ashes was not a surprise to them, did anyone evaluate any risks of burn out? Jason Roy’s Ashes selection was a late decision, who did he replace in the original plans?

    I could go on but I believe if we are to improve our Test performance we need to have more players to pick from, what plans are the ECB hatching to improve our performance, is it the hundred?

    Time for a clear out.

  • Joe Root – not a captain.
    The team is full of whiteballers who hardly play red ball cricket so the result was never in doubt.
    Bring back the county championship to the summer. Play the Blast on Sundays. Get rid of the Hundred.
    How hard can it be?

FOLLOW US ON TWITTER

copywriter copywriting