3 Reasons to be Hopeful and 3 Reasons to be Fearful

After Australia mauled England in the 1^st Ashes Test, here are three reasons why England can win the series, and three reasons why they can’t:-

India 2012

The last time England looked in such a bad state, and in fact the last time England lost a Test match, was the 1^st Test in India in 2012. England were thumped by nine wickets, and looked like they could neither take twenty Indian wickets, nor score enough runs to place any kind of pressure on the Indian bowlers. The pundits were demanding multiple changes from England, and Indian fans were talking of winning 4-0. England won the next two Tests, and drew the last to win the series 2-1.

England lost the first Test in that series as badly as they have lost this Test. They were able to turn the series around by acknowledging the mistakes they made in the first Test, standing by the right players, and making only one but the right change by including the extra spinner in place of a seamer. They didn’t panic, analysed their errors, and then went 13 matches unbeaten. The manner of the defeat will not cause England to panic, they’ll analyse, and history shows that this management team will make the right decisions to get England back into the series.

Australia’s batsmen are not suddenly world beaters

Going back to the end of the 1^st day, a lot of Australians were not particularly happy with how the series had started. Australia closed 273-8 and ended up 295 all out, with a lot of the problems that had dogged Australian cricket for the previous 24 months once again rising to the surface. They weren’t scoring enough runs, and too many of the batsman were out to shots that didn’t need to be played. Ultimately, Australia had more than enough runs to win the match, and hundreds by David Warner and Michael Clarke in the second innings were hugely encouraging.

Yet, over the last two years, only three Australian batsmen average higher than 40 in Tests, and two of those are now retired – Michael Clarke, Mike Hussey and Ricky Ponting. The averages of the current side for that period are as follows:- Rogers 34.90, Warner 38.30, Watson 30.72, Clarke 74.39, Smith 35.80, Bailey 18.50 and Haddin 32.64. Those are hardly numbers to strike fear into a bowling attack, as was proved in the summer. Rogers and Bailey give the impression of hard workers who perhaps lack the ability. Warner, Watson and Smith all give the impression that a poor shot is just around the corner. England can take 20 wickets in every Test, and that means England have a chance to win every Test.

Australia’s bowlers cannot keep this up

A huge amount, and deservedly so, will be made of Mitchell Johnson’s performance in this match. Those who believe this is a stunning return to form missed the Sri Lanka tour of Australia last winter, where for two Tests Johnson found this kind of form, taking wickets and sending three batsman home injured. But in this Test every Australian bowler hit their best form and played their role perfectly. Johnson was the spearhead, Harris the leader, Siddle hit the top of off stump as the third seamer and Lyon bowled accurately, allowing four batsman to make mistakes against his bowling.

With Johnson, when he has this confidence, he can be nigh on unplayable. The speed gun doesn’t do him justice, as his slingy action means he loses less off the pitch than most. Harris was bowling nearly the same speed, but didn’t hurry the England batsman nearly as much. But the history of Johnson shows that this form could desert him at any moment, when he becomes a bowler that delivers four balls to all four corners of the ground. For Harris, the problems are completely fitness based. No amount of form or confidence will make the cartilage in his knees grow back, and sadly for a hugely talented bowler and by accounts a fantastic bloke, an injury is always around the corner. Siddle and Lyon are good bowlers when they are your 3^rd and 4^th best, but when they are the first two options, as they were in India, they are a lot less threatening.

And why we should be worried:-

England’s batting is in a 2 year slump

England struggled in the summer Ashes, and now in this Test match, to score runs. England seem to either collapse, or when they did score runs, really have to grind them out. In the summer Jonny Bairstow and Joe Root were the objects of criticism, and now, it is Jonathan Trott. But the stats show that it is not one player that is the problem, but all of them. England’s batting averages for batsmen in Tests since the start of 2012 are below, and it doesn’t paint even a picture of adequacy:-

Alistair Cook – 42.78

Kevin Pietersen – 40.25

Joe Root – 39.55

Ian Bell – 38.38

Jonathan Trott – 38.25

Matt Prior – 36.22

Andrew Strauss – 33.19

Nick Compton – 31.93

Jonny Bairstow – 30.22

Michael Carberry – 20.00

James Taylor – 16.00

Samit Patel – 15.57

Eoin Morgan – 13.66

Ravi Bopara – 11.00

That England’s results have been reasonable during this period (Wins at home to Australia, West Indies and New Zealand, and in India; draws in Sri Lanka and New Zealand; defeats at home to South Africa and “away” to Pakistan) owes much to the qualities of James Anderson, Stuart Broad and Graeme Swann, at times supported by Tim Bresnan and others Steven Finn. Other than Joe Root, those averages are unacceptable for those players given their ability and the stage they are at in their careers. Prior’s average is reasonable for a keeper, but across his last eight Tests he averages just 15. But the problem is not one player; it is a collective failing where not even one player is scoring the runs England need.

England have mismanaged their best young players

When England first arrived in Australia, the general train of thought was that England would continue with Joe Root opening, and bring Gary Ballance into the middle order. However, runs in the warm-up games saw Michael Carberry play in the 1^st Test, with Root in the middle order, and Ballance carrying the drinks. Whilst Carberry’s runs meant his selection was deserved, the treatment of Root and the selection of a 33 year-old is emblematic of England’s overly pragmatic approach to selection.

The average age of the side for the first Test was 30.3, and ignoring the 22 year-old Root, 31.2. Eight of the players are 31 or older, and thus it can be argued in the majority of cases, that their best cricket is behind them. Over the next three years the vast majority of England’s Test side is going to get worse.

The three most talented youngsters that England have produced recently are, in order, Steven Finn, Joe Root and Jonny Bairstow. Yet all have been mismanaged by England, and all three have played international cricket, yet are no further on in their development than when they arrived in the England team.

Finn’s treatment is the most frustrating. He made his debut on the tour of Bangladesh, and since then has been in and out of the side, playing 23 of England’s 46 Tests in that period. England have time and time again left Finn out of the side, as despite the fact he takes wickets, he concedes too many runs. This is typical of England’s pragmatism, but ignores a vital truth of Test cricket – it is harder to teach an accurate bowler to take wickets at Test level than to teach a wicket-taker to bowl accurately. Since his debut, only two bowlers have taken more wickets than Finn at a better strike rate – Vernon Philander and Dale Steyn. Steyn, and more aptly, Morne Morkel were both wicket takers who bowled inconsistently at the start of their Test careers. South Africa, and in particular Graeme Smith, backed them and kept picking them. They are the basis for the best bowling attack in world cricket.

Bairstow arrived at international level with a reputation as England’s long term replacement for Prior, but not being quite a good enough batsman to warrant a place as a specialist. Two years later, he’s in exactly the same position, except has had to suffer the trauma of being dropped from the Test side twice, and rather than playing in both the ODI and T20 teams as he would be if managed properly, it sits and watches Jos Buttler make his own case for Test inclusion. Root is the best English produced (i.e. not KP) batsman for a long time, who arrived as a massive talent possibly not ready to open in Tests. A year later England still believe that is the case, yet during that time have jumped Root around the order and never rested him in white ball cricket despite the incredible transformation in his life over the past twelve months. He looks mentally tired, and that was born out in the ODI series against Australia, and possibly this Test series as well.

England can argue that their selection policy based on experience and the retention of players has served them very well since the appointment of Andy Flower. But that ignores an inconvenient truth for this management team – they benefitted from Duncan Fletcher introducing these players, and Peter Moores sticking by them, allowing them to become the players Flower inherited. Fletcher picked Cook, Broad, Anderson and Swann at 20, Bell and Prior at 22, Tremlett at 23 and Pietersen at 24. Andy Flower has done a huge amount right as England coach, but talent identification has been his main/only failing, and now it is biting back at England.

Australia have form and belief on their side

Going into this series a lot of English fans were bemused by Australia’s confidence entering the series. But the Aussies had a lot of reason to be confident. The tour of England helped rid Australia of a few players, some forever and some for now, and those players left have produced great form for their state sides. During a two day period, five of Australia top seven made 80+ in the Sheffield Shield, and of the two that didn’t, Shane Watson was injured and George Bailey was busy getting himself up to number 3 in the ODI world batting rankings.

With the bowlers, Mitchell Johnson was bowling fast, Peter Siddle was bowling well and Ryan Harris was bowling. Nathan Lyon looked solid and Jimmy Faulkner was showing off his all-round skills in India. Most pleasingly for Australia, should they suffer injury a number of their fringe players have shown form as well, with runs for Ed Cowan, Phil Hughes, Chris Hartley (the best pure keeper in Australia), Alex Doolan, Matthew Wade and Shaun Marsh. Their quite remarkable legion of potential Test quick bowlers continues to swell, with Chadd Sayers continuing his rise and Ben Cutting bowling himself back into contention after a spell on the sidelines – even Xavier Doherty is taking wickets.

The Aussies are confident, and anyone who saw the beasting Chris Tremlett and James Anderson took, both from the bowlers and the abuse they copped from the Aussie fielders, in particular George Bailey at short leg (for Anderson to cry foul about that was hypocritical, as he is known about the world as someone who particularly enjoys telling batsman what he thinks of them.), will have seen their body language and the confidence in them. They are not hoping to win, they are expecting to. For Anderson to cry foul about that was hypocritical, as he is known about the world as someone who particularly enjoys telling batsman what he thinks of them.

1st Ashes Test - How They'll Line-Up

With the first Test coming up soon, and more markedly, the announcement of the Australian Test squad, here’s how I think the teams will line up in Brisbane on the 21^st.

England

England are fairly settled, with nine certain starters for the 1^st Test barring injury or an incredible loss of form – Alistair Cook, Joe Root, Jonathan Trott, Kevin Pietersen, Ian Bell, Matt Prior, Graeme Swann, Stuart Broad and James Anderson. Of those nine, only Root has never toured Australia before, so there is strong experience of Australian conditions. The holes in the England line-up are the fourth bowler, and the sixth batsman.

Starting with the fourth bowler, it was billed as a straight shootout between Chris Tremlett, Boyd Rankin and Steven Finn, with Tim Bresnan to come into the mix later in the series. Rankin was probably the slight favourite before the first tour match, mainly due to novelty, but his bounce hurried the Australians in the one day series at home. It looked like a good battle with three England quicks vying for a position.

Then, the first tour game happened, and by all accounts, all three bowlers were extremely poor (the general impression of the Aussie journalists was that the best English seamer they saw that day was Tymal Mills in the nets), with all three playing to old weaknesses. Tremlett looked like he didn’t have the heart for the battle, Rankin looked extremely nervous and Finn would bowl a loose ball every over. To say there were no winners would be unfair, as the bowler who really won was Tim Bresnan. Tremlett, only due to his performances two years ago, is now the likely starter, but all three still have hope.

The sixth batsman is proving slightly more tricky than anticipated. Cook’s sore back gave an opportunity to Michael Carberry, and Gary Ballance and Ben Stokes were also given a game. The best outcome for England was a cautious 30 from Carberry, a hundred from Ballance and a spritely 50 from Stokes. What they got was 70 from Carberry, and failures from both Stokes and Ballance, who was dismissed first ball.

This has led to a lot of unnecessary failing about Joe Root’s position as opener. To pick Carberry to open and move Root down to six, as has been mooted today, would at best be short-termism and at worst do considerable damage to Root’s confidence. England bought into Root as an opener during the summer, and for me that’s an investment they have to maintain. Carberry is a nice bloke, and after his health problems and consistent runs at county level it’s extremely nice to see him in the England squad, but he doesn’t look like he’s got a glittering international career ahead of him. Root however might have, and there’s no reason to play around with his confidence.

Stokes’ form over the past two years with the bat suggests that batting him at six would be a push, and given Prior’s summer, they are unlikely to fancy pushing the keeper up to six to accommodate Stokes all-round skills (yet, Stokes has a long international career ahead of him). The pick for England is Ballance, who has looked a cut above for Yorkshire this year. One good ball in the first tour match doesn’t chance this, and England should be prepared to back him.

Team – Cook, Root, Trott, Pietersen, Bell, Ballance, Prior, Broad, Swann, Tremlett (Bresnan when fit), Anderson

Australia

Australia have a different problem. Whilst England have an obvious 9 and have to find two, Australia have an obvious 13 but removing two becomes extremely difficult, because a huge amount depends on the balance of their side and their bowling attack. The 13 are Chris Rogers, Dave Warner, Shane Watson, Michael Clarke, Steve Smith, George Bailey, Brad Haddin, Mitchell Johnson, Peter Siddle, Ryan Harris, James Faulkner, Nathan Lyon and Fawad Ahmed.

There are 7 certain starters there for me – Rogers, Warner, Watson (if fit, he damaged a hamstring in the final ODI in India), Clarke, Haddin, Siddle and Harris (if fit, because let’s face it injury is inevitable with this man). Warner may have been under pressure after the Ashes series, but three big one day hundreds, and the manner in which he is striking the ball, along with the lack of a feasible replacement, mean he’ll be there in Brisbane.

With the rest, let’s start with England’s favourite Australian, Mitchell Johnson. For England fans, he is a figure of fun, a source of bad balls and an excellent Barmy Army song. For the Sri Lankan batsman earlier this year, he was a source of pain, both figuratively and for in some cases literally. He took wickets, broke bones, and was generally the terror he can be. When he is off, he is simply death to the fielding side as boundaries flow. When he is on, very few players have an answer, as was seen in one terrifying spell in Perth in 2010/11.

With no Pattinson, Starc or Bird, Johnson’s selection seems a must for Australia. But if he is picked, can they go with a four man attack. If Watson is unfit, Johnson as part of a four man attack seems a gamble too far if he doesn’t come off. The solution to this is obvious – pick James Faulkner. Faulkner reminds me a lot of Stuart Broad when he came through. He’s far from the finished article, but he has a certain hardness, a battle readiness, that marked Broad out from his arrival. Neither looked technically ready for Test cricket, but they clearly had a mental quality well beyond their years and an ability to create a spell or a boundary blast from nothing. Faulkner looks a match-winner and the Aussies would be well advised to pick him as part of a five man bowling attack which negates the risk of a Johnson off-day.

This brings us to the spinner, and again it’s not an easy choice. Straight off the bat, anyone who doesn’t think Fawad should be representing Australia, reserve your judgement until watching this. Lyon offers control but no great wicket threat. Fawad offers a real threat, but also plenty of four balls. If the Aussies go with a four man attack, I’d expect to see Lyon play. With a five man attack, Fawad becomes a more attractive option. If the Aussies go with a five man bowling attack, Lyon may start the series but I’d expect Fawad to end it.

That leaves two batsmen for one spot, Steve Smith and George Bailey. Bailey splits the Australian cricket public like no other cricketer, not even Johnson. To his supporters, of which I am one, he is a superb leader, a player with the mental capacity to succeed at Test cricket and deserving of his ODI form which sees him the best Australian one-day player since Michael Bevan. To his detractors, he’s a technically weak, over-confident and over-rated player who doesn’t deserve a spot in their ODI and t20 sides and certainly doesn’t deserve the captaincy. Two of his most ardent critics are two of the biggest names/ (mouths) in Australian cricket, in Shane Warne and Ian Chappell, whose opinion carries a lot of sway with the Aussie public.

For me, Bailey could bring a lot to the Australian side. They lack leadership, and he’s regarded as the best captain in Australia. Smith would be extremely unlucky to lose his place, as he carries a lot of the characteristics that make Bailey an attractive choice. He’s regarded as mentally strong, if potentially technically weak, and a strong presence in the dressing room and on the training field. In his last match for Australia, he scored an extremely impressive maiden Test hundred. The easy option for Australia is to avoid the choice between Smith and Bailey, pick both, and play four bowlers. But if they want to win this series, five bowlers is the way to hurt England. I’d go for Bailey, but a little part of me would be hoping Watson isn’t fit for the first Test.

There are other players Australia could call on. Eight fast bowlers are under CA’s control, the ones not mentioned being Ben Hilfenhaus, Josh Hazelwood, Chadd Sayers, Clint McKay and Nathan Coulter-Nile. On those, Sayers could be the best bet for when Ryan Harris needs resting. A late developer, Sayers swings the ball late at a decent pace, and would have the added advantage of the notoriously studious England not being able to find much footage of him. McKay and Hilfenhaus would bring consistency; Hazelwood and Coulter-Nile pace and bounce.

As for batsmen, Phil Hughes and Usman Khawaja will continue to be mentioned, whilst Shaun Marsh would be a very strong candidate for the number three slot should Watson not be fit for the 1^st Test. Alex Doolan seems to be the upcoming young batsman, another highly rated Tasmanian youngster, who is another potential number three. The big problem for Australia is if an opener loses fitness or form. Ed Cowan’s time has surely passed, and most of the other opening options are converted number threes, such as Doolan. Hughes could make an unexpected return as opener if Warner fails to fire.

Team – Rogers, Warner, Watson, Clarke, Bailey, Haddin, Faulkner, Johnson, Siddle, Harris, Lyon. That’s my side, bit I expect Australia to pick Smith over Faulkner.