Brisbane Revisited

Now that the dust has settled a little and England supporters have stopped wandering around with glazed expressions, constantly repeating the words ‘517-1’ in disbelieving wonder, we can look back at the Brisbane test with some objectivity, for it wasn’t necessarily the Australian disaster, nor the English triumph, that some have reported.

The positives for Australia were the way that Siddle bowled in the first innings and the way that Hussey and Haddin turned the game around on days two and three in the face of some pretty good bowling. Hussey in particular deserves a lot of credit for responding so positively to his place being on the line. Sure, he had some luck, not least with the LBW decision on the third morning, but his judgment of length was impeccable and he took full advantage of any poor deliveries that came his way. Haddin too showed strength of character. There were those, including me, who questioned his inclusion ahead of Tim Paine, but he batted superbly, although his keeping remains suspect. The real concern for Australia will not be so much the performances of individuals, although Mitchell Johnson must surely lose his place, but that, once again, they got themselves into a winning position and weren’t able to take advantage. This was down to a combination of factors – it’s certainly true that the pitch got flatter, that England batted exceptionally well and that they didn’t have a lot of luck, but they also ran out of ideas pretty quickly and heads dropped early on. Ricky Ponting’s captaincy didn’t come out of days four and five with any great credit, particularly in the 7-2 fields that he set for Hilfenhaus and his failure to attack more on the final morning, and his body language when things are going against his side, as they have tended to of late, is not helpful.

That said, though, it was only Australia who had any chance of winning the game. Taking a lead of over two hundred in any test is an impressive feat and if they can keep doing that then they will win at some point, but the concern for them will be that in a series that is likely to fluctuate it is crucial to take full advantage of such opportunities. The other concern will be that this wasn’t like Cardiff, where they remained dominant only to fall at the final hurdle. Days four and five weren’t simply a plucky rearguard action by England, they were a humiliation.

A lot was written before the series about the respective mental strength of the two sides. England showed plenty of it in Brisbane, both in the way that they kept going with the ball and in the way that they set about saving the game. The first day at Adelaide will be a test of how Australia’s minds are working. I can’t wait.

Hot to Trott

I was at the Oval last summer when Jonathan Trott played his first innings. As he emerged from the pavilion, wearing a pair of wide, discoloured pads that looked as though he’d just fished them out of the team kitbag, the reaction of those around me was as if he had won a competition to bat for England in a test match. Many, I suspect, would have favoured the media campaign to restore Mark Ramprakash or even Marcus Trescothick to the side – when I explained to my neighbour that Trott was averaging over eighty in first class cricket that season he looked at me incredulously and went on to greet the shot with which he got off the mark with patronising applause that suggested that this couldn’t possibly last for long.

Of course, we now know what happened next. Trott’s assured maiden innings, full of trademark clips to leg and drives through the offside, was brought to a premature end by a remarkable piece of fielding by Simon Katich, but he made up for it with a match winning hundred in the second innings while his mother bawled in the stands.

A torrid tour to the land of his upbringing followed, commentators and opponents fixating on his between ball idiosyncrasies, and his place was under pressure at the start of the summer, but with three hundreds in seven tests since then and an average of just under sixty he is here to stay. His arrival has also had the happy by-product of enabling Ian Bell to drop back down to his favoured position of number six, a move which is greatly to the benefit of England.

I’ve seen him bat in the flesh twice since that auspicious start. On the first occasion he made 226 against Bangladesh and on the second he made 184 in the astonishing eighth wicket stand of 332 with Stuart Broad. Looking back at both innings they were characterised by secure footwork, lovely timing and a strong sense that he knew his game inside out. On the second morning at Lord’s, with all of the other batsmen discomfited by the moving ball, he looked utterly untroubled, calmly knocking the ball into his favourite scoring areas and leaving anything that looked remotely threatening.

He also now has the habit of delivering sizeable scores – on the occasions that he has passed seventy in tests he averages 221.33, which is remarkable. Three of his four test hundreds have resulted in England wins, while the fourth was part of a score of 517-1 that came after England were over two hundred behind on first innings. He has the happy knack of scoring runs when they matter, not simply when they are available, which is immeasurably important to England’s cause.

The elephant in the room, of course, is his nationality. Born and raised in South Africa, with an English cricket coach for a father, his selection for England has raised hackles in many quarters. Such gripes are irrelevant, however, for the eligibility rules are the same for all countries and have been exploited by pretty much everyone at some point or another. As with Kevin Pietersen, we should also consider the importance that county cricket has played in his development, particularly in his ability to play the moving ball. The only two questions that any selector should ask are ‘is he eligible?’ and ‘is he good enough?’. Luckily for England, the answer to both these questions is yes.

Blimey - Day Five at Brisbane

I’ve been watching test cricket for over thirty years. In that time, I’ve maintained a level of optimism that is suggestive of mental illness, but I’ve also had my share of ‘I was there’ moments, from Gooch’s triple century against India to Trott and Broad’s partnership against Pakistan. None of this, however, prepared me for waking up in the small hours of the morning and finding that England were declaring on 517-1.

Yes, it was a flat pitch and, yes, Australia’s heads dropped alarmingly, but even so it feels like a misprint. England aren’t the first side in test history to score over five hundred for the loss of just one wicket, but to do so in the first test of an Ashes series in Brisbane almost defies description. They were helped by some negative field settings early on, especially when Cook edged through a vacant third slip for four, by some pretty poor catching and fielding and by bowling that the Sydney Daily Telegraph described as ‘Shoddyline’, but nothing should detract from Alastair Cook’s performance in particular. Before the series started he was most people’s favourite for the axe, now he has over three hundred runs for once out and a record score at the Gabba. As for Trott, these things are becoming commonplace: this is the second consecutive test in which he has shared in a partnership of more than three hundred.

Momentum is an overrated concept, as the 2009 series told us, but there is no doubt which team will be happier as they travel to Adelaide. Mitchell Johnson, who averages almost forty with the ball and ten with the bat in a forgettable 2010, must surely be on his way out, but there will also be concerns about Hilfenhaus, who will surely improve, and Doherty, who may not. Having finished this test on the back foot after posting a first innings lead of over two hundred, Adelaide now takes on a psychological significance for Australia, especially as a defeat would mean that they would have to win two out of the last three tests. Dealing with pressure hasn’t always been their strength of late – we will find out a great deal about their character over the next few days.

The Cook, Strauss and Lazarus Show - Day Four at Brisbane

Even though I am a Newcastle United supporter, my default setting as a sports fan is optimistic. I suspect that this is a consequence of being brought up by the most pessimistic supporter in the world, but this is neither the time nor the place for psychological analysis.

In spite of this naturally postive outlook I was expecting to get up this morning and, at best, see Australia on the verge of vistory. In my bleaker moments I had visions of coming downstairs in the early hours of the morning and seeing the words ‘Sky Sports Replay’ in the top corner of a screen showing England 108-8.
To continue the theme, when I did switch the telly on only the bottom half of the score was showing due to the ever so helpful bar showing me which channel I was on, so my initial reaction was that England were seven down. It was a little early for vistory jigs, but when the screen cleared I must confess to a moment of joy when I saw that England were 270-1.

Alastair Cook, whose place before the tour was a matter of great speculation, batted superbly. His balance was right and he was ruthless on anything short and off line, of which there was a considerable amount. Strauss, in truth, was less assured, getting away with a number of edges and a horrible dropped catch by Mitchell Johnson, but his century was a triumph of character and he deserves all of the plaudits that will be coming his way. I wrote before the series about England’s strength of character and this was ample evidence, with Jonathan Trott also digging in effectively. England will need to bat well again tomorrow, but their efforts today have laid the foundations for a creditable draw.

Australia were looking short of ideas by the time the light closed in. The 7-2 field for Hilfenhaus looked ill-advised and Mitchell Johnson, a few hostile deliveries aside, is doing little to change the opinions of England supporters. If England do emerge with a draw tomorrow then the soul seaching will be Australia’s.

Haddin a Ball - Day Three at Brisbane

There are eighteen people in our Ashes competion. Eighteen people with six selections each. And none of them have selected Mike Hussey.

Hussey’s innings has shown the fine margins between success and failure in cricket. Had his first ball edge flown six inches further the knives would have been out and his career hanging by a thread. Had the umpiring, and the UDRS, been less kind then he would have saved his place but the doubts would still be lingering. As it is, he can look forward to the rest of the series at the very least.

Much will be made of the twin LBW decisions that shaped his innings, but this would be a little unfair – it is one things to be given a life but quite another to take full advantage. At his best, no-one picks the length of spinners better and he was quick to rock back and pull Graeme Swann whenever the opportunity presented itself. As with any Hussey innings it didn’t really impose itself on the memory as might have been the case with other, more flamboyant, players, but it was a magnificent knock and surely no-one would have begrudged him his double century.

Yesterday I observed how intelligently Brad Haddin had batted when Australia were in trouble, and this continued through a dificult first hour. Once he had settled, however, his range of stroke impressed and, although his wicket keeping still leaves a lot to be desired, it was easy to see why the selectors had reverted to him at the expense of Tim Paine.

As for England, they will have days when they bowl worse than that and bowl sides out. Anderson’s figures, in particular, were scant reward for some fine spells and Finn, although six wickets may have flattered him, is a terrific prospect. In recent years a score of 481 for Australia would have been an indication of complete dominance but on this occasion it is considerably easier for England fans to be optimistic.

That said, it is difficult to see England saving this game now. The batting has been brittle for a while and batting for a day and a half, which is what is required, seems unlikely. That said, it was very important that Strauss and Cook made it through the final session without being parted and they have, at least, managed that. If England do escape with a draw then the parallels to Cardiff may give them heart.

Unfussy Hussey - Day Two at Brisbane

Yesterday it was Peter Siddle, today it is Mike Hussey. Tomorrow, who knows? Mitchell Johnson? Marcus North? Stranger things have happened…

This was another intriguing day of cricket although with the run rate at 2.75 runs per over Lalith Modi may not agree. It was slightly odd watching Sky’s round-up this morning, for it created the illusion of an orgy of Australian boundaries when, in fact, England bowled with discipline and Australia batted pretty sensibly.

Hussey, of course, stole the show, using more of the energetic approach that he adopts in one day cricket than has been the case in his test outings of late. Having survived his first ball he played exceptionally well, punishing anything loose, running well between the wickets and showing good judgement when leaving the ball. England will hope that this is his one major contribution of the series. Brad Haddin also deserves credit for eschewing his natural attacking game and playing the conditions rather than some imaginary game in his head. Their partnership has already tilted the game back towards Australia – if they can see off the new ball in the morning then they could set a platform for victory.

In amongst all of this, England bowled pretty well after a dicey start. Anderson, in particular, is a different beast from that which toured four years ago, and Finn settled into a good length after a while. Graeme Swann will be disappointed, but he is good enough to come again and recovered from his initial shellacking to return economical figures. As a group, they certainly showed enough to suggest that this series will be very competitive, especially if Michael Clarke continues his current run of form.

It’s easy to imagine Clarke regaining his form, assuming that his back holds out (and how many people believed Justin Langer’s assertion that he is 100% fit?), but it is less easy to imagine Marcus North still being part of this team come Sydney. His bowling is useful and he seems like a good bloke, but after yet another single figures score his place must surely be on the line.

It’s an important first session tomorrow morning. If England can get off to a flyer with the new ball and restrict Australia to around 300 then it will be game on, but if Australia can get a decent lead then they will be firm favourites. Bring it on.

Siddle's Swingers - Day One at Brisbane

In the day or so leading up to the test there had been much talk of the questionable wisdom of the selection of Peter Siddle over Doug Bollinger. Correspondents to the cricinfo comments section, not usually the most balanced group it must be said, were of the opinion that this selection betrayed the inner turmoil of the Australians (although not always expressed quite like that), with some suggesting that Australia might as well hand over the urn now. I wouldn’t have gone that far but am quite relieved that I never got round to writing the blog post that I had planned, since I would have got it horribly wrong.

Don’t misunderstand me – I admire Siddle as a bowler. He bowled pretty well in England last year, particularly at Headingley, and I like his attitude, but I would have seriously questioned the wisdom a) of omitting Doug Bollinger and b) replacing him with a man who has hardly played for getting for a year because of injury. Just shows how much I know.

Until Siddle produced his mid-afternoon burst, England had been progressing reasonably serenely. Strauss will be disappointed at how he got out and both Pietersen and Trott will feel that they had done the hard work but failed to deliver, but Alastair Cook and Ian Bell were progressing fairly easily and a decent score looked on the cards. Up to that point, the Australian seamers had looked pretty toothless, but Siddle got his length right, moved the ball just enough and swung the game Australia’s way.

Having written the other day that England were good at toughing things out it is, perhaps, inevitable that I would be proven wrong, although only Matt Prior should be really disappointed with his dismissal, a wafty drive at a good ball. In the event, a shell shocked England did pretty well to reach 260, a below par but not catastrophic score, thanks to some more fine batting from Ian Bell.

England will be disappointed that none of the batsmen who got starts went on to make big scores, an all too familiar failing of late. Bell can be exonerated since he was trying, selflessly, to score runs with the tail, but the others should be looking to put things right in the second innings. As for Australia, Siddle bowled beautifully, but Hilfenhaus was no more than steady and Johnson was, once again, an expensive mess. He seems undroppable, but surely he must be looking over his shoulder at Doug Bollinger. Xavier Doherty had a tidy debut, picking up two late wickets, but did little to suggest that he will have much of a bearing on the series.

England need a big day tomorrow. They’re capable of it, but will Australia let them?