Ashes Buzz

Ashes Buzz http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/ Tim de Lisle's Cricinfo blog on the 2006-07 Ashes series en Copyright 2009 Thu, 11 Jan 2007 20:12:30 +0000 http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/ http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss Raking over these Ashes

Every team needs a Hussey © Getty Images

BEST PLAYER Ricky Ponting. The world’s best batsman and a much improved captain. BEST NON-PLAYER Troy Cooley. The only man to finish on the winning side in both the last two Ashes series. Australia's seamers did this time what England's did last time, working as a team and offering no respite, even with the old ball. WORST BALL The first, bowled by Steve Harmison. It went straight to second slip – and into Ashes mythology. BEST INNINGS Ponting’s 196 at Brisbane, which grabbed the series by the scruff of the neck. BEST TEAM PLAYER Mike Hussey. Australia’s least spectacular batsman, but the one most likely to steer them out of trouble. He forged partnerships that shaped the business end of the series. He added 209 with Ponting at Brisbane, to snuff out England’s first hint of a decent bowling performance; he added 192, also with Ponting, at Adelaide, to see off the follow-on; and he made 74 not out to hold Australia together at Perth when England finally did bowl well. Also chased like a lunatic in the deep, caught Strauss brilliantly at Brisbane, and served his time at boot hill. Every team should have a Hussey. England’s best bet could be Owais Shah. BEST MATCH The third Test at Perth. Brisbane was one-way traffic; Adelaide was a bore until the last day, when that savage twist arrived; Melbourne went flat after the excellent Hayden-Symonds partnership; Sydney promised much but petered out when England’s top order flopped. Perth became one-sided too, but only late on. The first day, when Harmison was himself and Monty made his entrance, was riveting. Then Australia fought back: after the bloated scores of the first two Tests, it was great to see the bowlers in charge. Then, out of nowhere, came hurricane Gilchrist. Finally England’s young players batted with just enough steel to salvage some honour. BEST FIELDER Andrew Symonds, prowling the covers in the last three Tests. His strength, reach and pace put him in the select club of fielders who can turn a dot ball into an event. BEST HITTER Adam Gilchrist. Had a bizarre time, making either 0, 1, 60 or Australia’s fastest-ever hundred, but to finish the series with a strike rate of more than a run a ball was staggering. Managed to make a difference and put his feet up at the same time: in the whole series, he faced only 225 balls.

Faultless behind the stumps © Getty Images

BEST CATCHER Chris Read. With 11 catches and one stumping out of only 20 wickets to fall while he was out there, he was pure silk behind the stumps. Pure jelly in front of them, but then so was the man he replaced, Geraint Jones. BEST SELECTION Stuart Clark, the quiet man who ended up not just as the most economical bowler on either side, but the most incisive (26 wickets at 17). When the series began, some good judges were advocating dropping him for Mitchell Johnson, and plenty of fans were clamouring for the raw pace of Shaun Tait. Either could have done well – but not, realistically, as well as Clark. WORST SELECTION England at Brisbane, making three unforced changes (G Jones for Read, Giles for Panesar, Anderson for Mahmood) which all had to be rescinded later. None of the beneficiaries had significant form, and two of them were less than match-fit. All the selectors needed to do was bring in Flintoff for Mahmood, plus a battle-hardened top-order batsman for Trescothick. The extra changes smacked of panic. WORST STRATEGY England’s insistence on playing five bowlers throughout, even when it had become clear that this left them with only five batsmen. MOST UNLIKELY BLOCKER Kevin Pietersen. Bit by bit, Australia’s pinpoint accuracy reduced England’s buccaneer to a barnacle. In the first Test he faced 199 balls and made 108 runs; in the last, it was 199 balls again, but only 70 runs. He batted longer than anyone on either side in the series, yet didn’t score the most runs. WORST CASE OF SHELLSHOCK Paul Collingwood. His double hundred at Adelaide was a career peak, but afterwards the only way was down, starting in the second innings, when he made 22, hopelessly slowly, as his team mates turned to lemmings at the other end. Didn’t pass 30 again.

Warne's 4 for 49 at Adelaide: 'a chilling piece of psychological cricket' © Getty Images

BEST BOWLING The Australians bowled so well as a pack that they took 92 wickets with only two five-fors. Their best performance was probably Warne’s 4 for 49 in the second innings at Adelaide, a chilling piece of psychological cricket; he asphyxiated his opponents with a piece of cord woven from their own fears. Best by an Englishman: Hoggard’s 7 for 109 at Adelaide, a masterly display of patience, variation and sheer bloodymindedness. WORST BOWLING Harmison at Brisbane (one for 177): not so much a spearhead, more a boomerang. Worst by a slow bowler: Warne in the first innings at Adelaide (one for 167), because he stopped being Shane Warne and turned into Ashey Giles on a bad day, aiming outside leg stump. BEST COMMENTATOR Nasser Hussain. Thinks like a captain, talks like a journalist. BEST OBSERVATION On the final day of the series, I bumped into Alastair McLellan, a business journalist who once edited an interesting book called Nothing Sacred: The New Cricket Culture. He pointed out that Peter English, Cricinfo’s Australian editor, had done a piece on the Adelaide debacle entitled “Insipid England ruin series”. Written in haste, proved right at leisure. WORST SLEDGE Most ineffectual: Collingwood laying into Warne at Sydney and keeping him pumped after his standing ovation had faded. Most graceless: Warne to Collingwood at the same time. It’s your final appearance of a glittering career – why spend it descending to the level of a playground bully? BEST RIPOSTE Ian Bell, when Warne labelled him the Shermanator. He said: “I’ve been called worse.” His bat did the rest of the talking: after floundering against Warne in 2005, he made 121 off him this time for only twice out, using his feet to come out of his shell. BEST PERFORMANCE BY AN ENGLISHMAN Mark Ramprakash, scoring a perfect 40 with his salsa in the final of Strictly Come Dancing. SILLIEST FOOL Me, for assuming Adelaide would be a draw when I went to bed that night. I forgot the lesson that is rammed home early on in The Silence of the Lambs, when Jodie Foster is doing her FBI training…

Scott Glenn: How do you spell assume? Foster: Er, A-S-S-U-M-E, why? Glenn: Because when you assume something, you make an ASS out of U and ME.

MOST ACCURATE PREDICTION Glenn sodding McGrath. He finally got one right. BEST BLOG COMMENTER Kathy from New Zealand – thoughtful, soulful and able to rise above the sometimes toxic banter of more interested parties. Runner-up: the delightful gentleman who remembered seeing Len Hutton. Many thanks to everyone who contributed, and the silent majority who didn’t; to Sambit Bal for bringing the blog over from my site, and to everyone at Cricinfo for their help, especially Will Luke.]]> http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/archives/2007/01/raking_over_the.php http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/archives/2007/01/raking_over_the.php Reflection Thu, 11 Jan 2007 20:12:30 +0000 England's troubles turn to farce

'Australia have made the second best team in the world look like no-hopers' © Getty Images

History repeats itself, Marx said – the first time as tragedy, the second as farce. And he was amply borne out this morning, as the lower half of England’s batting did their best to re-stage the nightmare they suffered in the first innings. The bigger picture was just as bad. The series began with England's bowlers conjuring up the first hour from hell, and here they were plumbing similar depths with the bat. First the last batsman standing, Kevin Pietersen, lunged forward without thinking and nicked a ball from Glenn McGrath that was passing harmlessly outside his off stump. Pietersen is a huge talent, but he has shrunk before our eyes in the past couple of weeks. He has been able to stick around but his strike rate, usually so high, has plummeted. It’s almost as if two months in Australia have turned him into a fair-dinkum Englishman. Then Monty Panesar and Chris Read blocked for 15 minutes. Finally they decided to set off for a run – or rather Read did, while Monty was slow out of the blocks. Andrew Symonds took out the middle stump with a ridiculously good throw. England were now, in effect, 12 for seven. You had to laugh. When some runs did come, they were off the edge. Read soon flapped at a lifter, just like in the first innings. He’s an outstanding wicketkeeper and although he has played a few hapless strokes, it’s not his fault that he has been asked to bat at number seven in Australia, half-way through a series in which it had already become clear that an extra batsman was sorely needed. Saj Mahmood, in surely his final appearance at number eight, was bowled off an inside edge. Steve Harmison mustered a little defiance, clouting McGrath back over his head. But it said an awful lot that England had reached the point where eight runs counted as defiance. The bottom five managed 29 runs in the innings, 33 in the match. There is a terrible collective fragility about England now. They can have two decent days, and one bad one, and the bad one knocks the stuffing out of them, undoing all the good of the previous two. It’s as if each setback has taken them straight back to that awful morning in Adelaide. This game was the fourth in a row in which England have achieved some kind of parity, only to toss it – or have it wrenched – away. And if you think the Test team are in a bad way, bear in mind that over the past four years, the one-day team have been a whole lot worse. But let’s not dwell on the losers of this grimly one-sided series. Australia have been awesome. The 5-0 scoreline that is half an hour or so away now is a great achievement, the crowning glory of a famous team, and another memorable chapter in the book of myths and legends that is Ashes history. The Aussies have got into a few scrapes, as Ricky Ponting has said, but the way they have got themselves out of them has been phenomenal. Seven batsmen have made hundreds, and most of them have been either big ones or viciously fast ones. The fielding has crackled with predatory intent. The seam bowling, led from the back by Stuart Clark, has been a model of sustained professionalism. Two all-time greats have been given big emotional send-offs without the razzmatazz detracting at all from the job in hand. They have made the second best team in the world look like no-hopers. England need to learn as much from the experience as the Australians did from 2005. Whether they will have the nous, the will, the nerve and the focus, remains to be seen. ]]> http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/archives/2007/01/englands_troubl.php http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/archives/2007/01/englands_troubl.php Action: fifth Test Fri, 05 Jan 2007 00:48:58 +0000 Where is Australia's fortress?

Warne: he and McGrath haven't lost a home Test together for 10 years © Getty Images

At the start of this series, there was much talk about Brisbane being Australia’s fortress. In mid-series, something similar was said about Perth. Both were right, but they didn’t tell the whole story. Australia’s fortress is … Australia. Since the turn of the millennium, Australia’s record in home Tests looks like this: won 34, lost 2, drawn 7. So the 5-0 whitewash that only a miracle can now avert is merely a little better than par for the course. The only reason they haven’t done it more often is that most visiting teams play three Tests. Pakistan have lost their last six Tests in Australia; West Indies have lost their last eight. Only India and England have won one. Australia’s average score at home, as a team, is 488; their opponents’ is 275. England’s average in this series is 274. Par for the course. Where England have flopped worse than other teams is with their bowling: Australia have romped to 520 per completed innings, helping themselves to an extra 32. When the Aussies go abroad, they are still way ahead of the rest, but not by quite such a massive margin. The score moves to 26-8, and the team averages to 395 and 281, so other teams have a chance – though the Aussie bowlers are just as clinical. It’s like football: playing at home makes a bigger difference than it should. This season, in the English Premiership, only three teams out of 20 have picked up more than half the points in away games. It doesn’t excuse England’s performance – they’re second in the world, and should have pushed Australia harder – but it does put it in context. And it means that visiting teams need to think much harder about how to steal victories on Australian turf. Today, it was largely Shane Warne who turned parity into dominance. Like Justin Langer yesterday, he found the farewell cheers acting as a shot of caffeine and went off at a ridiculous lick. Warne’s personal home Test record is quite something: won 48, lost 7. Glenn McGrath’s is even better: won 52, lost 5. Together, they haven’t tasted defeat in a home Test since February 3 1997, when West Indies, who had just lost a series in Australia for the the first time in ages, picked up a consolation victory in Perth. McGrath has lost one home Test since then – Melbourne, 1998-99, against England, when Warne was injured and Dean Headley had his day in the sun. Australia have lost two home Tests since, one to England and one to India, and each time, both Warne and McGrath were missing. Australia have been a great team, no question; but their twin peaks have been the two bowlers who bow out this week.]]> http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/archives/2007/01/where_is_austra.php http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/archives/2007/01/where_is_austra.php Action: fifth Test Thu, 04 Jan 2007 11:42:52 +0000 Thx Fred

Andrew Flintoff managed to find a hint of his old self at the start of the new year © Getty Images

The pattern of a long series is seldom uniform – men who make double hundreds at the start often find ducks waiting for them at the end. But long series are not as long as they used to be, so fragments of pattern are apt to survive. England’s openers stuttered yet again; they may be just too alike. Yet another Aussie retired. Hunter S Thomspon may have got it wrong: when the going gets soft, the tough get going. Ian Bell compiled another of his fighting fifties, rather than one of the hundreds he reels off when he is in his rightful place at number six. Kevin Pietersen again mixed genius with rushes of blood. England made another baffling selection, opting to field all three of their seaming liabilities (Harmison, Anderson, Mahmood) rather than a second spinner (Dalrymple) who might have provided the missing cement at number seven. For the second Test running, they missed Jon Lewis, who could have been their best bowler on the Melbourne Christmas pudding, and the most natural understudy for Matthew Hoggard here. They had as good a day as their long-singing fans could have asked for, yet they stand only a couple of nicks away from another insipid total. The difference is likely to depend, as so much has in this series, on Andrew Flintoff. “New year, new you,” the newspapers are all saying, but Flintoff prospered by finding his old self today, for the first time in nine months. Lately he had regressed to his callow younger self, hanging out half a bat at stock deliveries. Today, even though he arrived in a mini-crisis, he was instantly decisive. He looked busy, ran freely and hit out selectively, using more of the face (and therefore saving a little of it). Off Stuart Clark and Brett Lee, he made 26 at a run a ball. Finally someone has worked out that just because Clark is a commercial lawyer is no reason to be silenced by him. This was the Flintoff of Edgbaston 2005, and the scorecard half-resembles that one. Ricky Ponting, sensing trouble, lurched on to the defensive. It’s often a good sign when Flintoff is not out overnight. Last time it happened was in Perth, when he at least managed a semi-defiant fifty, and the time before was Mumbai in March, when he and Collingwood were at the crease as England finished the first day on 272 for three. Flintoff made 50 twice, sang Ring Of Fire, and led the way to his only overseas victory as captain. Today, he made sure that a mass leaving party was also an even contest. It was a great idea for the adverts on the grass, usually so charmless, to say a big thank you to Warne, McGrath and Langer. But let’s also, in a smaller way, salute a man who managed to be carefree when the cares of the world were on his shoulders. Thx Fred. ]]> http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/archives/2007/01/thx_fred.php http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/archives/2007/01/thx_fred.php Action: fifth Test Tue, 02 Jan 2007 14:37:59 +0000 Some New Year resolutions

Must avoid press conferences © Getty Images

AUSTRALIA Must remember to give opponents a chance. Declining to bring any bowlers out of retirement should do the trick. Must stop John Buchanan giving press conferences. It’s one area where he and Duncan Fletcher are as bad as each other – one defensive, the other passive-aggressive. Must see if they can collapse even more dramatically than at Melbourne and still win. Maybe let things go to 84 for 9 this time. ENGLAND Must play an extra batsman. Kevin Pietersen hasn’t been a place too low at number five – the four men after him have been a place too high. Picking Jamie Dalrymple at seven will help, but Andrew Flintoff, in his present lack of form, will still be too high at six. There’s no point playing five bowlers if the captain doesn’t have faith in them. Must reach 100 with just one wicket down, something they have managed only in the second innings at Perth. Must be aggressive with the bat and patient with the ball. Just bowl at the top of off stump: as Matthew Hayden helpfully pointed out, that’s all a Test-match bowling plan needs to say. Must remember how to play overseas. Since the successful tour of South Africa two years ago, their home record reads won 8 (7 if you disregard the Pakistan forfeit), lost 2, while their away record is won 1, lost 7. Must not publish any more autobiographies until they have the Ashes back. SHANE WARNE Must announce his retirement from international hair-replacement ads with immediate effect. Must agree not to take any more tail-end wickets in this match – they’re beneath him, aren’t they? ANDREW FLINTOFF Must bat as if he’s no longer captain. Must keep smiling, even in defeat – Brett Lee showed the way last year. Must give Monty Panesar an early bowl and a reasonable field.

Counties: must not offer a contract to Shaun Tait, Mitchell Johnson, Ben Hilfenhaus or anyone called Cullen until at least 2010 © Getty Images

GLENN McGRATH Must allow himself to have a tear in his eye, so that he can’t see where he is landing the ball. Must do something about his batting average. In an age of multi-dimensional cricketers, 7.36 is rubbish. Should aim to finish in double figures, which will mean scoring 237 for once out. If Jason Gillespie can do it … STEVE HARMISON Must stand up and think of Durham, grab the new ball and repay all the faith that has been placed in him. DUNCAN FLETCHER Mustn’t play the blame game, unless he is prepared to take some of it himself. Must take the players to a bar afterwards and have a drink with the travelling fans, whose support has been beyond barmy and well into the realms of certifiable. THE COUNTIES Must not offer a contract to Shaun Tait, Mitchell Johnson, Ben Hilfenhaus or anyone called Cullen until at least 2010. Exceptions may be made if the state the player represents offers a contract to a young Englishman in return. JUSTIN LANGER Must come clean about whether he is retiring. His dad has hinted as much, but that may be just a New Year tradition – an old Langer sign. Happy New Year. ]]> http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/archives/2006/12/some_new_year_r.php http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/archives/2006/12/some_new_year_r.php Planning Sun, 31 Dec 2006 16:14:00 +0000 Were England spineless?

Beaten, yes - but not lily-livered © Getty Images

There’s an adjective we’ll be seeing a lot of in the next day or two: spineless. It’s the one the media traditionally bring out for England collapses. But is it justified? Yes and no. The word has two distinct senses, and the one that strikes us first is synonymous with gutless. Were England lacking courage today as they slumped towards 4-0? I don’t think so. The batsmen weren’t backing away to square leg, or trying to get out. Most of them got stuck in: five of the top seven faced 30 balls or more, just as all of the top six had in the first innings. Most of their opponents didn’t do that. To be a Test cricketer for any country takes courage: not many of us would fancy facing 90mph bouncers. It also takes commitment. You have to put in years of practice, and do more hanging around than in any line of work outside film-making and war. So accusations of spinelessness, like accusations of racism, should be made very sparingly. Most of these England players have shown grit at other times – the Ashes 2005, Mumbai 2006, Old Trafford 2006. Lily-livered they are not. The team, however, has been spineless in the other sense of lacking a spine. Test teams need their vertebrae – a solid opening pair, at least one other top batsman, a counter-attacking six and seven, a strong captain, a settled wicketkeeper, and an exacting new-ball pair. Others may join this core according to their gifts and personality – Australia’s backbone obviously incorporates a rather portly legspinner – but these six components are just about essential in most conditions. And one way or another, England have mislaid them. As openers, Cook and Strauss have been less than the sum of their parts. They keep getting through the first 10 overs, then succumbing, through a mixture of a technical flaws (Cook pushes across the line of standard slanting deliveries), a run of rough umpiring decisions (and yes, Damien Martyn certainly suffered something similar in 2005), plus both men’s inability to find a higher gear. If it was bad luck that England lost Vaughan and Trescothick, it was bad judgment that they didn’t ship in some experience to replace them. The cameo Justin Langer played in Melbourne, kick-starting Australia’s reply, would have been inconceivable from England’s openers. At least they have the other top batsman, even if he seems at odds with the present regime. It was uncompromising individualism that took Kevin Pietersen to England, so they can hardly be surprised if he shows a bit too much of it now. And the management have done plenty of things that might leave a good player feeling exasperated. Several of the components come down to Andrew Flintoff’s role. He hasn’t been a strong captain: he relies too much on gut instinct, as he calls it, and not enough on his considerable brain. Not only has he lost his scriptwriter, he doesn’t seem to be directing the movie. He has barely been up to counter-attacking at six, and Geraint Jones had hardly anything to offer at seven. Bad management in both cases: Flintoff’s batting often takes a lot of de-rusting, and Jones should never have been recalled without finding his form first. Once Steve Harmison went doolally, Flintoff became Matthew Hoggard’s new-ball partner, which was manful of him, but put further strain on his ankle. The case for resting him grows. So England’s spine is creaking badly. But today’s sad procession was more about good bowling than bad batting. The ball Stuart Clark bowled to Pietersen, a killer nip-backer, was so well timed, it was like a job application for leader of the pack. England’s failing, as on the last day at Adelaide, was meekness. They hit only 17 fours in the match, in 140 overs. That was partly down to the slow pitch and outfield, and partly to the bowlers’ formidable accuracy, which offered no respite. But the batsmen did little to bother them. Matthew Hayden advanced out of his crease; several England players retreated into theirs. They helped dig their own graves. But we do need to bear in mind how Australia’s middle order did in this game. I’ll have to Ask Steven if they have ever won a game before with only 18 runs from numbers three, four and five. This was a match won not just by some fiercely disciplined bowling, but by one outstanding partnership, outside of which Australia made 140 for nine. Shane Warne was the man of the moment, but naming him man of the match, when he took only two top-order wickets, was an insult to two musclebound Queenslanders. ]]> http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/archives/2006/12/were_england_sp.php http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/archives/2006/12/were_england_sp.php Action: fourth Test Thu, 28 Dec 2006 19:55:09 +0000 Not the same old story

That rarefied beast, the Aussie allrounder © Getty Images

There’s a headline on the BBC site today saying “Same old story”. It’s true that England are once again in a losing position, two sessions after being in a promising one. But as soon as you look at how it happened, there’s nothing same old about it. The way the game turned was new: a different and rather unlikely story. Twelve wickets fell yesterday, followed by another three this morning. And it could easily have been more: Australia dropped a few catches, probably because of the vile weather, and England had those excellent lbw shouts against Matthew Hayden which Rudi Koertzen, perhaps subliminally influenced by the huge crowd, couldn’t quite bring himself to give. So in the first four sessions, the bowlers created at least 20 chances, and the two teams together scraped 270 for 15. Since then, it has been 261 for two. What changed? Some of the bowlers got tired – Andrew Flintoff had given his all. The ball got older, and there was no Shane Warne to weave a little hair-replacement magic on it. The fielding was ordinary: somehow, Steve Harmison found himself in the covers early on, where he played the part of a record-company PR man – handing out free singles. Hayden was well set, and unlike Andrew Strauss, he was able to turn his 50 into something immense. Andrew Symonds blossomed under Hayden’s wing: the Queensland fishing-mates connection visibly helped, and made you rue the fact that England have had no two batsmen from the same county playing in the series. Symonds went from scratchy to domineering in double-quick time, as if he was playing for one of his many counties. England have suffered most forms of violence at Australian hands in the past decade and a half, but here was a new one: being hammered by an Aussie allrounder, a species that had been thought to be mythical, like the Aussie metrosexual. The different story turned out to be a lurid tale of horror: Attack of the Bright Pink Bat Handles. The pitch had something to do with it too. Drop-in pitches aren’t bad exactly, but they are eccentric. Five years ago in Christchurch, New Zealand, England benefited from this. The pitch started as a minefield and a hundred by Nasser Hussain, a bad-pitch master, was the only score above 45 in either side’s first innings. Going in again with a lead of 80, England slumped to 106 for five, before Graham Thorpe and Flintoff put on 281. Flintoff, just like Symonds, made his first Test hundred. England declared when the lead reached 550 – and very nearly lost the match, as Nathan Astle produced one of the great do-or-die performances, walloping 222 off 168 balls. This pitch hasn’t flattened out as much as that one did, and the MCG boundaries are not as short, and there was nobody in that scenario like Warne or his scriptwriter. But funny things can happen on drop-in pitches. Poor old England are going to need some tomorrow. ]]> http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/archives/2006/12/not_the_same_ol.php http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/archives/2006/12/not_the_same_ol.php Action: fourth Test Wed, 27 Dec 2006 17:47:14 +0000 Goodbye Mr Clinical

19 times his bunny:Mike Atherton © Getty Images

You wait ages for a bogeyman’s retirement, then two come along at once. Glenn McGrath is to join Shane Warne in bowing out after these next two Tests. The most prolific fast bowler of all will walk off arm in arm with the most prolific spinner. McGrath may even find that one of his whitewash predictions has finally come true. That would be a hell of a last hurrah, or as he presumably has it, hurrath. The limelight at the MCG and the SCG will be unprecedentedly bright, turned up by the sentimentality we sports fans are prone to. Sharing it will suit McGrath more than Warne. Warne is a showman, a conjuror and an innovator, whereas McGrath is none of these. He is more of a surgeon - except that surgeons are supposed to make you better. At his peak, he didn’t so much bowl teams out as disembowel them. He had a particular taste for English and West Indian flesh. The five men he dismissed ten times or more in Tests were Mike Atherton (a ridiculous 19), Brian Lara (a formidable 15), Jimmy Adams, Sherwin Campbell and Alec Stewart. He defeated them not by being clever, although he was, but by being patient, skilful, confident, and exerting immense control. Warne has expanded the possibilities of bowling; McGrath preferred to narrow them down. His deities were the eternal verities, line, length, lift, and an upright seam. He showed that you don’t need very much movement to catch the edge. He sometimes moved the ball extravagantly, but those deliveries didn’t tend to be the lethal ones. The bulk of his wickets were taken by standard deliveries, aimed at the top of off stump, and doing just enough. He was both a great attacking bowler and a great run-saver, and the reason was that his stock ball was also his danger ball. Along with Richard Hadlee, he was the most clinical of all the top bowlers. He made a very good Australian team almost unbeatable. Since the start of the 1997 Ashes, they have played 94 Tests with McGrath there, winning 66 and losing only 12. Without him, they have played 25 Tests, winning 15 and losing eight, so when he has been absent injured or tending his sick wife, the win ratio slips from 70 per cent to 60, but more strikingly, the loss ratio leaps from 13 per cent to 32. And the number of draws halves, because even when things were going against his team, McGrath would slow their opponents down. He is going at the right time from his point of view. There have been intimations of mortality in this series. His six-for at Brisbane was gained mainly on reputation, as England wilted, and since then he has been just a supporting player, taking tidy two-fors. Kevin Pietersen has shown that you can dance down the wicket to him because you know where the ball will land, and McGrath has not taken that indignity well. From the team’s point of view, the timing is not so hot. Australia famously suffered when Dennis Lillee, Rod Marsh and Greg Chappell all departed together. This is at least as great a loss, because rather than being spread through the team, it’s half the attack going at once, and more than half the threat. Ricky Ponting’s armoury won’t be empty, but it will be normal. Who will lead the pack now? With Brett Lee going through another of his blunt patches, Stuart Clark is the only bowler who can be sure of a place in Australia’s next Test series, fitness permitting. The new chairman of selectors, Andrew Hilditch, has taken a stern line over Stuart MacGill’s behaviour issues (you wonder what he makes of Warne’s dissent). The next Aussie Test attack could be Clark, Mitchell Johnson, Shaun Tait and Dan Cullen, with Andrew Symonds or Shane Watson in support. Promising, intriguing, but not daunting. Indian fans, whose team go to Australia next Christmas, can raise their hopes a notch. ]]> http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/archives/2006/12/goodbye_mr_clin.php http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/archives/2006/12/goodbye_mr_clin.php Real life Sun, 24 Dec 2006 15:44:32 +0000 Timing, Shane

Cricket's foremost entertainer © Stamp Publicity (Worthing)

We were expecting two retirements today, and we got them – but only one was expected. The role earmarked for Glenn McGrath was taken by Steve Harmison, retiring from one-day internationals. More of that in a moment. The big story, even though it was widely leaked, is still the retirement from Tests of Shane Warne. For cricket, it means the end of one of the very greatest careers. Warne has been not just the most prolific bowler of all, but the foremost entertainer of the modern age. He took the neglected, marginal, difficult art of leg-spin, placed it centre stage, and made it look easy. His prodigious spin was just one of several facets of his game that have been phenomenal: his control, his stamina, his sense of drama, his bowling intelligence. He has made the game more interesting. You could argue forever about whether he is the greatest bowler of all. He may not even be the greatest of his era – you can make a case for Murali, if you take the view, as most umpires and players do, that his action is legitimate. You can make a case for McGrath, who, unlike Warne, was able to maintain his best form wherever he went, including India. Of the bowlers I’ve seen from further back, Malcolm Marshall was probably just ahead of all the current crop in his sensational ability to combine menace with guile, and Imran Khan was a complete cricketer, a great fast bowler who was also a fine batsman and captain. But Warne has definitely, in my book, been the greatest of all Ashes bowlers. Like Ian Botham, he is a personality player who felt personally about the romance and history of the Ashes. And thus became a major part of that history. For Warne himself, it means a new life, probably involving more time with the kids and a microphone in his hand. He has made some bad calls in his private life, but this one, the biggest decision a cricketer has to face, he seems to have got spot-on. His powers had finally begun to fade, but the fact that he has still managed three four-fors in yet another Ashes victory suggests he may have one or two last hurrahs up his sleeve – if, unlike Bradman in 1948, he can keep a tear out of his eye. The 700th wicket will surely come fast, hastened by the cheers of a packed MCG. With two Tests to go, he could even gobble up the 14 he needs for 200 in the Ashes. For England, it’s a last chance to continue the slightly better work of their past few meetings with Warne. They should be looking to shut out the emotion of the moment, as well as the towering reputation and the inevitable sledges, and make him feel every one of his 37 years. The way Ian Bell (at last) played him on Sunday, with spring heels and an upright bat, will do nicely. Harmison’s decision is more questionable. Semi-retirement is a good option and one that more players should consider: it has clearly helped Warne. Harmison hasn’t been working as a one-day bowler, and he clearly struggles as much with long absences from home as he does with the one-day wide rule. But he is custom-built for the Caribbean, as he showed in 2004. If he was going to quit before the World Cup, he would have been better off doing it last summer. But I guess he didn’t know he was going to want to. These decisions are not easy. There is now yet another opportunity for England’s younger brigade. Chris Tremlett is a good pick, a tall, awkward, hit-the-splice bowler who just might be coming through now after shining at the Academy in Perth. But he should be there alongside Stuart Broad, not instead of him. How can the same selectors be wise enough to pick Monty Panesar and dumb enough to leave out Broad? ]]> http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/archives/2006/12/timing_shane.php http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/archives/2006/12/timing_shane.php Real life Thu, 21 Dec 2006 16:43:55 +0000 The cry goes up again: pick Monty!

Will Monty Panesar make the cut for the one-day series? © Getty Images

Tomorrow England announce a squad for the one-day series. Monty Panesar is widely expected not to be in it. He hasn’t played a one-day international yet, and he would be a bit of a gamble as he has played hardly any one-day cricket for his county. But the same was true of Simon Jones when he became a first-choice one-day player for England in 2005. And Monty, like Jones, is something special. He is a wicket-taker, and an inspiration. Matthew Hoggard, writing in today’s Times, says England need more of Monty’s attitude. A contributor to this blog, Ian, has described Monty as a talisman, which is spot-on. He has some of same the qualities – spark, enthusiasm, appetite and enjoyment – that Andrew Flintoff has, when not carrying the weight of the world on his shoulders. England’s one-day team is in a mess. They have two big problems: getting bowled out, and not taking wickets. Jamie Dalrymple has come in this year and done well as a bits-and-pieces player, showing a strong temperament and getting some revs on the ball. But as yet he isn’t a strike bowler: in 14 games his best is two for five, and his strike rate, 52 balls for each wicket, is as modest as Ashley Giles’s. Michael Yardy, picked alongside him in the Champions Trophy, is another tidy bits-and-pieces player, a natural understudy to Dalrymple rather than a foil.]]> http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/archives/2006/12/the_cry_goes_up.php http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/archives/2006/12/the_cry_goes_up.php Selection Wed, 20 Dec 2006 11:30:37 +0000 A touch too old but much too good

Australia have won the Ashes, at speed, in style, and quite deservedly. They have played much the better cricket. They haven’t always been at their best, but they have had something England have lacked: an intensity, born of hunger. One team has been on a cricket tour; the other has been on a mission. In 2005, much was made of the idea that Michael Vaughan’s young team were not scarred by Ashes defeat. But defeat doesn’t have to be a scar. For Ricky Ponting, it has been a spur. He has been the man of the series, the outstanding performer on either side. His batting has been world-beating: from day one, there has been no sign of the shackles England put him in last time. His captaincy remains naïve on the tactical front – some of his field setting today was strangely defensive, as if he had 50 runs to play with rather than 250 – but he had a burning desire for vengeance which he managed to communicate to his team. On the final morning at Adelaide, when the game seemed to be drifting to the dullest of draws, Ponting gathered his team round and asked if any of them thought they couldn’t win the match. They responded, and England froze. That first session proved the defining moment of the series. There is all the difference in the world between 1-0 after two Tests and 2-0. The Dad’s Army jibes have not been entirely misplaced. These Australians are a great team in their twilight years, and their big runs have been made by the younger batsmen. The under-35s – Ponting, Mike Hussey and Michael Clarke – have amassed 1312 at an average of 119. Even if you include Andrew Symonds, that average still stays over 100. The over-35s, even after Adam Gilchrist’s fabulous firework display, have made only half as many runs (645 at 37). And it was striking how much Symonds’ fielding lifted the team at Perth. The leading wicket-taker in the series is also one of Australia’s younger players – Stuart Clark. But here the old stagers have had more influence. Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne don’t take as many wickets as they used to, but they don’t waste them. The one time McGrath has managed more than two wickets was in England’s first innings of the series, the one that set the tone. Since then he has been mortal, but able to make strategic interventions, such as snaring Alastair Cook last night. Only Kevin Pietersen has been able to treat him with disrespect. The Aussie edifice is a magnificent building in need of some refurbishment. Warne has aged too. In 2005, his wickets were evenly split between first innings and second. This time he has been negligible in the first innings, taking two for 233, but still a force in the second, with three four-fors. The trademarks are all still there, some of the time – the lavish spin, the drift, the variations, the histrionics, the ability to seize the moment. But he is slowly turning into Stuart MacGill. For England to beat Australia, all the planets had to be in alignment: settled side, strong captain, four fit fast bowlers, home advantage, openers making runs, Flintoff on fire. This time they didn’t have any of those. Their year of four captains has ended with the wrong one in charge, although he has done well at times, and for a happy hour today he found his feet, his smile and his old self. But then he hadn't had to bowl, or even think, for all of yesterday.

England’s batting has been brittle, and the top order green, but overall it has done quite well. The team average of 316 is virtually identical to last time (318). What they haven’t been able to do is score fast, except off Brett Lee. Not even Pietersen and Flintoff have strike rates above 60. That has been partly the gravity of the situation, and partly the old-school parsimony of Clark, a one-man reproach to the profligate third seamers of 2005. Pietersen’s performance today was an odd one. He played himself back in, which was essential; he let Flintoff dominate, which was wise; but then he had nothing more to offer. He should have taken Warne and allowed Geraint Jones face the seamers. And helping himself to a single off the first ball when batting with the tail was tantamount to waving the white flag. In his Sunday newspaper column, Pietersen appeared to have given up; his handling of the tail confirmed it. The fans belting out Jerusalem deserved better. But it isn’t the batting wot lost it: it’s the management. Weakened by injuries, England further handicapped themselves with their selection. Duncan Fletcher, who normally avoids unforced changes, made three for the first Test at Brisbane. Ashley Giles, Jimmy Anderson and Geraint Jones were all rushed back into the team as if they were superstars. Two of them were short of match fitness, and one was still out of form. As Flintoff himself was rusty, and Steve Harmison was out of sorts too, the attack was a rabble, crying out for Monty Panesar. Australia’s team average, virtually level with England’s in 2005 (315), has rocketed to 578, which is what it was in the halcyon year of 1989. Fletcher’s misjudgments made it easier for them. Good players can have a bad series; so can good coaches. The echo of 1989 is significant. England went into that series as holders of the Ashes. Australia kept faith with the captain who had steered them to defeat in the previous series, Allan Border. He was a great batsman and limited captain, implacably set on vengeance, whereas England were in disarray, with a coach and chairman of selectors not seeing eye to eye and the captaincy changing hands for the fourth time in a year. It’s astonishing that Fletcher, the most methodical of England coaches, should have fallen into some of the same traps. Before the series began, it looked as if Ponting’s Australia were too old but still too good for England in this fragile state. They have proved it. They have been a touch too old, but much too good. That’s the thing about Dad’s Army: they finished on the winning side. ]]> http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/archives/2006/12/a_touch_too_old.php http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/archives/2006/12/a_touch_too_old.php Analysis Mon, 18 Dec 2006 11:23:30 +0000 Crushed by the stuff of folklore

At Brisbane, they were remorseless. At Adelaide, they were first dogged, then ruthless. Today, the Australians were first determined, then majestic. England’s management have made many blunders in this series, but today wasn’t about the losing side. It was about the winners. This is the way Test matches should be won. When Adam Gilchrist came in, at 365 for five, the game was virtually up. England were hardly going to make 400 to win the Test, or bat two days to draw it, so they were already praying for a monsoon in the midst of a drought. Gilchrist’s innings was the icing on the cake. But what icing. Andrew Flintoff nearly got him early on, squirting to gully, and what followed underlined just how much Flintoff had achieved in keeping the greatest number seven in history quiet through a whole series. Once Flintoff took himself off, Gilchrist played Twenty20: two runs per ball, a couple of fours per over off the quicks, and a string of sixes that were so massive, they should really have been eights. It was magical stuff. This series hasn’t delivered the knife-edge excitement of 2005, but here was something to go into Ashes folklore. The game had been shaped by four other batsmen: Matt Hayden, raging against the dying of the light: Ricky Ponting and Michael Hussey, maintaining their double run-machine act; and Michael Clarke, easing to another unnoticed hundred. England didn’t hold their half-chances, and didn’t bowl enough yorkers at Gilchrist. The heat of Perth may have got to them, but it could equally have been the heat of the Ashes kitchen, which has been too much for them at most of the critical moments in the past month. Australia had learnt from their mistake at Perth last year, when the scores in the first three innings were very similar, but their 500 came at a stodgy rate. South Africa were left needing to bat four sessions, rather than six and a bit. One slow, battling hundred – from Jacques Rudolph – was enough to save them. England need three, and the man best equipped to provide one, Andrew Strauss, has once again been rudely Koertzened. England are back where they were after three days in Brisbane, playing only for pride. And they don’t have enough batsmen: the decision to stick with five bowlers has backfired, with Flintoff seeming unsure how to use Saj Mahmood. Collectively, they need to push the game into the fifth day. Individually, most of them have points to prove. Alastair Cook has to get past 50, Ian Bell past 60, and Paul Collingwood has to show he can cope with steep bounce. Flintoff himself needs to find his feet and his form, after losing his way as a batsman and now finishing wicketless for the first time in 42 Tests, since Edgbaston 2003. Geraint Jones, poised somewhere between the last-chance saloon and the stocks, needs runs more than anyone. Only Kevin Pietersen has nothing to prove, and the prospect of another duel with Shane Warne always gets his juices flowing. So there should be plenty of interest in the last rites. Then again, it could be all over by lunch. ]]> http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/archives/2006/12/crushed_by_the.php http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/archives/2006/12/crushed_by_the.php Action: third Test Sat, 16 Dec 2006 12:13:43 +0000 England get Perthed

It’s pretty flat in western Australia, but England can turn most surfaces into a rollercoaster. After soaring yesterday, they slumped today. Perth is a very particular place to bat. Whenever Australia have had a decent attack, it has been a graveyard for English batsmen, because the bounce and carry turns the typical English ploy of propping forward on off stump into catching practice for the cordon. Some distinguished players have made hardly any Test runs at the WACA. Graham Gooch managed 116 (spread over 17 years), Alec Stewart 120, Mike Atherton 100, Ian Botham 92, Mike Gatting 92, Nasser Hussain 76, Michael Vaughan 43, Marcus Trescothick 38, Keith Fletcher 26. In modern times, only three types of Englishman have consistently been able to cope: left-handers (David Gower 471, Chris Broad 178), extreme technicians (Geoff Boycott 319, Mark Ramprakash 187), and South African exports (Allan Lamb 200, Robin Smith 101 in one match) – men who grew up an ocean away, rather than a whole world. The present England team don’t have any technicians, so today was all about representatives of the other two breeds: Andrew Strauss and Kevin Pietersen. Strauss has had a weird series – always in form, never in the runs, thanks to a combination of bad hooking and bad luck with decisions. He has made runs almost every time in the warm-ups, as if he was a dead-match bully, which he very definitely isn’t. This is not a man who wilts under pressure, or who worries when he starts a series poorly, as he did in the 2005 Ashes. Today he controlled his temptation to hook, and looked like getting his first major score on Australian soil. The square drives were pinging through extra cover, which is quite an achievement at the WACA. The mood music was upbeat. He made a quick start, then consolidated, then came out of his shell again. He spanked a cover drive off Stuart Clark, only to fall for the obvious follow-up, the one pushed wider. But he missed it. There was no edge, and he was still given out by Rudi Koertzen, a man whose mode of dismissal is so stylish – a gunslinger’s glare and the left arm coming up in super slo-mo – that he likes to give it plenty of airings. On past form, England wouldn’t have got many more than Australia’s 244, but Strauss was the man most likely to make a hundred. Pietersen was kept quiet by tight bowling, then by super-defensive fields and the stifling presence of Matthew Hoggard, the deadest deadbat in world cricket. Pietersen showed glimmers of his genius and an ability to adapt, but that does not as yet include the ability to marshal a tail like Steve Waugh or Mike Hussey. He is too much the showman to be a good shepherd. England lost the first Test because they only had half a bowling attack. Having finally fixed that problem, they now find they only have half a batting line-up. Everybody except Strauss, Pietersen and arguably Collingwood, is at least one place too high. Alastair Cook, as predicted, has become this year’s Ian Bell. At number three, Bell is confirming that he is a gifted number six. At six and seven, the overstretched Flintoff and the out-of-form Jones have become an awfully soft underbelly. They are fine in those slots when they are at the top of their game, as at Trent Bridge 2005, but that’s a long time ago now. They find themselves so high up because of England’s dogged belief in the fifth bowler, and as one of them is captain and the other is on the management committee, they are partly responsible. So it was cruelly ironic that the man they handed their wickets to, like a couple of Christmas presents, should be Australia’s fifth bowler, Andrew Symonds. Flintoff, who started the series as the leader of the pack, trying to be captain on the side, is now more of a captain who bowls a bit and bats hardly at all. He hasn’t even held a catch. The widespread assumption has been that if he gets injured, England are sunk. As it is, he has just about stayed fit, and they are sinking fast. If he were to miss a Test, it might not be the worst thing, for him or for them. ]]> http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/archives/2006/12/strauss_the_key.php http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/archives/2006/12/strauss_the_key.php Action: third Test Fri, 15 Dec 2006 11:43:49 +0000 Fletcher and Flintoff own up

Today two proud men finally admitted that they had made a mistake. England’s team sheet had 11 names on it, but it boiled down to two words: mea culpa. By picking Monty Panesar and Sajid Mahmood, Messrs Fletcher and Flintoff conceded that they were wrong, and the rest of us were right. Monty then went out and proved it, with a large helping of luck. He didn’t bowl as well as he can, but after all the brouhaha, he did well to bowl as well as he did. And he has earned some good fortune after handling the frustrations of the past few weeks with amazing good humour. Even after today’s triumph, he was still saying: “The selectors know what’s best for the team. I trust their judgment.” Which was highly magnanimous. And showed why he, among others, would have been a better pick for BBC Sports Personality of the Year than the talented, but not as yet very colourful, Zara Phillips. Fletcher and Flintoff may have blundered in the faith they showed in Ashley Giles, but they were vindicated today in their decision to stick by Steve Harmison. One of the best things about Fletcher’s England is that, unlike some of their predecessors, they usually rise to the challenge of fast pitches. This wasn’t an absolute Perth trampoline, but it was yards quicker than the Adelaide dustbowl. The last time England saw anything like it was at Old Trafford five months ago, when Panesar and Steve Harmison destroyed Pakistan. Then, they took nine for 40 between them; here, nine for 140, with Harmison – helped by the umpires – collecting his first overseas four-for since West Indies 2004. In the second innings at Old Trafford, Panesar and Harmison went one better and took all ten. It’s early days, but Panesar has shown a glimpse of something Shane Warne has in spades: the ability to team up, lethally, with a fast bowler, using bounce more than turn, and thus impose himself on a Test match from the start. The pitch was sporting. The central figure was sporting. The underdogs barked, but the favourites fought back. The Aussies are still favourites, and it will be no surprise if they reassert themselves tomorrow. But this was just the sort of day the series needed. ]]> http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/archives/2006/12/fletcher_and_fl.php http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/archives/2006/12/fletcher_and_fl.php Action: third Test Thu, 14 Dec 2006 12:08:42 +0000 A tale of two puppies

There are many players in this series who have no real counterpart in the opposing team. Geraint Jones doesn’t bear much resemblance to Adam Gilchrist. Kevin Pietersen has little in common with Mike Hussey. And Shane Warne couldn’t easily be mistaken for either of England’s slow left-armers. But there are two players whose career paths have been quite similar: Michael Clarke and Ian Bell. They’re both boyish, blondish right-handers who know what it is to be the great white hope of their country’s batting. Clarke is the only young cricketer in Australia who has been a regular in the Test team. At 25, he has played 24 Tests, scoring 1324 runs at an average of 40. Bell, a year younger, has played 20 Tests, making 1423 runs at an average of 45, which comes down to 38 if you discount the bonanza he enjoyed against Bangladesh in 2005. Behind the similar stats lie two different approaches to handling young players, partly dictated by the different stages the two teams have reached. Australia, with a powerful and experienced top order, have kept Clarke out of the deep end. He has never batted in the top three. At four and five, he has done modestly – three fifties in 18 innings and an average of 30. But at six and seven, he has been a star: also in 18 innings, he has three hundreds, two fifties and an average of 52. Tomorrow, he moves up to five again. For Bell, against Australia, five would be a luxury. He batted at four in the last Ashes and has been at three in this one. In India last winter, he even opened in a Test. His average, like Clarke’s, rises with his position: 13 as an opener, 36 at three, 44 at four (inflated by Bangladesh), 45 at five, 93 at six. Maybe England should drop him down to eight. Both men have made neat, consistent starts to their one-day international career, averaging in the low forties. But where Bell has 26 caps, Clarke already has 91, so he has far more experience of the pressure-cooker. England are not good at giving their bright young things one-day experience, as Alastair Cook (two caps) is now discovering.

Clarke and Bell have both done well in this series. Bell has come in every time at about 30 for one, and has scores of 50, 0, 60 and 26, which doesn’t sound much but is about twice as good as he was last time. Clarke has come in at 407 for four, 257 for four, and 121 for four, and has yet to fail, making 56, a stealthy 124, and 21 not out. He has shone in all of Australia’s last three wins against England, going back to Lord’s 2005, when he shared an excellent stand with Damien Martyn. Bell has made four Ashes fifties, yet none of them has led to a win. Clarke is still the baby of the Australian side. They call him Pup and look out for him. During the Adelaide Test, Warne had dinner with him and told him they were going to add 100 together the next day. They did. It must have been like getting an injection of pure confidence. Bell isn’t England’s youngest player any more – Cook is two years younger. He finds himself in a dressing-room where hardly anyone is old enough to be a father figure. Ashley Giles, perhaps, when fit and not feeling too Eeyorish; Matt Maynard, the batting coach, perhaps. Someone must be doing something right because against Pakistan last summer, Bell was a revelation at number six, adding a touch of Greg Chappell to his familiar Mike Atherton impression. Now, pushed up to three by Marcus Trescothick’s troubles, he has been able to survive but not to dominate. When he faces Warne, it’s like watching a siege.]]> http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/archives/2006/12/a_tale_of_two_p.php http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz/archives/2006/12/a_tale_of_two_p.php Analysis Wed, 13 Dec 2006 15:51:56 +0000