Cricinfo - Blogs - Different Strokes - Not good enough for Australia

England’s out-cricket was impressive. James Anderson, Stuart Broad, Graham Onions and Swann made up a varied and hostile attack, the fielding was sharp and nearly all the catches were taken – the only really bad miss being when Swann failed to get hand near a fairly routine third slip catch before Nash had scored. Even Matt Prior’s wicketkeeping failed to cause the usual drawings-in of breath and tut-tut-tutting from the always-pick-the-best-keeper brigade. It is not hard to imagine this fielding team holding good batting sides in check, especially once Andrew Flintoff gets fit enough to replace the hapless Tim Bresnan.

As a county allrounder, Bresnan is in the top echelons, but his bowling lacks the bite necessary for Tests. I suspect him of bribing the guys who calibrate the speed guns, because it was when he was alleged to have bowled at 90mph that I knew for certain that they were badly wrong. He is the Ronnie Irani de nos jours; he may well have a lot to contribute to the limited-over sides, but the Test team needs someone who wouldn’t flabbergast if he got a five-fer.

Such as Swann, for instance, who already has two to his name, and whose 63 not out was classier than is expected from someone batting at nine – but, counting Bresnan and Flintoff, England have five players competing for the number seven spot to which they are ideally suited so someone has to drop down.

On the other hand, the top order’s batting was pretty dismal.

Had umpire Davis properly sent Ravi Bopara on his way when he was palpably lbw on 40, England would indeed have been in the mire. But on such things careers can turn. Being able to make a big hundred when the rest fail is exactly what England have wanted to see in their No. 3, so in one innings he ticked all the boxes that Ian Bell and Owais Shah left blank on their application forms and booked his spot for the rest of the summer. If he succeeds over the next three months, he will have the job for years.

The rest have little to be satisfied about. Apart from KP, for whose dismissal Edwards and Ramdin were responsible, the top order gave their wickets away, although Prior contributed 40 well-made runs before offering extra cover some easy catching practice.

England deserved their win, and it is a significant step forward for them to be one-nil up rather than one-nil down after the First Test of a series, but they will have to improve their batting considerably if they are to challenge Australia later in the summer.

The problem is all Australia has to do is win the toss. Look at the series' against SA, in OZ, Ponting lost the toss over and over and lost the series, in SA he won the toss in the first two tests and the Aussies put up 450 and then Mitchell Johnson and co did the rest. If the English batting can deal with Johnson and Clark( a very good bowler)and the new guys, then England have a chance. IF they win the toss. If Ponting wins it then it's all over I'm afraid, because this attack is nowhere near as good as South Africa's.

i agree with waterbuffalo i have noticed the preformance of the australian team after warne & mcgrath left has come down to the toss. with the exception of perth and cape town australia have produced far better results when they have batted. in india last year the 2 test which ponting won the toss australia looked far more competative even had a chance to win in bangalore if not for a solid 4th innings by india forcing a draw and the same again in new dehli, compaired mohali and nagpur which india won the toss and went on to win the tests comfortably.

Yes you can play the team that comes to the park and this west Indies team was a sad one, beset with problems like Gayle continuing to play needlessly at the IPL and ending up playing badly at both South Africa and England. Swann is a good bet and given the traditional aussie weakness against off spin, england should feel heartened. But if Mitchell Johnson continues his good form and if Lee bowls as fast as he did in his first two outings, however brief in twenty twenty, Australia could have a more potent attack.In Australia Duminy , Smith ,Kallis and De Villiers all made runs. In South Africa they did not and the results were there for all to see. England must put runs on the board if they are to challenge Australia . Given the fact that a few of the australian pacers however good they have been so far, have limited english exposure, one expects theh games to be tight. My bet is on Australia as Ponting will do a last hurrah in England and hopefully will remember 2005.
Sridhar

Was wondering at the make up of the Aussie attack in the Ashes. Looking at CA's new contracted players i would guess the 2 certainties are obviously Johnson and Hauritz. Clark will be the first change seamer which leaves, Lee, Siddle and Hilfenhaus to fight it out as the other opening bowler. I would have gone for Siddle a few weeks ago, but i have been really impressed by the standard of Lee's bowling in the shorter version of the game. Even though he always was better in the shorter stuff, he did look very sharp indeed, and i think he has managed to open the matter up for debate amongst Australia's selectors. The other spot will be the competition for the no 6 'all rounder' spot between Watson, Symonds and North. Personally i would go 4 seamers and include both Siddle and Lee at Hauritz's expense and use North and M Clarke as the spin option. Aussie selectors wont do that, so i think Symonds will get the spot. Im not sure that is the great attack, but i do think it will bother Eng.