Well my heart rate has just about returned to normal following the thrilling finish to the Trent Bridge Test on Sunday. It truly was a wonderful match, encapsulating pretty much everything that is good about the modern game: fast scoring rates, capable lower order batting and a tendency for players to really wear their emotions on their sleeves. Comparisons with Edgbaston 2005 are wholly justified. As was the case eight years ago, I was in the middle of a match myself during the final throes of the tensest of Tests. I remember that day that no-one was paying any attention to our under 15s fixture, not even those who were on the field of play! The rest of us crowded round a tiny TV in the pavilion, nails shortening by the minute. Such was the effectiveness of Brett Lee and Michael Kasprowicz’s resistance that there was time for my match to finish, my kit to be hastily thrown into my bag, my dad to drive me (probably also quite hastily) home with TMS crackling through on Radio 4 LW and me to perch myself on the very edge of a living room chair, eyes transfixed on the much missed Ashes coverage on Channel 4 before England were able to claw themselves over the line.
It may be that I’m eight years older (and probably four years more mature), or that England are no longer weighed down by the dreadful Ashes record that preceded the 2005 win or even that England’s victory margin was seven times more comfortable, but for me Sunday didn’t conjure quite the same level of do-or-die, all-encompassing excitement as that fateful day did. What Sunday did do, however, was round off in spectacular fashion just about the perfect Test match.
It seemed to me that just about everything exciting that can happen in cricket, happened during the Trent Bridge Test. The only thing missing was probably a hat trick, although there were three opportunities for one in the game, so we can’t feel too hard done by. It is said that the best cricket occurs when the ball is slightly superior to the bat, and I feel that was the case here. Although conditions weren’t particularly helpful, and no batter covered themselves in glory for either side in the first innings, we did witness two superb displays of fast bowling from the under-rated Peter Siddle and the superlative James Anderson. These two showcased their craft at the highest quality and must be commended for it. Siddle is more known for his heart and Anderson for his skill, but each proved they had plenty of both. Two deliveries stick in the memory. Siddle’s perfectly pitched yorker to castle a well set Joe Root probably hasn’t received as much praise as it should. Perhaps if it was a Kevin Pietersen or an Alastair Cook that it dismissed then it might have, but it was a special ball produced when it was needed. Anderson surpassed that however, when Australia batted. The Burnley Express is capable of bowling magic balls with reasonable regularity and two stick in the memory. One a comprehensive cleaning up of the hapless VVS Laxman on India’s last tour here, the other an embarrassment of the unfortunate, and perennial pub quiz tie-breaker answer, Australian stand-in wicket-keeper Graham Manou during the 2009 Ashes. His dismissal of Michael Clarke however, raised the bar even higher. Not just for the quality of the batter in question, but the narrower the margins involved. Clarke appeared to be covering all angles with his competent looking defensive push, but Anderson managed to sneak to ball past so it just shaved the off stump. A terrific delivery and one that will surely been replayed time and time again, in Anderson’s dreams and Clarke’s nightmares.
Although from a personal point of view, I relished this spectacle of skilful fast bowling more, the major talking point following the match was the meteoric rise out of the blue of Ashton Agar. The teenager’s debut innings was a perfectly scripted story within a perfectly scripted story. His team’s innings was in tatters as he walked to the crease, yet he set about batting with the nerveless enjoyment that perhaps can only be there on a player’s debut. As he began to get into his stride and play some accomplished proper cricket shots I was put in mind of a club game. Not because of the standard of cricket, but the gradual realisation that this young lad coming in at number 11 could bat, and bat well. Joyous would be the one word I would sum his innings up with. Even when he was tragically but perfectly out on 98, he allowed himself a smile that was tinged with only the tiniest bit of regret. Whether Agar goes on to have a successful career or disappears like the legion of Australia spinners before him he will always be remembered for that innings that displayed the best qualities youth can bring to the art of batting.
The events of last week gave us a real box office start to this year of Ashes cricket and we would be foolish not to expect that tomorrow’s second Test at Lord’s will continue in the same vein. Although Trent Bridge answered plenty of questions, most notably the one of whether or not Australia will be competitive, it also threw up many additional questions of its own.
For England, it is a question concerned with selection, and it is a tricky one to answer. Steven Finn’s place as the third seamer is certainly in a lot of jeopardy. We saw the best and the worst of Finn in the first Test. In his first spell in Australia’s first innings he looked at his unplayable best, steaming in, bowling at pace in the right areas and proving himself a genuine wicket-taking threat. In contrast, his final spell of the match was two overs of the worst panicky, rabbit-in-the-headlights type of bowling synonymous with many a young England seamer thrown in at the deep end in the 90s. When a player is struggling, normally the problems have their roots in one or more of the four key coaching areas: physical, mental, tactical and technical. Finn is physically in excellent shape and, whereas a fair few people have criticised Finn’s technique pointing to his infamous and now hopefully forgotten habit of kicking the stumps over, for me his technique is fine and the primary reason for his struggles is a real lack of confidence. It may be that England are using his attributes wrongly in their bowling plans, but whatever line and length he is attempting to bowl, he doesn’t seem to run in with any conviction. Surely then, if that is the issue, the best way to fix it would be to show faith in him by giving him a starting spot tomorrow and to drop him would be to further dent his already visibly diminished self-belief.
A factor firmly in Finn’s favour is the venue for the second Test. Not only is Lord’s his home ground, but his record there is impressive for both Middlesex and England. When a bowler is feeling under the pump, how comfortable he feels playing at a ground takes on greater significance. The two possible replacements for Finn are Tim Bresnan and Graham Onions, who both have contrasting records at Lord’s. Although he is perceived to be the favourite to replace Finn, Bresnan’s record is pretty dismal whereas Onions’ is very reasonable indeed. Understandable when the bowling styles of the three are considered. Onions and Finn rely more on seam movement, something which the Lord’s slope assists greatly, whereas Bresnan’s forte is swing. His batting shouldn’t be a factor in the decision, given the strength of England’s top six and the inevitable presence of Broad and Graeme Swann in the lower order. Both Onions and Bresnan have clearly been affected by injuries, but the vibe is that England trust Bresnan more, perhaps due to his contributions to the one day team. It doesn’t help that Onion’s last England appearance was a pretty chastening one at the hand of the West Indies last year.
One additional knock on effect of dropping Finn is that, with England losing his pace and bounce, it may be that the team will look to Stuart Broad to alter his bowling to replicate that of Finn. They like having variety in their attack and, regardless of whether it be Bresnan or Onions who comes in, it wouldn’t be a like for like replacement, although Bresnan’s natural length is perhaps similar. Therefore the fact that England haven’t included the likes of Chris Tremlett or Boyd Rankin in their squad may be a concealed hint that Finn will retain his place, or that may be reading too much into it. Back to the Broad issue, the enforcer role is one that he has attempted manfully in the past, but it is abundantly clear that not only is he definitely not suited to it, but he is often potent when he pitches the ball up looking for swing. Whether consciously or sub-consciously, I can envisage Broad being drawn to that back-of-a-length length in the absence of Finn, and it being to his, and England’s detriment.
In my opinion, it is worth persisting with Finn on his home ground. He may be slightly mercurial at the moment, which isn’t ideal in a four man attack, but the Lord’s factor swings it in his favour for me. There is a perception around that every Yorkshireman wants Bresnan in the team come what may, but this isn’t true. I, along with the GLY (Greatest Living Yorkshireman) Geoff Boycott, would rather Onions come into the team if Finn were to be dropped, his superior record at Lord’s and his better suited bowling style being the deciding factors here. In truth, I believe England won’t go along with me, as well they might. I expect Finn to be dropped in favour of Bresnan. They like to put out in the media that they aren’t a ruthless team in terms of selection, but that masks the truth somewhat in my opinion. Just ask Monty Panesar, Nick Compton, James Taylor and arguably Onions himself. The bowling coach David Saker has always had very apparent reservations, or maybe frustrations, about Finn for whatever reason and he will perhaps be more vulnerable to the chop than the norm whilst Saker is there.
For Australia, it has once again been off the field events that have dominated their preparations, but as I said in my last post, it is the cricket itself that will be of the only concern in this series. Selection-wise, the only player at real risk is Ed Cowan, who was disappointing at Trent Bridge. For me, it is not a question of whether he belongs in the team, just that fact that he is not a number three. That position is arguably the most important in the batting line up and Cowan isn’t suited to it. I would personally move him up to open and drop Chris Rogers into the crucial number three spot. Cowan would be more comfortable in his usual opener’s role, it would give Australia a handy left right hand combination at the top of the order, and with Rogers having played plenty of cricket at Lord’s with Middlesex, a move one place down shouldn’t affect him greatly. Again, I don’t believe this will happen, as Australia very deliberately set out their stall before the series by naming their opening pair. To change it one match into the series would be a rare admission of a mistake by an international cricket team.

The Battles That Will Win The War

It feels as though England have been playing cricket almost constantly this year. In fact, England have played 45 days worth of competitive cricket this year, or in more relatable terms, almost a quarter of the year so far. All this cricket however, whether it be the intense and nerve-wracking Champion’s Trophy final or the instantly forgettable recent T20 series against New Zealand, has just been one enormous aperitif to the mouth-watering bumper main course that is the Ashes. As with any modern Ashes series, the build-up started pretty much as soon as the previous series finished, and the recent climax to the build-up has been characterised by selection dilemmas, off-the-field incidents and bold predictions by pundits from both sides. All these will pale into relative insignificance once the first ball in bowled tomorrow however, and for the next seven weeks, the final destination of that most coveted of urns will be decided by the actualities of the cricket. How leather impacts willow. Whether two hands can grasp a crucial catch. A momentary lapse in a batsman’s concentration. Here, I outline what I believe to be the three key battles that will decide the Ashes.

1. Alastair Cook v Mitchell Starc

No one would dream of questioning Alastair Cook’s batting pedigree. Indeed, the England captain is on the cusp of graduating from the very good to the great in the pantheon of English batters. He is approaching both thirty Test hundreds and a century of Test caps at a canter, and the ascension to the captaincy appears to have further galvanised his batting. However, and this may prove to be an important however, he does have a weakness against left arm seam that is no longer just perceived, but apparent and verifiable. It is a trait that, like many others, he has in common with his predecessor and former opening partner Andrew Strauss. I must admit I find it bizarre that such a weakness could exist, given they are both left handers. Kevin Pietersen is notoriously weak against left arm spin, a vulnerability that is understandable from a technical point of view given that the ball is turning away from his bat. The left arm seam to left handed batter configuration is surely analogous to a right arm seam to right handed batter configuration, undoubtedly the most common duel seen in cricket outside the subcontinent. If a right handed opener had a weakness to right arm seam, well, it’s fairly obvious he wouldn’t be around for long. Why then, is Cook frail against the mirror image of this often seen combination? It may be that left armers are comparatively rare so exposure to, and thus practice against them is reduced, but I believe the root cause of Cook’s flaw is technical. His tendency to plant the front foot early and play around the pad that took him to the verge of being dropped three years ago has been, if not totally ironed out, at least tempered substantially. The relics of this however, are brought into sharp relief against left armers, given the difference in both angle and release point.
The young, exciting and talented Trent Boult got him in both innings at the Lord’s Test earlier in the summer, as well as twice in the series in New Zealand. Neil Wagner, a less heralded left arm quick, also got him twice in that same series. Australia have a left armer with an even greater reputation than Boult in Mitchell Starc. I personally have been more impressed by Boult given his greater control and wider skillset. It would be fair to say that Starc has an extra yard of pace and more of the ‘X-Factor’ than his Kiwi counterpart however. I fully expect him to share the new ball, and for the proactive captaincy of Michael Clarke to come to the for as he explicitly targets the England captain with his unpredictable but undoubtedly dangerous young left armer. Graeme Swann spoke recently about ‘cutting the head off the serpent’ with regards to Clarke. If Clarke and Starc can exploit this flaw to remove the heavy-scoring head of the English serpent, it will go a long way towards reducing England to a manageable total.

2. Michael Clarke v Graeme Swann

If there is one player on either side that is most ‘up’ for this series, then it is Graeme Swann. The off-spinner has not been backward in coming forward about his excitement about the Ashes and his fervent desire to win them. Although he hasn’t said it in so many words, it is clear to any observer that he wishes to create a ‘legacy’ this year through his own personal performances, as well as the team’s. At 34, and with the injury-ridden year he has had, it is obvious that he is, if not part way through, at least entering the autumn of his career. He is, however, well placed to have himself a glorious Indian summer. An expected prolonged period of very dry weather coupled with the plethora of left-handed batters that he so enjoys in the Australian lineup will have Swann licking his lips. Indeed it is hardly surprising he is so riddled with excitement for the summer ahead. There may well be a nasty fly in his ointment however, in the shape of Michael Clarke. Not only is he a dastardly right hander, but he is also an extremely fine player of spin bowling, of all kinds. Swann may well chew up and spit out the left handers at the other end, but a Clarke who has got himself in against the seamers will be a very different proposition. Now given the conditions and circumstances Swann will be expected to be more attacking in this series, in contrast to the holding role he normally plays in England, and it is likely that Cook will be inclined to generally set more aggressive fields accordingly. This, along with the fact that Clarke doesn’t really have an obvious weakness against spin, could prove problematic for Swann. The automatic reaction would be to attempt to tie Clarke up and restrict his scoring to try and lure him into a rash shot or a lapse in concentration. This will be easier said than done for three reasons. Firstly, Clarke’s nimble footwork and confidence against spin allow him to manufacture a reasonable amount of runs against defensive fields. Secondly, the increased expectation put on his shoulders since both becoming captain and losing Ricky Ponting and Michael Hussey from the batting unit has made him a more responsible and focused player than he was in either of the last two Ashes series. Finally, given the abundance of left handers in the Australian lineup, it is more than likely that there will be one at the other end from Clarke and that Swann will be bowling aggressively to whomever it is. Switching from an attacking to a containing line, field and mentality often plays havoc with a bowler’s execution of his skills. No, it is fair to say that Clarke will be the most likely spoiler of Swann’s planned party, and the off-spinner will have to be at his most wily if he is to stop him.

3. Kevin Pietersen v Everyone

A self-confessed big match player, and the owner of the most ‘X-Factorness’ on either side, the performance of Kevin Pietersen will have a huge bearing on the outcome of the series. It is no secret that, like Swann, Pietersen is pumped for the Ashes. Indeed, the former alluded to just how excited the latter his in his recent Sun column. Like his captain, Pietersen is another England player on the verge of greatness. There are many who would claim that he is already there, but I prefer to leave him on greatness’ doorstep because, as was said on the most recent episode of ESPNCricinfo’s Switch Hit podcast, Pietersen is a better player when he has something to prove. There is no doubt in my mind that he is the most talented and exciting batter on the planet at the minute. You can throw names like Jayawardene, Amla and Kohli into the mix, along with the two captains contesting the Ashes this year, but ask me whether I would rather see each of this score a hundred, or watch a single Pietersen century and I would pick the latter every time. When that talent manifests itself, he is virtually unstoppable and his only enemy is himself.
What, or rather who, then stands in the way of that special talent coming to the fore? Well, it is well documented that, for all their failings, Australia have a strong and potentially potent bowling attack. I have already sang the praises of Starc, but James Pattinson is perhaps even more impressive, and the backup seamers are competent too. Pattinson, though young, has ego and the traditional aggressive streak that has often typified great Australian teams of the past, and is perhaps missing from some of his teammates. The thought of a pumped-up Pattinson bowling to Pietersen is a mouth-watering one, as the latter will not take kindly to the sight of an ego that could potentially threaten his own and will consequently attempt to take the former down a peg or too in his own brutal way. If he manages, the results will be catastrophic for Australia but, as is often the case, one’s greatest strength is also one’s greatest weakness. If Pietersen allows his ego to run away with him, England’s key game-changing weapon will be nullified.
A couple of perceived irresponsible Pietersen dismissals will also refuel criticism aimed at his from off the field. Whilst I said in the introduction that on field events are ultimately where the Ashes will be decided, Pietersen’s game often transcends the field of play, meaning his performance is capable of being affected from outside. Also, regardless of the claimed successful ‘reintegration’ and the constant stream of Pietersen-friendly soundbites that emanate from the England camp, we would be foolish to imagine all the water is totally under the bridge. It may not be as fragile as it was this time last year, but Pietersen’s position in the dressing room, and how it changes throughout the summer, will have a huge impact on his performance, and England’s performance as a whole