Which way will The Ashes swing this time?
Roar Pro
By Benjamin Conkey, 30 Jun 2009 Benjamin Conkey is a Roar Pro
- Tagged:
- Australian Cricket, Cricket, english cricket, The Ashes
Australia's bowler Stuart Clark celebrates the wicket of West Indies batsman Dwayne Bravo. AP Photo/Andres Leighton
It might be a little simplistic to say that swing will decide the Ashes, but that’s exactly what happened four years ago. Australia was undone by Jones, Flintoff and Hoggard, who made the Duke ball talk with reverse swing.
England was then completely outplayed in the 2006-07 series.
What was most interesting was their lack of swing with the Kookaburra ball.
Flintoff was economical, but nowhere near as threatening, and Hoggard was fodder for the batsmen, without any movement in the air.
It’s one of the percularities of cricket. No two cricket balls are the same. Even when you have the same brand of ball, you can expect differences.
Four years ago, England swung the Duke ball consistently. Australia didn’t.
It was irrelevant in the first Test because Glenn McGrath moved it prodigiously off the pitch. But when he was injured, suddenly it did matter. Suddenly, England scored 400 runs on the first day!
Australia have one final opportunity against the England Lions before the first Test. It’s hardly an adequate hit out for bowlers or batsmen, which is why Phil Hughes took the smart step of playing a couple of months of county cricket.
Stuart Clark has the opportunity to play the McGrath role and should be a handful, if he gets a chance.
But will any of our bowlers swing it? If Johnson does, I’m predicting a Bob Massie type performance. On the other side, James Anderson has been in stunning form.
He produced some incredible swing bowling against the Windies.
Ryan Sidebottom has the advantage of being a left-armer, he’s economical, and gets the odd one to move back into the right-hander.
Throw in Flintoff, the ever reliable Paul Collingwood, and the unpredictable Stuart Broad, and England’s fast bowling line-up looks solid.
But when you think about it, 2005 was just out of the ordinary.
I’m not sure how long England has played with the Duke ball, but Australia hasn’t had too many problems in England prior to 2005.
Perhaps it was the four-pronged attack, whereas in the past batsmen could see off the likes of Darren Gough and pile on the runs against the lesser bowlers.
Australia handled South Africa’s pace attack well this year, but something tells me the Duke ball under English conditions will create a sense of de ja vu.
Hopefully, for Australia’s sake, they will be better equipped to deal with it this time around.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Cricket articles
- What we do and don’t know about our Baggy Greens (112)
- Success of Twenty20 spells trouble for ODI cricket (106)
- Channel 9 commentators an annoyance this summer (99)
- Media should call stumps on Rodney Hogg (93)
- One Day Cricket is suffering from Middle Child Syndrome (89)
- Cricket Australia must take a stand against racist spectators (86)
- Dave’s Warner-ful switch-hit panned by precious critics (84)
- Australia vs Sri Lanka, Perth ODI: cricket live scores, commentary (143)
- Hall of Fame for Indian legend Gavaskar
- Sri Lanka to target ‘weak’ Aussie bowlers
- India backing Rohit Sharma to find form
- Game-by-game preview of round 19
- Twenty20 cricket not up to the test (5)
- Like father, like son: Alister McDermott on a fast track to the Test team (30)
- Australia vs Sri Lanka, Perth ODI: cricket live scores, commentary (143)
- Twenty20 cricket not up to the test (5)
- Pakistan’s win over England a triumph of character (21)
- Steve Waugh is right about cricket’s succession plan (5)
- India vs Sri Lanka, Perth ODI: cricket live scores, commentary (180)
- Let’s talk about selection, Test fans (28)
- Pakistan win shows what’s beautiful about the game (13)
- Explore:
- Australian Cricket, Cricket, english cricket, The Ashes
Brett McKay said | June 30th 2009 @ 8:25am | Report comment
It’s going to be a great series Conks, no doubt about it, and your suggestion that swing will decide the Ashes mar be simple, but I’d also argue it’s pretty accurate. As in every series in England, its going to be all about who makes the most out of the conditions.
The Duke ball over there has been in use as long as I can remember, but I also recall in series through the 80s and 90s that a second toss was held to decide whether the Duke or the Reader ball was used. I don’t know when this practice ended (or even started), but the Dule has been THE ball in England for a fair while now.
SouthernWaratah said | June 30th 2009 @ 8:50am | Report comment
There’s naturally a lot of hype at the moment, but England V West Indies a few months ago isn’t a great indicator as to where their bowlers are at. The moment a WI batsman put his head down the runs came, Nash & Chanderpaul I think it was put on near 200 which brought Nasser Hussain to say “Amazing what happens when batsman care”. WI simply folded, Bopara was dropped at least twice in both his 100’s (3 times in one of them) and that won’t simply happen against us. Cook and Strauss haven’t seen a left arm bowler like Johnson in their career – he’ll make a meal of them. Siddle will ruffle Bopara’s feathers and make life uncomfortable then suddenly KP is in at 2 -25.
Anyone disagree?
Spiro Zavos said | June 30th 2009 @ 9:16am | Report comment
The matter of the make of ball and what a certain bowler or bowlers can do with it is fascinating. The leading bowler in the side usually selects the new ball the team will from a box of them presented by the umpires. The bowlers make their choice on the feel of the ball in their hand, how much the seam stands up, and in the case of Richard Hadlee on the colour of the ball. Hadlee believed, apparently, that the darker the red colour of the ball the more it would do. This seems to me to be a bit like selecting eggs on the brown colour of their shells. But, what the hell, it certainly worked for Hadlee.
Brett McKay said | June 30th 2009 @ 9:18am | Report comment
not at all SouthernTah, I hope that’s exactly how it plays out!!
Colin N said | June 30th 2009 @ 9:41am | Report comment
SouthernWaratah,
Even as an England fan, I don’t disagree actually. However, both Cook and Strauss are very good batsmen. Cook’s struggled with his technique in the last 18 months, but still averaged 48 in that time. Strauss has completely changed his style and as a result, doesn’t tend to give much away.
A lot of question marks still hang over Bopara IMO. He has all the shots, but I don’t think his defence is up to it, I think Shah’s a far better batsmen. KP’s England’s only world-class batter.
The bowler’s are pretty good, Anderson’s starting to come of age and can swing the ball both ways. He’s forming a good partnership with Broad, who himself has added a bit more zip to his usually consistant line and length. Onions is talented, but unproven, as is Adil Rashid, but I feel Swann far outways any Australian spin option. Flintoff will be his usual consistant self, if he’s fit.
I don’t know if you’ve heard, but Michael Vaughen’s set to announce his retirement from first-class cricket, which I think is a huge shame. He was a great captain and very fine cricketer. He never got the praise he deserved IMO.
SouthernWaratah said | June 30th 2009 @ 10:02am | Report comment
Colin N, I think I’ll judge Swann when he performs on the big stage, I saw some of his wickets and they were quite impressive, but again against a lack lustre WI batting effort. For all the talk that we’re average against decent spin bowling Australia was hardly put to the sword last year in India by their spinning options, I thought it was the Indian seam bowling that cause more havoc.
vinay verma said | June 30th 2009 @ 11:43am | Report comment
Benjamin
Being a batsman centric game Captains and bowlers,over the years,have looked for the slightest edge. John Lever with his vaseline in India. The mintgate saga in England and Atherton with mud in his pocket. Unfortunately for him it stuck.
Bowlers have used fingernails and bottletops. Darrell Hair ruled a forfeit at the Oval suspecting ball tampering. The ICC reversed the result and Holding resigned from the ICC.
Before the arrival of Kapil Dev Indian captains would rub the ball on the turf to get rid of the shine. The rules have since been amended.
The second Test of the 2005 series was,I believe,more about momentum,than the swing. Ponting and won the toss and should have batted. Especially since his main bowler was out. When you have 400 on the board it is easier to set attacking fields and exploit whatever there is in the atmosphere. If australia had been 2-0 I doubt England would have been succesful. As it is McGrath did not play in the only two that Australia lost. The margin of the loss was two runs and three wickets. So it was not as if Australia were comprehensively beaten.
Captaincy is such an important part of cricket and Ponting has to learn quickly.
Mark Taylor would bat even if it was a greenish pitch as runs on the board dictate the momentum.
So I am a bigger fan of momentum than I am of swing. Seize the initiative and dont let go.
Spiro Zavos said | June 30th 2009 @ 1:43pm | Report comment
Vinay is correct. The old cricket adage is: ‘You should think about putting the other side into bat if the conditions are dodgy, and then don’t do it.’ Vinay or Kersi will know the statistics on this but putting the other side into bat isn’t the best gamble a captain can make. You bat, as Mark Taylor generally did, and then try to dictate the outcome of the game from their. Ricky Ponting definitely made a poor decision sending England into bat after Glenn McGrath was ruled out with a twisted ankle just before the Test started.
Jameswm said | June 30th 2009 @ 2:32pm | Report comment
4 years ago England did bowl well, but australia batted poorly – impatiently and arrogantly. In one innings, Hayden got out about as stupidly as I have ever seen, sparring at one outside off on the up and mistiming it straight to a short cover placed there for that exact shot. Gilly on the other hand was in a tangle as he had no plan B.
I am still not convinced they’ve learned their lessons. Ponting doesn’t seem to have. Sometimes he walks in, puts his head down and you know straight away he has walked in with the sole purpose of scoring a hundred, not caring how long it takes or how ugly it is. And he normally succeeds.
I wish he’d do it more often.
vinay verma said | June 30th 2009 @ 3:20pm | Report comment
How many times have we seen a bowler question the shape or condition of a ball? And invariably the bowler has copped a hiding. You never see a bowler complaining when hes taking wickets.
The last 2005 Ashes also proved that Kasper and Lee were not able to adapt. They bowled too short and that does not give the ball time to swing.If there is anything at all in the atmosphere you have to pitch it up. Not full but on a good length. Same goes for reverse.
Yes,Hayden was arrogant and Gilly was confused. Hayden did pull his head in towards the end but the seies had gone. England had the better tactics and their players stuck to them They fully desreved to win but the difference was miniscule.
This time around Australia seems all the more balanced. Forget the spinner and forget the Macdonalds.
This could be the series that sees Australia have an opening partnership to rival the Simpson and Lawry,Hayden/Langer combinations.
Siddle and Johnson to rival the Lindwall/Miller,Lillee/Thomson pairings. The emergence of Johnson as a batter in the Alan Davidson mould. And Marcus North and Hussey to stabalise the lower middle order like Slasher mackay and Peter Burge.
Lots of reputations to make and some to enhance like Ponting. I have a feeling this is going to be a defining moment in Australia’s cricket fortunes over the next three years.