- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
An insinuation I can’t stand about professional sportsmen is that they’re not trying.
Usually the assumption of a supporter who has seen his side of choice being beaten, it is a shallow, often thoughtless and nearly always ill-informed remark.
Yes, I’m sure there are exceptions which could be pointed out and I’m hardly spouting an all-encompassing view but it gets my goat.
Take a minute to think. Are sportsmen, or women, when playing a game which is their livelihood, under intense pressure a lot of the time, likely to drift through, not giving a toss about the outcome?
There will be times when the individual, or team, aren’t at the races, when all is not in tune and the outcome is way short of that expected but to put this down to a lack of effort is wrong.
‘They don’t care about what they’re doing’, after the shocking development of losing a sporting contest. If all defeats could be explained by the protagonists giving up then an awful lot of performers around the world need to find something else to occupy their time.
Over the past fortnight I’ve heard this argument for both England and Australia.
It could be the case that Australia were a fraction complacent in Wales – Chris Rogers all but admitted as much – and England might well have taken their eye off the ball and become a bit comfortable with a nice 1-0 series lead in north London.
But too many confuse complacency, and it can happen however good and thorough the preparation and pre-match soundbites, with an unwillingness to apply the necessary diligence.
As was the case in Cardiff, the victors at Lord’s were, in very simple terms, the more accomplished side.
For James Anderson, Stuart Broad and Mark Wood in episode number one read Mitchell Johnson, Mitchell Starc and Josh Hazlewood in the second instalment. The former trio got their gameplan spot on and reaped the rewards and the latter threesome replied in kind.
Joe Root, Ben Stokes and Moeen Ali capitalised at first then Steve Smith, Chris Rogers and David Warner matched their bet and raised it some.
An Australia firing on more cylinders wouldn’t have succumbed quite so easily and England, if they’d actually managed to ignite just one, the same.
What should worry an England supporter is that it wasn’t merely an outplaying but a thorough whipping to which little in the way of answers were supplied.
Alastair Cook was excellent in the first innings alongside Ben Stokes, and Stuart Broad did an okay job with the ball. But that was it. Toothless bowling and trampled on batting does not a pretty picture make.
The slight alteration of Jonny Bairstow – a much better player than when last sighted in the Test arena, here’s hoping for a Smith style renaissance – for a shell-shocked Gary Ballance is right and tinkering instead of wholesale change is the best way to go. Mitchell Marsh for Shane Watson didn’t work out too badly did it?
What will definitely need to be offered now that Australia have properly shown their hand is a far more disciplined approach. It’s been done once and there is no reason why it can’t be repeated.
As for the tourists, it isn’t coincidence that once their top order realised that the method used in the first Test was erroneous and they made the necessary adjustments, they were able to make real headway.
There’s no need to attack Ali’s spin in a gung-ho manner; riding out the early swing makes tackling Anderson less tricky; be prepared to bat for four or five sessions; the English change seamers will not consistently match their senior colleagues so be prepared to wait for them.
All of the above, in turn, enabled the seamers to operate how they would always choose to given half a chance. Plenty of runs on the board – if they’d conceded 150 on the second evening for the four wickets taken it wouldn’t have mattered – it allows Mitchell Johnson to attack entirely rather than have to put in some defensive yards.
Speed is speed, after all, and while I didn’t think he had that kind of performance in him on such a surface, he deserves plenty of praise. It won’t have been a welcome sight for the hosts.
When deciding whether the Lord’s result is decisive as in recent Ashes series, you should consider both sides of the coin. A comprehensive win has been followed up by a defeat of a similar manner for both combatants.
But needing a draw at worst to retain the prize. I think it’s obvious whose shoes the majority would choose to be wearing.