With the loss of the Ashes, we’re seeing the usual and expected recriminations and calling for heads to roll. Sells a few papers, but does it offer any substance?
Really, it’s not as if we were flogged in England. Actually the series was quite close.
I hated losing the Ashes and it hurts me to say it but full credit the English players who were able to find career best efforts when it mattered most. But does anyone really think they would beat us at home?
In the end, an inspired spell of fast bowling by Broad in the first innings of the last Test, a gritty performance by Panesar with the bat in the last innings of the first Test, a rock solid opening batsmen for most of the series, a good call of the coin toss in the last Test, and an uneven distribution of poor umpiring decisions all together took their toll.
If any one of those things doesn’t happen for England, we probably retain the Ashes. And maybe win the series.
We’ve all been spoiled by an era of cricketing greatness when we had three players who would make anyone’s greatest Australian XI of all time (Warne, Gilchrist and McGrath) another who would be a strong contender for that team (Hayden) and several other cricketers who were genuinely great players (Waugh, Ponting, Langer, to name a few).
With those players in the team, we were capable of dominating teams away from home.
The current Australian XI is a good team but not a great one, and in world Test cricket, where the home team enjoys a significant advantage, a good team playing away from home needs everything going its way to win.
We didn’t have that and we lost.
So where do we go from here?
With respect to the batting, we failed to record a significant opening partnership throughout the series. I don’t think Watson is the answer (too many small technical flaws to open at that level).
It’s not surprising that Hughes had a form slump, most promising young players do and I recall Ponting being dropped early in his career but let’s stick with him because no other opener in Australia has his potential.
And it’s time to find a replacement for Hussey.
If Watson’s body allows him to bowl maybe he could slot in down the order as an all rounder but otherwise I’d like to see us go for a young guy with talent that we can develop (someone like Klinger).
With respect to the bowling, everyone knows the first priority should be to find a spinner who can really turn the ball. But Hauritz did bowl well, better than I thought he could actually, and deserves to retain his place in the twelve until we find someone who can really threaten the opposition.
Our pace attack stands up well in comparison with any other the world today – we have a good mix of age and experience as well as considerable variety. Johnson could be more consistent and he has a worrying tendency to get too side-armed in his delivery action, but he’s menacing and dangerous when it’s all working for him.
Contrary to popular opinion, I don’t think the captain and selectors made too many mistakes with the bowling attack.
Surely you had to take the same pace bowling attack into the First Test as dominated in South Africa, and we very nearly won the First Test, so why make a change for the second?
Maybe Stuart Clark could have played in the Third Test, but I doubt that would have changed the overall result. And since the four pace bowlers got the required 20 wickets easily in the Fourth Test, I’d have stuck with them for the last Test.
So where does that leave us?
We’re still a good team. And we’ll be a very good team if we can unearth a good spinner and develop Hughes and young middle order batsmen.
But we’re no longer a great team. And whilst we’ll win at home more often than we lose, we won’t be able to dominate other good teams away from home like we have in our recent past.
Bigad
Guest
Dont't kid yourself either. England were horrible in the 1st and 4th tests, and only good for one bowling innings int he 3rd.
stillmissit
Roar Guru
Shane Warne had god given talent I give you that one but McGrath really; what is the difference between McGrath and Clark not much except the amount of bowling McGrath got v Clark's lack of overs due to injury. Gilly had batting skill but he still didnt look like a great keeper. The key people in building Australia the last time were the ones I have mentioned plus Mark Taylor and Steve Waugh. What we have a the moment is officials of very poor or no ability trying to guide a game going in reverse when all they have known is the forward gear. Sutherland is incapable of rebuilding a structure and Hilditch has been almost criminal in his control of selections. All this is by the by to a certain extent, the bottom line is the cricketing public's opinion and there need for a real rebuilding of our cricket team. I believe that the spin that is being put out by cricket australia (which is what you have echo'd - thanks for that) and supported by articles like this one are guaranteed to keep us quiet until there time on the gravy train is up and cricket in Australia is in the ditch.
Viscount Crouchback
Guest
I disagree. Shane Warne and Glenn McGrath had God-given talent. The system had nothing to do with their success. In fact, it was a positive hindrance to Warne. Don't get me wrong - Australia is quite right to be demanding and quite right to put in place the very best structure it can. But the 1995-2007 team was a freak, a one-off. The idea that you can re-create such brilliance in every decade is simply fantasy. I fear that, like an overly indulged child, the Australian public has been rather spoilt by the success of the past two decades.
stillmissit
Roar Guru
Hysteria is it? Well mate when you have a whole nation dedicated to one sport and we are on the skids things can and should be done. To just sit here and say "Well we had a once in a generation players, we'll just sit here and wait for the next set to come along" is a form of madness that thankfully Alan Border, Bob Simpson etc changed for us. It wasnt done on the back of a great set of players, the foundations were laid down by hard nosed work and setting a team ethos that was the foundation of this age of 'Once in a generation' players you refer to. The only reason we had such great players was the pressure to perform that was placed on them by captains, officials and other players. Take Borders legendary swipe at Dean Jones in India 'If you cant take it I will bring on a Queenslander'. This is the stuff that articles like this one and your comments undermine. Sit back and die or get off your arse and do something about it.
Viscount Crouchback
Guest
What absurd hysteria. Australia does not have a divine right to rule world cricket. Losing a close series by the skin of one's teeth does not necessitate a complete overhaul of one's cricketing system. You chaps need to confront reality. Australia no longer has great, once in-a-generation bowlers. This type of thing is going to happen more often in future, so you'd best get used to it. The factors I cite above will still enable you to be consistently competitive. But you won't be competitive at all if you panic after every defeat and lurch into panic like England in the 1990s.
stillmissit
Roar Guru
Viscount Crouchback - As you think and agree with this article I can only assume that you know nothing about management. One of the key things that this article assumes is that we still have the goods and all will be well. This approach is almost guaranteed to bring about a total failure and put us where the West Indies have been for years. All the signs are there, a sort of Laissez-faire approach to a great loss, a management team that has failed being given another chance, the players and particularly Ponting getting the message that it is OK to fail all will be well tomorrow. Guys if you cant see the horror story that is written on these walls then Australian cricket is on its way to join the West Indies.
quickjohnny
Guest
Everyone, Let's not forget what lies ahead this summer......Pakistan and the West Indies ( I think that's right, but I haven't been enthused enough to look at a schedule). In all honesty, how many of you can get excited about watching these series? Once upon a time there would have been reason to, but now????????????? So, therein lies a problem. Test cricket doesn't have the appeal it once did. In many ways it has lost its mojo, and T-20 needed to happen to give cricket a 'happening' feel in the age of everything happening in the click of a finger. Although it hurts, the emphasis of the players will eventually turn away from test cricket. Call it evolution, call it revolution, call it whatever you like.......but the bottom line is that we should be grateful there has been so much talk generated by the result of the Ashes series because in years to come, test cricket will be considered an appendage of T-20. I really wonder how much the Australian players' response to the loss has been theatrical. In this day and age, I wouldn't mind better that deep down at least some players are thinking: 'Well I missed out on a winning bonus in England, but hopefully I can make that up in the IPL.
Colin N
Guest
"If any one of those things doesn’t happen for England, we probably retain the Ashes. And maybe win the series." That's a stupid thing to say. It's like me saying if England weren't so bad at Headingly then England would have won 2-0, or if it hadn't rained at Edgbaston, England would have won there. You can look at the areas where things went wrong and had the selections been different etc etc. But, who knows if bringing in Hauritz would have improved things, but you can't say, 'had these specific things not happened then Australia would have won.'
Viscount Crouchback
Guest
This is an eminently sensible article. Australian cricket remains fundamentally strong. You have the climate, the facilities, the public interest, the tradition of excellence - everything is in your favour. The hysterical response to a close defeat speaks of a persistent and deep-seated national immaturity.
Whiteline
Guest
Sheek Correct, cricket is in trouble. especially in reference to tests/first class etc. Why the ICC hasn't struck a deal with the IPL smacks of arrogance and ignorance. A couple of things need to happen and fast. There needs to be an agreement between these groups along the follow lines * A window created for IPL where no international cricket is played * Players must be contracted to a state/county/provence/country in order to be eligible to play in the IPL - this will ensure the integrity of first class and the International program is maintained Alas, it's probably 2 years too late for this as the horse has bolted.... who knows where it will end up. I can tell you now that the traditional thinking of wanting to wear the 'baggy green' may well be different among the young kids of today playing in the under 11s ......
sheek
Guest
Simon, I can be a "kick down the door instead of knock" kind of guy sometimes. By "insipid" I meant your article didn't tell us much we already knew. Yes, the media are off & frothing at the mouth like they usually do, & there's too much over-reaction in some quarters. On the other hand, there are some long standing problems, especially with the development (not) of spinners. And the selection committee might be too fond of dinner parties!! But cricket as a whole has some problems to deal with, I believe. Especially the homogenisation of teams at the expense of spinners, & creating pitches (in Australia especially) that no longer are unique from each other. Then there's the impact of T20, which I think is very serious for world cricket. Ponting remains the only option as skipper, & Hughes will come back better than ever. We lost the series because we didn't grasp the key moments. But that's been said by others already.
davido
Guest
Well thought out article. Have we re-gained the underdog status again that Australians so desire?
Beardan
Guest
This is a well written article that is very accurate. I still would have gone for Clark instead of Siddle first test but you can understand where those 4 knucklehead selectors were coming from. This article is fair and only critical (Watson and Hussey) where criticism was due. Excellent work. I will follow this author.
stillmissit
Roar Guru
Sheek I agree - Simon this is an unAustralian article you should be put up against a wall somewhere. If we are OK in the eyes of the general public then we are going down fast. The only thing that can make me believe we are serious about this would be the heads of Sutherland, Ponting and Hilditch. We need a real hard Aussie cricket person to stand up, none of this mamsy pamsy feel good stuff.
sheek
Guest
Two ridiculous responses (so far) to an insipid post anyway. We should be more worried about the future of test cricket. When guys can make a fortune playing T20, without having to bother with a first class career, you know the long version of the game is in trouble.
Lem
Guest
The difference between the two teams was that when it really mattered Australia choked and England didn't.
JR Salazar
Guest
Don't kid yourself-you lot were horrible that fifth test. You guys are gonna have to make some serious shakeups for the next series. One more thing: James Sutherland's remarks of backing Ponting up are ludicrous. Someone's gonna have to take the fall and there will be shake-ups. The world will have ended if there isn't any changes to knock some sense back into a side whose egos are tattered from a series like this.