Are Steve Finn and Tremlett England’s answer to Garner and Ambrose?
There are no surprises which to me suggest that England is going to be conservative. Panesar will not strike fear in Australian hearts, Rashid would have sent a more attacking message.
England will not win with being timid. They have to take the fight to Australia.
Monty Panesar returns to the England squad and may well partner Swann in Sydney. England will go into the first Test with the same team that played the last Test against Pakistan. The only change may be Bell for Morgan.
England have made 17 visits to Australia and only won on three occasions. In 1954 they were inspired by “Typhoon “Tyson. In 1971 it was the smouldering poet, John Snow, and in 1987 it was the portly but combative Mike Gatting.
Hutton, Illingworth and Gatting were all strong men and did not take a backward step. Strauss will need to put on the boxing gloves and do what he did last year. Set attacking fields and bat positively.
Tyson took 28 wickets in the five Tests in ’54-’55 including ten in Sydney and nine in Melbourne. He ended with 77 wickets in 17 tests at an average of 18 and a strike rate of 45. Richie Benaud rated him the fastest he had seen. Tyson’s support cast included Statham and Bailey who both were masters of swing and seam.
As they say speed kills.
In 1970-71 Snow almost killed Terry Jenner with a vicious bouncer. Right though the series Snow was intimidating and had the measure of the two Chappells and also Stackpole, Redpath and Walters. His backup was a young Bob Willis who was to terrorise Australia many years later at Headingley.
Mike Gatting did not have the bowling firepower but the batting was strong with Broad, Gower, Lamb and Gatting himself. The bowling had “no neck” Gladstone Small and Botham with canny spin from Emburey and Edmonds.
This 2010 version is a totally different lion. It rules the Twenty20 jungle. It bested the current holders of the 50 overs World Cup. Most importantly, the pride of place in this lion’s den belongs to the Ashes.
Australia will start the series as the hunter. The main target will be Andrew Strauss. Australians have always targeted the opposing captain.
Strauss has had a mediocre Test year in 2010. His last century was in July 2009 against Australia. He has gone 23 innings without a century and struggled in South Africa passing 50 only once. In 10 innings in Australia he has a top score of 50. His opening partner Cook is yet to score a hundred against Australia.
Trott has played one test against Australia and has one century. He is now batting in the pivotal no 3 spot and will be vulnerable if the openers go early. But with an average over 50 he remains England’s best performer.
No other England batsman averages 50.
Pietersen at 4 is an enigma. He has not yet come to terms with losing the captaincy, regardless of his public twitterings. Twitter, incidentally, is banned for the England players. Time for Phil Hughes to get on the blower.
KP has not had a good 2010. No hundreds, an injury, and being dropped for the first time in his career. His confidence is down and Australia will smell the blood.
Collingwood would appear the batsman most likely to succeed and Bell will be expected to deliver. The pressure will be intense on Bell as he struggles against Australia averaging 25 in 13 matches. Against India he averages 24, again highlighting his failures against strong opposition.
Australia on the other hand has Ponting, Clarke and Hussey all averaging over 50. Katich is close to 47 and Watson against England averages 48. But all this is in the past and Ponting and Hussey have to prove they still have it.
But in the end it is bowlers that win matches and Australia’s pace trio of Hilfenhaus, Johnson and Siddle/Bollinger have better averages and strike rates than their England counterparts. There is only a struck match between the pacers of both sides.
It is in the spin department that England possesses the edge and in Graeme Swann they have a match winner. He is averaging 26 for his 102 wickets and is without question the preeminent spinner in Test cricket.
Ponting, Clarke and Hussey must attack Swann.
They have to use their feet and not let him settle. England on the other hand will target Hauritz and how he stands up will go a long way in determining the stronger side.
There is no clear cut favourite. There are questions waiting to be asked of every player. Every session will be an examination of technique and temperament. Every day will be a new set of challenges.
There is no more engrossing rivalry than England versus Australia. We know the England side that will walk on to the ‘Gabba on the 25th of November. Bell to be the only change for Morgan from the side that played against Pakistan in the last test.
If one was setting odds based on form and the first test was next week then England are the clear favourites.
Australia will not show their hand till the week before the test. They will be battle hardened after India and a few Shield games. The two Tests in India in October will give us some of the answers.
If Australia wins the series, or even draw, in India then they will steamroll England.
If on the other hand Australia flounders in this passage to India they will be the raging underdogs against England. It is too early to pick the Ashes winner. We have to wait till Greg Chappell announces the squad for Brisbane.
England’s Ashes squad 2010 / 2011: Andrew Strauss (Capt.), Alastair Cook, Jonathan Trott, Kevin Pietersen, Paul Collingwood, Ian Bell, Eoin Morgan, Matt Prior, Steve Davies, Stuart Broad, Tim Bresnan, Graeme Swann, James Anderson, Steven Finn, Chris Tremlett, Monty Panesar
England’s Performance squad: Jimmy Adams, Jonny Bairstow, Danny Briggs, Michael Carberry, Maurice Chambers, Jade Dernbach, Andrew Gale, James Hildreth, Craig Kieswetter, Adam Lyth, Liam Plunkett, Ajmal Shahzad, Ben Stokes, James Taylor, James Tredwell, Chris Woakes
Vinay Verma
Roar Guru
Bayman and Colin N, the mindset is going to be important. England genuinely believe they can win. They will have to back this up and the intent they show on the first morning in Brisbane will determine their chances. On the other hand Australia's mindset yesterday against ndia,barring Ponting,was passive and made me think of Gandhi's birthday which is today. It was non-violent like a pavlova.
Colin N
Guest
Out of all the comments I've seen on this thread, I think this is the best of the lot, so.........congratulations! :) I enjoyed that little read.
Bayman
Guest
Vinay, I suspect that after reading your article, and the responses, one thing is quite clear. Neither England nor Australian supporters are particularly confident of winning. There seems to be a fair bit of, "If he plays well....and if he plays well". Certainly, from my perspective, the only reason I'd pick Australia is history. Some Roarers doubt our batsmen, some the bowlers. Personally, I think that despite the tribulations of Johnson and our failure to clinch victory in Cardiff in 2009, the real problem has been our batting. I can't remember how many times the tail has made our total respectable in the last few years but I am sure it's more than I would like. A score of 5/150 which becomes all out 350 does not, in fact, fill me with any joy. Once is good, three out of five is too much. To be sure, all the batsmen have made runs at some point but very rarely at the same time. Ironically, one of the few times I remember recently was in Cardiff when we couldn't bowl England out on the last day. There's no doubt England have improved though not necessarily in the batting and bowling. The difference today is the lack of fear. No longer do England hope to compete for awhile before the inevitable defeat. Now they know they can beat us and the mental battle is no longer so one-sided. Conversely, Australia no longer carry that aura of invincibility. There's still a lot of chat and aggro but these days it is not being backed up by performance as it was in the halcyon days of McGrath, Warne, Hayden, Waugh and co. The Aussies should get credit for still being very competitive and not suffering the great decline that others have gone through but let's not kid ourselves that it's still the old Australia. We still should beat England out here but it's by no means certain. Anderson may (or may not) have improved as a bowler. Time will tell. He can bend it in England but out here he's been pretty much straight up and down. Swann will bowl well and be very combative. It will be interesting to see if he maintains his incredible reputation for getting a wicket in his first over. It's a talent, and a gift, that's worthy of respect. The new guys will be fascinating to watch. Finn, Tremlett, Broad and Bresnan will have to overcome the desire to drop it short on those bouncy Aussie decks. It can be fun but only until the cherry disappears into the crowd. Perth can be a nightmare for the unwary. As for the English batting I'm going to presume KP will come good. It's hard to imagine today's player with the one who toured here in 2006/07. Most Englishmen seem to prefer to play off the front foot which can make life difficult out here. Of course, this front foot curse has also inflicted itself on the Aussies in the last few years. Modern coaching has a lot to answer for. I think Australia should win but, as I said, I'm definitely more nervous about our batting than our bowling - and that's allowing for the fact Johnno will bowl his usual amount of rubbish. If England should prevail, however, I won't be saying, "Gee, that's a surprise!" Perhaps Ricky should bring out a double-headed coin for the toss. Of course, being a Tassie boy he'd probably know the guy on the coin... and then call tails!
Colin N
Guest
"In 2009 on a road at Edgbaston, where a whole day was lost to rain. And that infamous game that McGrath rolled his ankle on the morning of the second test. He was castigated for bowling, even though the wicket had been under water for days before the game, after heavy rain, and the groundsman told him that it would move all over the shop … it didn’t." 2009 Edgbaston where Australia were 262 all-out and England hit 376. Australia in the second innings were 375/5, but it was hardly a match where Australia would have won because the game was lost to weather. In fact it was finely balanced. If anything, for the potential spectacle, it was a shame the weather intervened. As for 05 - at Old Trafford, a whole day's pretty much succumbed to the weather and by the end, England had Australia 371/9. If you really want to be pedantic, England probably would have won that game had the weather only forced there to be 14 overs to be bowled on that Saturday. But anyway, how is it relevant to points I made above?
Georgie McHugh
Guest
England triumphed after winning 4 of 5 tosses on featherbed flat wickets and regularly got the better of the conditions. Sunny first day bat. When Australia batted, it was overcast. Ponting has won only 2 from 10 tosses in England. In 2009 on a road at Edgbaston, where a whole day was lost to rain. And that infamous game that McGrath rolled his ankle on the morning of the second test. He was castigated for bowling, even though the wicket had been under water for days before the game, after heavy rain, and the groundsman told him that it would move all over the shop ... it didn't. It wasn't the reason that Australia lost either series; but, it certainly didn't help.
Rowdy
Guest
That's right, sheek, and we all stop at 4pm for a nice cup of tea, cucumber sandwiches (with the crusts cut off) and a quick round of what-hos and jolly good shows. What's wrong with fair play anyway ? Do you prefer the foul stuff ? Crikey, it's a game!
Colin N
Guest
I wouldn't say either were necessarily superb in 09. They had their moments and game-changing spells, but there were times in which they were dominated. I think they are better bowlers than they showed in 09. Swann by his own admittance said he was pretty awful in the last Ashes and everyone said he wouldn't take wickets in South Africa - he ended up being top wicket taker I believe. I think both these sides are pretty average to be honest with you and on paper you would say Australia look better on paper. However, I don't think England performed anywhere near their best last year and still came out on top.
Vinay Verma
Roar Guru
Colin N, Broad and anderson are certainly improved. They both were superb against Australia in 2009. Since then the competition has been weak and dare i say suspect. Will these two perform in australia. It remains to be seen. Will Swann succeed? Australian wickets do not favour finger spinners..though Emburey and Edmonds have had some success when Gatting captained. Colin,I am convinced Australia are 20% better than England in Australia. I will be the first to acknowledge England if they perform beyond my expectations.
sheek
Guest
VC, Thank God we play you Poms more often at sport than the Yanks. You Poms are just such push-overs (which of course doesn't say much for us Aussies either when we can't beat you). Ouch.....!
Colin N
Guest
"Anderson will struggle in Australia unless there is Humidity and this is only likely in Brisbane and Sydney. Broad I believe has too much being expected of him." Well, we'll see. But as I said, Broad and Anderson are much improved - do you not agree? "Surely,colin,you don’t expect any Australian to give England a chance?" No I don't - although I don't see how that is relevant to points I made. What I will say is that I don't like people adhering to outdated stereotypes, and people seem to do that far too much on this forum, although it does make for entertaining reading :)
Colin N
Guest
I don't quite understand that. I would say both line-ups (Eng 09) and Aus (with Watson) are 6 bowlers, four batters with one all-rounder. Either that or 7 batters and five bowlers!
jameswm
Guest
Australia has been playing 5 bowlers since Watson came in. But before that, it was 4 bowlers. Still - with McGrath and Warne as two of them, no one needed to worry too much about being conservative or bowling the opposition out twice.
Viscount Crouchback
Guest
Yes, there's certainly a touch of Hick about Bell. He seems to have toughened up - and of course, he's still a relatively young man - but time will tell. Technically, he's a beauty.
Viscount Crouchback
Guest
It's not Flower "being conservative". It's simply the inevitable loss of balance that occurs when a team loses a world-class all-rounder (Flintoff). The Australians have been playing four bowlers for ever, but no one suggests this is "conservatism".
Viscount Crouchback
Guest
Some amusing comments above. I'm not sure who most needs the lectures on "mindset" and "playing hard" - England, or the Australians who collapsed under pressure at the Oval and lost the Ashes...
Colin N
Guest
"How did Anderson do last Aussie tour, or was that the start of his career so doesn’t count as much?" I never said it didn't count, but Anderson is a much better bowler than he was then. Johnson had a great start to his test career, but was shocking in the Ashes considering the amount of press he received
sheek
Guest
Gee Vinay, You're making me work tonight, but I'm happy to oblige. This is NOT off the top of my head! Of test series of 3 or more tests in England, England have won 16 series to Australia's 14, with 3 drawn. Total of 33 series (3 tests or more). However, there is a caveat to England's dominance - they won 8 series up to WW1 compared to Australia's 3. Since 1921, Australia have therefore won 11 series to England's 8 (in England, that is). Australia won 4 series in succession in 1989, 93, 97 & 2001 before losing the past two in 2005 & 09. England won 6 series in succession at home before 1900, in 1884, 86, 88, 90, 93 & 96. This can be described as England's greatest period of domination over Australia. For most of the remaining time, we've had the edge.
Vinay Verma
Roar Guru
Sheek,you are the auditor I cannot fault. The main thrust of my piece was that England find it tough to beat Australia in Australia. Australia,conversely,have been successsful in England for long periods. Perhaps you can tell me of the top of your head how many times Australia have won series in England.
Vinay Verma
Roar Guru
Brett,I actually hope England persisit with the short stuff. Firstly,Finn and Tremlett(if he plays) are not a Kaspar version of Garner or Ambrose. Broad and Anderson are good when they pitch it up and it depends on the atmospheric conditions and how quicky they adjust to the bounce.
sheek
Guest
Some other useless info. The Ashes weren't created until 1882, although England & Australia had by this time played each other 7 times. The 3 test series in Australia in 1882/83 was the first for the legendary Ashes. All England touring teams travelled to Australia by boat for a very long time. The first England touring team to travel by airplane was Mike Smith's 1965/66 side. Although the first England senior A or B team to travel so far by plane was the Young England team to NZ in 1960/61. The first series of 5 tests in Australia was in 1884/85. The second in 1894/95. The first series of 6 tests in Australia was in 1970/71. For a long time there was confusion about a 7th test in this series. The sticking point about the abandoned (first) Melbourne test was that the captains had tossed the coin for choice of innings, & both teams had named their 12th man. However, years later common sense prevailed that this test never happened since neither team ever took the field. No ball was bowled, no ball was hit, & no ball was fielded. The concept of 6 test series was short lived, & all the 6 test series were in the 70s - 70/71, 74/75 & 78/79.