- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
The opening Ashes Test match is only the first serving in a ten-course marathon that finishes in Sydney early in the New Year.
And whether you think such a saturation is good for the game, there is little doubt that it will capture the imagination.
The oldest, and biggest, rivalry in the game has rarely failed to produce compulsive viewing and don’t expect that to change this time around.
Even if the English leg is the one-sided contest that many this side of the world are predicting, there is little danger of it becoming stale and boring as most would like to see Australia getting a good stuffing.
But I, for one, just can’t see that happening.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not going to jump on the Aussie bandwagon and proclaim that a couple of encouraging performances against Somerset and Worcestershire represent the beginning of a full-scale resurrection, but they are certainly not the easybeats many have them down for.
That said, should England turn up on enough occasions, they will not have enough to reclaim what they so desperately want and there are plenty of reasons for this.
The first, and most glaring, is the tourists’ batting.
Michael Clarke is world class and a good argument could be made for having him down as the best batsman on the planet but what else is there?
Shane Watson, now that he is opening again, is more than capable of having a decent series but he has no previous evidence to back up that assertion.
Chris Rogers is a good solid performer, and has been for years, but is an unknown quantity at the top level and both Ed Cowan and Phillip Hughes are short of Test match standard.
That leaves Usman Khawaja, another relative unknown, and Steve Smith who seems to have the right kind of spirit but a cat on a hot tin roof style that doesn’t scream consistency.
The joker in the pack – pun very much intended – is David Warner who has the tools to be a very good player but the mentality of someone who wants to throw away what he’s got.
The combative Brad Haddin is a good choice as ‘keeper and his batting is highly effective so that is one in the plus column.
The second reason is their relative inexperience.
That can sometimes play to a side’s advantage as there are little in the way of scars from previous defeats but in this case, and this concerns mainly the batting, it won’t help at all.
You can be as keen as you like but that won’t make-up for a lack of quality in essential areas.
Reason number three is the bowling.
This is a strength without doubt and in James Pattinson and Peter Siddle the visitors have two excellent seamers but they should be really concerned as to what backs them up.
Ryan Harris, as good as he can be, is a walking Injury claim form, Jackson Bird is untried and Jason Faulkner might be one for the future but isn’t ready quite yet.
Mitchell Starc has the ingredients to be a fine performer but consistency isn’t his friend and that is one thing they could really do with.
Spinning wise, Nathan Lyon is underrated but he won’t be causing any sleepless nights for those he is to face and if he doesn’t do the holding job that will be required of him then there will be added pressure on a seam attack that has to be allowed to bed in.
So there you have it. Australia can’t bat and they can’t bowl and if it is a prediction you want then they can’t win.
Closer than some think is how it will be but 3-1 to England is how it will finish.