ASHES: Talking points from day one at the WACA

By Ronan O'Connell / Expert

Was Steve Smith’s hundred the best of the Ashes so far? Will Shane Watson, George Bailey and Chris Rogers all survive this series? Will England learn not to bowl short at the WACA?

These were some of the questions posed by a fast-paced day of cricket at the WACA which saw Australia fight back from 5-143 to end the day ahead in the match at 6-326.

Was Steve Smith’s hundred the best knock of the series so far?
Smith’s maiden century of 138 not out in the final Test of the last Ashes was a marvellous knock.

But it pales in comparison to his innings today which was the supreme display by any batsman so far this series.

At 5-143, just 34 overs into the day’s play, Australia were on the brink of relinquishing the momentum they had built up over the first two Tests.

England were revitalised and brimming with confidence for the first time since day one of the Gabba Test.

Over the following four-and-a-half hours Smith showcased the calm and circumspection so patently missing from the efforts of his older team mates before him.

Opposed to Graeme Swann he utilised nimble footwork to manipulate the tweaker’s length.

Against the quicks he shouldered arms to those deliveries which posed the greatest threat and dispatched others which strayed into his hitting zones.

Smith’s position in the side was being questioned in some quarters after an underwhelming start to this series.

He will not receive similar scrutiny for some time.

His innings was of such significance that Australia not only avoided being skittled by England but finished the day well on top in the Test.

The average first innings score at the WACA in the past nine Tests has been 308.

Given England’s average score in their first four innings this series is 200, Australia will feel they are in the ascendancy.

Tomorrow morning, Smith and Mitchell Johnson have the opportunity to grind England into the flint-like WACA surface.

A total of 380-plus would ensure England would have to play sensational cricket to avoid defeat and the resultant handing over of the Ashes.

Will Shane Watson, Chris Rogers and George Bailey all survive this series?
At the start of this series, the makeup of Australia’s batting order was as certain as it had been since the retirements of Mike Hussey and Ricky Ponting last summer.

Chris Rogers had averaged 56 in his previous three matches.

David Warner was being backed by the selectors due to his career average of 50 in home Tests.

Shane Watson had finished the Ashes series in England as comfortably Australia’s highest scorer, with 418 runs.

Michael Clarke was Michael Clarke.

Steven Smith had finally blossomed as a Test batsman, hitting his first century and ending the last Ashes with a respectable average of 38.

George Bailey was the only unknown, having been selected almost entirely off the back of his sumptuous ODI touch.

It was a comforting situation for the Aussies who had made an extraordinary volume of alterations to its batting order over the tours of India and England.

Phil Hughes, Matthew Wade, Ed Cowan, Moises Henriques, Glenn Maxwell and Usman Khawaja were all tried and discarded.

Meanwhile, Clarke, Smith, Watson, Warner and Brad Haddin had all occupied at least two different positions in the order.

Now, Australia again have uncertainty surrounding their batting line-up thanks to the dismal form of Watson, Rogers and Bailey.

All three found varied, yet equally disappointing ways to dismiss themselves today.

Rogers started the rot by calling for a quick single before hesitating and being caught short of his crease by a brilliant turn-and-throw effort from James Anderson.

The veteran is averaging just 20 from five innings this series and has four scores of 16 or less.

History suggests that when you are 36, form slumps are not long tolerated by the selectors.

Soon after, Watson did as he always does, showing encouraging signs before frittering away a decent start.

Those signs today were not the typical flourishing drives or commanding pulls which have become Watson’s trademark.

Instead, he had gladdened Aussie hearts by displaying common sense in leaving a clutch of deliveries in good areas just outside off.

This patience dissipated in a moment of mediocrity as the all-rounder lurched onto the front foot and tried to flay a delivery on the up which he should have either left or defended from the crease.

Watson has had a charmed run in the Aussie side, retaining his place despite years of indifferent batting form thanks to both the lack of alternatives and the high regard the selectors have for his bowling.

But the manner in which he has donated his wicket to England often this series is of huge concern.

The 32-year-old has played some gruesome, unnecessary strokes to deliveries which would have best been left alone.

Fortuitously, the selectors clearly believe they require a strong fifth bowling option, in part to protect invaluable but physically-fragile quick Ryan Harris.

With all-rounder-in-waiting James Faulkner likely to be unavailable for the next two Tests with a broken thumb, Watson has been given some breathing space.

New number six George Bailey is perhaps the man under the most scrutiny.

The 31-year-old has been unconvincing in his first three Tests, with his only score of note – 53 at Adelaide – coming after he was put down by Monty Panesar early in his innings.

He was drafted into the side partly because of the maturity and composure it was hoped he would add to Australia’s faltering top six.

Yet the stroke which brought about his downfall today was callow and reckless.

England’s plan could scarcely have been more blatant.

Skipper Alastair Cook sent a man to deep backward square leg. Stuart Broad fired in successive bouncers.

Broad’s next delivery was again short and Bailey gleefully leapt into the English trap, skying a lame hook shot to Kevin Pietersen on the boundary.

Bailey cannot afford many more such missteps this series or he may find that the Test career for which he waited so long will be ruefully truncated.

Will England learn not to bowl short at the WACA?
It happens year after year. Touring quicks are seduced by the extravagant bounce of the WACA wicket and subsequently make the mistake of banging the ball into the deck far too often.

After 50 overs of today’s play, nearly half of the deliveries from England’s bowlers were bracketed as “short” on the Channel Nine pitch map.

Soon after, another television graphic showed that just 11 of the first 307 balls sent down by England would have struck the stumps.

Hence, the English bowlers had all but eliminated two key methods of dismissal – bowled and LBW.

To further illustrate England’s ill-advised length, Steven Smith’s wagon wheel shows he scored 81 of his 103 runs through the on side.

Six times Smith unfurled his favoured pull shot to lash long hops to the boundary.

The young Aussie’s most glaring weakness is his tendency to lunge forward to fish at balls just outside off.

Yet rarely did England target this flaw.

Former Western Australia captain Tom Moody, who played more matches at the WACA than almost any other cricketer in history, summed up the most frequent mode of dismissal at Perth.

“Most of the wickets at the WACA come from the batsman pushing forward and it hits the top outside edge of the bat,” Moody said during a commentary stint on Channel Nine.

Too rarely did England ask the Aussie batsmen to make such a movement.

The Crowd Says:

2013-12-14T07:01:41+00:00

Bearfax

Guest


Ronan firstly I supported Rogers inclusion, not because of anything else but his first class average. I still think he's got something there to offer. That wasnt the focus of my criticism. It was based on what I think is a failure of the selectors for a long time to understand that to progress you operate from a position of best potential strength. That means if you have an older player in their 30s whose been around long enough to have worked out the kinks in their game but is still unable to make a significant impression, then to select just because they look good in another form of the game where the strategies are totally different, while the player continues to fail where it counts is folly. Yet they've been doing it over and again with players like S. Marsh, North, Voges, Bailey, Cowan, Finch, Quiney Christian etc and have ended with egg on their face. Yet we have a bunch of younger players who have better first class averages even well before they have addressed their demons who are played around with to the point where you can see they lose confidence. Yet these are your strength. This is not just about Hughes. Its about a focus on your future. Surely if you have a good older player and a good younger player and the younger player is statistically better performed, you should always go for the younger player....because they will develop further and if they are as good as the older player now, they'll probably be far better later.You just must persist with them. They finally persisted with Warner and Smith, both considered by many as a waste of time and yet what have we got now. Hughes, Maddinson, Doolan and Khawaja are no different. Surely blind Freddy can see they are outstanding talent and if they can succeed at first class level at a young age, I'm convinced they can move to the next level. They've fought hard and worked on their game to reach first class level and succeed. There is nothing to stop them reaching the next stage other than hard work and experience. There's nothing magical about the next step up any more than the step up from grade cricket to first class cricket. If you've got the talent and work hard at it, you'll get there. I dont believe in all this hogwash about technique.debilitating someone from reaching the next level when they've been so successful at the lower level often against the same sort of bowling, just less intense. Ronan I remember so well exactly the same stuff being strutted out about Hayden. And there are interesting parallels here. We've got great kids coming through. Pick them. They arent going to lose by the experience and may well gain. And they may have to be dropped several times like Hughes to address an issue. But always to work on an improvement in their game, never to dismiss them as prospects. That's what happened to Bevan and its a tragedy because he could have been one of the best test players on record. We judge far too early.

2013-12-14T05:52:20+00:00

Eddy Bramley

Roar Pro


Great innings from Smith. England looked to be dominating when he arrived at the crease and, with the help of Haddin, he batted Australia back into a promising position. a timely innings for Smith too whose position may have been slightly in doubt. He's certainly solidified it now!

AUTHOR

2013-12-14T05:18:25+00:00

Ronan O'Connell

Expert


Bearfax it's harsh to compare Bailey whose had 4 innings with Hughes whose average is so poor over an extended period of 23 Tests. Rogers has averaged 34 since coming back into the side which is not good enough but he deserves another couple of Tests. Watson is lucky to have survived so long but the selectors clearly want an all-rounder and there is no obvious alternative apart from Faulkner.

2013-12-14T04:48:54+00:00

Bearfax

Guest


Well I've been on this track before Ronan. lets wait and see in the next 6-12 months. I'll of course remind you if he comes good....mind you I wont if he fails. ps I dont think he's failed. He just hasnt lived up to expectations yet. And it surprises that you would support batsmen in the present team after almost 3 tests who are averaging less than Hughes did during the period you are criticising him about. Bailey 24, Rogers 20, Watson 18. Hmmm. Even some of the bowlers have better averages.

AUTHOR

2013-12-14T03:36:30+00:00

Ronan O'Connell

Expert


Faulkner won't pay an part in this series by the looks of it because of his broken thumb.

AUTHOR

2013-12-14T03:35:29+00:00

Ronan O'Connell

Expert


Haha that is a very embarrassing stat for England indeed. One of the great all-round efforts from a player so far this series.

AUTHOR

2013-12-14T03:34:00+00:00

Ronan O'Connell

Expert


Yeah it is easy to forget Smith is still very young at 24...he seems to have been around forever.

AUTHOR

2013-12-14T03:32:45+00:00

Ronan O'Connell

Expert


No I don't think any of that trio is at risk of being dropped for the next Test. Different story if they struggle for the remainder of the series though.

AUTHOR

2013-12-14T03:30:47+00:00

Ronan O'Connell

Expert


Can't agree with you Pom...an average of 42 in your first 25 Tests is very good for an opener.

2013-12-14T03:30:22+00:00

twodogs

Guest


Thanks for that mr linguist. I may ask you later on what other abbreviations mean. I asked my kids and they rolled their eyes and said some thing like 'where have you been dinosaur?'. No problems but, my daughter Kate has just asked me for 50 bucks 'cause she's a bit short this week!.............

AUTHOR

2013-12-14T03:26:56+00:00

Ronan O'Connell

Expert


Thanks for that comparison Matt, very interesting.

AUTHOR

2013-12-14T03:25:31+00:00

Ronan O'Connell

Expert


Yep Boof definitely deserves credit for the way things have turned around since the debacle in India.

AUTHOR

2013-12-14T03:24:07+00:00

Ronan O'Connell

Expert


Yep I agree with you Andrew. The luxury of being a winning side is not chopping and changing.

AUTHOR

2013-12-14T03:22:58+00:00

Ronan O'Connell

Expert


As far as I'm concerned Hughes has been offered a stack of opportunities and has failed time after time. His form in the Shield now is no better tan it was before he was picked (and failed) previously. Hopefully this top six can hold the fort until after the SA series and then I'd look at maybe blooding someone next summer against India's weak attack.

2013-12-14T02:52:43+00:00

Mark Skinner

Guest


The thing is, his dismissals have been awful. He looks quite out of place in Test cricket...

2013-12-14T02:49:44+00:00

Mark Skinner

Guest


Bailey does not look like a test cricketer. His dismissals have been poor and he's taking up a spot for a newer cricketer

2013-12-14T02:48:24+00:00

Bearfax

Guest


I agree with much that you say Ronan. On this point regarding Hughes I disagree strongly. I think he's about to blossom. But we'll see wont we. Besides who else is there. Bailey is in my opinion a mistake. His flaws are far worse than Hughes especially against the rising ball. Doolan is off the boil...I would have picked him next if his form had continued. We both agree Silk and Maddinson are perhaps too young yet. Similarly Lynn. Khawaja is in repose. Burns is beginning to show some improvement again. Point is there is Hughes after Rogers, Hussey, Clarke and Warner in first class averages and performances this season and then there's daylight. People forget Smith was in the 20s not so long ago for test averages and considered to have too many flaws. And Hughes scores more heavily than Smith. Confidence is the issue not flaws. Remember Hughes scored an 81 not out against England that would have been a century but for running out of partners. We were blinded by Agar's remarkable innings, but forget that it was Hughes sticking around that saved that innings. Had he scored a century I wonder if we would be having this conversation

2013-12-14T02:46:25+00:00

Muttonman

Guest


Ronan, I believe you have also said that you wouldn't want to blood someone new in SA, which is a fair view. Hughes debuted very well in SA and is in better form than any of the other Shield hopefuls. Unless Maddinson, Carters, Doolan, Silk, or Lynn etc. outscore him in Shield, I don't think they are able to be justifiably picked ahead of him.

AUTHOR

2013-12-14T02:13:16+00:00

Ronan O'Connell

Expert


Absolutely they can Jayden but it depends on which England side turns up this morning. The ball is still very new and if the English quicks are switched on and bowl the right length they could run through us in the first 30 minutes. If they are listless like they were in the last session yesterday Australia could pile up well beyond 400.

AUTHOR

2013-12-14T02:11:04+00:00

Ronan O'Connell

Expert


I hope you're right Matt...Bailey should be given the rest of the series to prove himself and, given Rogers' strength is against pace, I'd be retaining him for the horribly difficult tour of SA in February.

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar