Yes the Australian middle order failed again, and yes, we lost another Test match. But imagine Ryan Harris bowling at England after Australia got knocked over for 136 on a superb bowling track – things would have been very different.
Instead we had Josh Hazlewood and Mitchell Starc running in bowling short and wide. Hazlewood particularly let Ian Bell, who was struggling until this game, off the hook by bowling some absolute cheesy deliveries, leaking three successive boundaries.
Starc on the other hand kept leaking runs. For some reason he has been persisted with by the selectors despite him clearly not showing any signs of being a Test bowler. His average in this series stands at 31.66 at 4.16 runs per over, which is unacceptable for a new ball bowler.
This is where we lost the match.
Michael Clarke had a lucky break-through when Alastair Cook was unfortunate to have been caught by Adam Voges off Nathan Lyon. Lyon was turning the ball but was taken out of the attack next over and Hazlewood continued his boundary-leaking spree. Hazlewood and Starc conceded 25 boundaries at more than 4.5 runs per over in that innings; things would have been a lot different had we bowled tighter.
Everyone seems to be going after the batsmen, which is justified, but our bowling let us down big time. We have plenty of bowlers in the shield capable of playing Test cricket. Jackson Bird is much closer to a Glenn McGrath replacement than Hazlewood. We need a bowler who keeps it tight for Mitchell Johnson to attack in short spells. Hazlewood, despite being talked up as the new McGrath, is nowhere close to being that bowler.
An ideal bowling line-up would be Johnson, Bird, James Pattinson and Lyon. Darren Lehmann says he wants pure pace, but continues picking Hazlewood.
Coming to the batting, Our top three are set, and Clarke deserves another go. Voges can be replaced with Shaun Marsh. My real worry is seeing Shaun bat above Nevill.
Going by what I saw at Edgbaston, Mitch Marsh has obvious technical flaws and England have found him out with the bat, while with the ball he isn’t keeping it tight nor picking up wickets.
Nevill showed brilliant composure batting almost 25 overs. Forget what he scored, he batted for 150 deliveries which today is a rarity in any Australian batting attack. We need someone who can dig in, and Nevill showed he can attack when the situation demands at Lord’s. He should certainly bat above Marsh.
I would go in with an extra bowler/batsman in place of Mitch Marsh. We need to end our obsession with all-rounders.
I’d give Voges another go in Mitch Marsh’s place. Voges bowls handy left-arm off-spin (surprised he hasn’t been used this series) to fill the all-rounder gap.
The best all-rounder in Australia has to be James Faulkner. He can fight out of any situation, and has proved both his bowling and batting capabilities in limited overs cricket time and again. He should be given another go in Test cricket after he serves his ban.
Lehmann needs to quit his obsession with pace and all rounders. McGrath didn’t bowl 140 kph all his career, and we are good enough to win without an all rounder, at least until Mitch Marsh is ready.
Ham
Guest
Nah, it was the batsmen.
Ahmed
Roar Rookie
Faulkner is our no.1 all rounder , if he can't we should include an extra bowler/batsman , just shouldn't pick bits and pieces all rounders for the sake of filling the spot.
Ruminate
Roar Guru
Im a big fan of Faulkner too, and you're right he is a quality cricketer who fights to the death, Im just pointing out that if he is to be included, he's not a #6 bat, most likely never will be, and at this point I feel that it's too much pressure on Neville. Of course it can well be argued that M Marsh is not either, and certainly he has struggled in tests in the UK, however he did very well in the lead up games and his bowling continues to improve as he gets more confidence in his body. His test batting average is 30.7, whilst they both have FC averages just shy of 32. Faulkner has the better bowling record, but is a couple of years older. Mitch Marsh needs to be backed, I feel, he seems like a future match winner to me. Then there is he debate about having 3 left arm pace bowlers.... Starc's 5/114 is at just under 23, Id take those figures! You're right though, it does seem like they fill the same role, though Id argue that Starc is much further developed than Johnson was at the same age. The problem for the last test is that both johnson and Hazlewood had poor tests together...Given his brief test career to date, I don't see that Hazlewood will have too many more poor ones. He is going to be a star as you rightly point out! ( in my original comment his name was spellchecked to Hallowed for some reason). I blame the batsmen fair and square, had they put another150 on the board in the first innings, its not just about the runs, but also the time at the crease, England wold have been batting later not he track in both innings...
Ronan O'Connell
Expert
Bird is playing county cricket and averaging 40 with the ball. Hazlewood is playing Test cricket and averaging 20. As clear cut as it gets.
Ahmed
Roar Rookie
Faulkner anyday is a greater all rounder than Marsh is. If they are to persist with Marsh they may as well pick Faulkner. Faulkner has that fighting spirit when everyone else fails and has batted us out multiple times and will do so in the future. Marsh is hopeless against the swinging ball, how about not playing a all rounder at all ? Teams succeed without one so did we. I agree on Clarke, he hasn't used Lyon well. Starc's 5-fer at lords costed him 114 runs. He is playing the Johnson role, i don't think we can afford two such bowlers. Hazlewood is a star for the future, not yet a 'leader of the attack'. Batsmen failed but the way the ball was swinging we could have had England all out for about 100 - 150. Which we did not. Batsmen are to be blamed but the bowling cannot go unnoticed too. England got us out cheaply due to the massive change in conditions from lords.
13th Man
Guest
yeah a bit harsh on Hazelwood. Starc however needs a rest, poor performance, give Siddle a run.
13th Man
Guest
hmmmm no, i don't think you could say the bowlers lost this one. The batting was woeful, completely terrible shot selection on a pitch with a bit of movement. Our bowling wasn't great but apart from a couple of pesky english partnerships (Broad and Ali) they weren't that bad. Mitch Marsh is a young fella and needs to be backed in, be patient with him. He will come good.
Ahmed
Roar Rookie
Can't defend for long, lack of patience and off stump awareness. He is not a test material for now. Can score a handy 25-30 ball 45-50 when the team is at 450-4 but will not be able to come out and play 20 overs like Nevill did the other day. Marsh should be sent to bat behind Nevill.
Ahmed
Roar Rookie
Starc has been bowling short and wide when the need was to keep it tighter, he's done so even at lords. Johnson came back well after a poor show in the first test and has kept it quite. Although he won't be dropped , but a win is imperative to retain the ashes. We need someone experienced with is Siddle, he can keep it tighter and support Johnson. If Johnson fails at trentbridge he can be dropped for starc. Johnson bowled a deadly spell to bring us back while the runs continued to flow from Hazlewood and Starc. England went to plan b and defended Johnson. Johnson had to be over bowled to contain runs and he lost his steam eventually. I am not criticizing Hazlewood individually, but his job is to contain runs and i feel if he is able to keep it at around 2.5-3 rpo he will allow Lyon and Johnson to attack more.
Ahmed
Roar Rookie
The bowling (particularly this attack) has fired when the batsmen gave them 400-500 scores. England could easily have been knocked over for something in the 100-150 range in their first innings, Starc and Hazlewood combined to leak 25 boundaries which is unacceptable. Yes Hazlewood is the leading wicket taker but his duty is to keep it tight, he is leaking at least 1 boundary per over.
Ahmed
Roar Rookie
Starc is top class in limited over cricket and this sadly is not the case in test cricket. Faulkner made his only List A century in International cricket and not in Ryobi. Reckon it has something to do with his batting spot.
Ruminate
Roar Guru
How many points to pick up on this article, though good on you for having a crack at it! Firstly, the batsmen can NEVER get away with a first innings effort of 136, that just puts ridiculous pressure on what the bowlers, the ones picked on here being the youngest members of the team who should be supported by the senior members. Hallowed put in one poor performance, in what has to date been a very promising start to his test career. Whilst he is a bit slower than the other members of the squad, contrary to what is claimed in the article he is around 140k's. Starc indeed had a poor test...off the back of the first test (5/114 & 2/60), the second test (1/86 & 1/16) where he was returning from injury , and in the third (2/71 &1/33), in the latter he might have been short of a run. To say that he shows nothing is rubbish, as he certainly did in the first test. in any case, he's ahead of Clarke, Voges, and Marsh in batting average and aggregate in this test series Clarke has not captained well to date in this series, you could even say that he has been outcaptained by Cook, which is some indictment. Marsh doesn't have obvious technical flaws, he just doesnt have enough experience in the UK which means he is going too hard at the swinging ball too early. Voges has looked completely at sea, and given their respective ages, there is no way that Id have him in ahead of M Marsh. Faulkner is a quality player, but he is not a #6 bat and would require Neville to bat at #6. He may be able tot do this, but not quite yet in the Ashes. It is his batting that holds him back a bit as he would need to play as a bowler.
Broken-hearted Toy
Guest
Having Starc bowl like this makes Johnson's job impossible. He can't really attack when he has to try and stem run flow. And he needs to be attacking to take wickets. He's not the type of bowler who can do both like McGrath. Which makes Clarke's job as skipper impossible. You can't set fields for poorly directed bowling.
Broken-hearted Toy
Guest
Yes, playing away from his body also leads to a big gate, which is why he gets bowled a lot.
Ruminate
Roar Guru
Burns is completely out of form in the UK at the moment, I seem to recall that his average is in the 20's this season
Broken-hearted Toy
Guest
Spot on. Starc has bowled for a season with Yorkshire in county cricket, but he seems to have learnt nothing on using the Duke ball. He is a lovely pressure valve for the English batsmen, either they don't have to play or they can belt him for four. Johnson has been unlucky. He beat the bat a hell of a lot. Both he and Lyon could have had Broad or Ali out any time in one of those sessions at Edgbaston. Broad and Ali got through by luck and got their eye in. Starc hasn't had any spells like that. He appears incapable of them. Stats tell you very little in this series. You just need to look at Anderson for that.
Zim Zam
Roar Rookie
I know Starc has got more wickets than Johnson, but his control is pretty much nonexistent. When he's on, he's fantastic. It's just that he's only on for about three overs a Test Match, and the rest of the time he's giving away fours. Johnson's actually been able to do a pretty good job, more and more as the series has gone on, of creating and maintaining pressure, which Starc just can't seem to do most of the time.
Pope Paul VII
Guest
Can't agree with you Ahmed. The middle order were like butter, twice.
CT
Guest
Burns is ready. Got a couple of important fifties in his few tests to date. Would have made this tour but Voges was banging down the door. So he got the nod. Joe has also had three solid shield seasons on the trot.
CT
Guest
"tequilla fuelled young virgin at a niteclub:. Gold. PIOZ . Why on earth would you send your own team to the slaughter on a grassy Edgbaston pitch with heavy overcast and the forecast of rain?