The Aussies are winning, the Poms are losing, and an 18-year drought on UK soil may just be broken later this year. Or so say the optimists.
As Australia brushed aside a hapless Sri Lanka in the past fortnight, talk quickly shifted to the upcoming series against the old enemy. ‘Upcoming’ may be a stretch, as at least 21 white ball internationals are scheduled before the whites are donned again on August 1.
Nevertheless, the lopsided nature of the Sri Lanka series forced an early shift in conversation to the makeup of Australia’s ideal Ashes XI and more importantly, its chances of winning away for the first time since 2001.
Those chances, in the eyes of some fans, grew in the last fortnight. The half-empty Ashes glass may have just shifted to half-full. Four Aussie batsmen made centuries in Canberra, alleviating the unwanted record of no home tons in an entire summer.
Jhye Richardson emerged as the perennial ‘bolter’ with some truly exciting spells, while Mitchell Starc rediscovered his touch with a second career 10-for. Perhaps more importantly, however, we watched on as Jason Holder’s West Indies side crushed England in back-to-back test matches, completing a surprise series win in short time.
Trevor Bayliss’ attack-at-all-costs revolution of English cricket has, for the most part, been a success. But it was exposed in stark terms against a Windies side who belied stereotype to out-discipline the tourists.
This contrast in form of Australia and England is tempting to think that the gulf in class between the two sides mightn’t be as great as initially thought. Australia’s strong pace attack, after all, could cause havoc on a frail English top order. This might just be the time to strike.
Despite the optimism, the thought that Australia are all of a sudden strong Ashes contenders disregards some facts that blow overwhelmingly in England’s favour.
The first and most obvious of these is that there’s little evidence to suggest Australia has tempered its inability against the moving ball. Despite the crushing win on a Manuka road, Australia found itself three wickets down for less than 40 runs in both innings. This, too, against a Sri Lankan pace attack decimated by injury.
With Jimmy Anderson, Stuart Broad and Chris Woakes steaming in at the other end, that 3-40 could easily transpire to 100 all out. Anderson, a common foe on his home patch, has shown little sign of slowing up despite entering a 16th year of test cricket.
His incredible ability to move it both ways is still unmatched, and will cause huge issues for the Aussie top order. It’s also likely to be his swan song. We saw the power of goodwill momentum with Alastair Cook’s final series last year, and the feeling is likely to be the same.
England’s James Anderson (centre) celebrates PRESS ASSOCIATION Photo. Picture date: Saturday August 26, 2017.
Second is that Australia’s hopes, even with a performing bowling unit, rest largely on the form of the returning Steve Smith and David Warner. There’s innumerable questions hanging over this, but perhaps the most stark is that it will have been 16 months since the pair have faced world class Test bowling. In March 2018 it was against Kagiso Rabada and Vernon Philander, where they both struggled, and in August 2019 it will be Anderson and Broad.
The third is that while England’s form away from home is poor (much like Australia’s), they’ve been dominant at home. Without losing a home series since 2014, Joe Root’s side are a classy side in familiar surrounds.
They have often returned home from away series losses and blown away the next opposition, much as they did last year. After a poor performance against New Zealand away, they returned to beat India 4-1. And before the caveat brigade tell you the score ‘could have easily been 4-1 to India’, the simple fact is that it wasn’t. Against the world’s best Test side on home turf, they ran away with it. On the contrary a mere three months later that same Indian side dominated Australia.
David Warner will be a tad rusty when the Ashes starts. (AFP PHOTO / PAUL ELLIS)
While this still points heavily in England’s favour, their one undeniable, almost panic stations concern right now is a lack of opening options.
Without a Strauss or Cook, Australia could feasibly have England two-for-not-much in most tests such is their issues at the top.
Many have been and gone – Stoneman, Jennings, Hameed, Hales, Lyth. Now Rory Burns and Joe Denly have entered the hot seat. Starc, Hazlewood and Cummins will be licking their lips.
England aren’t a great side, and neither are Australia. In fact, one could mount an argument the 2019 Ashes will present two of the weakest XIs we’ve seen in some time.
Nevertheless, England are a strong unit at home, and any optimism should be tempered by the knowledge that events of the last fortnight have little to no bearing on the result later this year.
Dr Funkytown
Roar Rookie
Fair Call but still feel they have copped it to a degree before when Warner took a swing at Root. They will at the very least have a good length warm up before the floodgates open.
AREH
Roar Guru
None of them are in great touch, but I'd still label them International quality. What I think they lack is stability - shifting and changing batting positions almost every match can't be helping. Bairstow is capable at 3 without the gloves, but needs to nail that place leaving Root at 4. For all his aggression, Stokes averages 33 in test cricket. He is an ideal number 6 for mine, but shouldn't be higher. Probably leaves Buttler at 5; is that too high? Foakes and Ali at 7 and 8 respectively is a bit of a luxury, it's just that they have surplus options for these positions, and a lack of top order quality.
Paul
Roar Guru
Again, Jeffrey, I think it will come down to a war of attrition with the bat. By series end, you'll probably see 2 or 3 guys from both sides having bowling averages close to 20 and 3 or 4 guys having batting averages below 30. It's the side that gets the most players to average above 30 with the bat that should win this series, I think. England will be favourites for sure, especially if their team goes deep into the World Cup and Australia does not. You and I both know ODI and Ashes cricket are poles apart, but this won't stop the British press from proclaiming a 5-nil series win.
Jeffrey Dun
Roar Rookie
All fair points Paul. I do believe that if England produce conditions for the series like we had for Edgbaston/Trent Bridge last time, then the outcome of the series will be something of a lottery. England will bowl well in those conditions but so will Hazlewood, Cummins and Rhichardson, and we know how fragile the England batting line-up is. The toss could be even more critical than usual. The timing of the series may work in Australia's favour and the Australia A tour should provide a good opportunity to acclimitise. That said, I do think that England (like all home countries) should be favourites.
The Bush
Roar Guru
Bairstow hasn’t been in form for over 2 years. Stokes has a batting average of 33. Stokes had one little patch of form with the bat ever. He’s been mediocre through the rest of his career. In any event any chance we have is predicated on Smith and Warner playing to their ability at the right moments. Otherwise their mediocre batting line up will our score ours (as it’s in England).
Raimond
Roar Guru
Everyone (except for Root) has a poor-to-mediocre record at Test level. This may be the most overrated cricket team in history.
DaveJ
Roar Rookie
Against the world’s best Test side – nah, that’s really South Africa in all fairness. India just ahead on the rankings due to a quirk in the system thanks to them beating Sri Lanka away, while SA lost in Sri Lanka the year before. Whoever is saying it could have easily been India vs England is kidding themselves. There were a lot of low scores and England won because their bowlers were far more potent and they batted in greater depth than India.
Paul
Roar Guru
Jeffrey, the stats that most interested me came from the Indian tour to England last year where Anderson took 24 wickets at a shade over 18. I acknowledge the other numbers you have quoted, but these were the most recent Tests played by England at home, against a side who have some pretty useful batsman, as we saw this summer. Anderson was aided and abetted by some bowler friendly pitches. I'm not suggesting they were out & out green tops, but there was a complete contrast between the pitches served up for the ODI series, versus those the guys used in the Tests. England is likely to serve up pretty much the same again I suspect, which will turn this series into a low scoring affair, because if Anderson does well, it stands to reason our attack should do likewise against a less than stellar English batting lineup. If Australia goes into the first Test with the following batting order; Burns, Warner, Khawaja, Smith, Head, Patterson & Paine, only Warner, Smith & Khawaja have either played England or played Tests IN England. The side needs to get as much time in the middle over there, be in it County games, practice games or what ever, just to aclimatise. I think we have the batsman who are capable of doing well, but going into bat with little or no experience of foreign conditions can't be a good thing.
Nick
Roar Guru
There's some really odd posts popping up here. There's an acknowledgement that Australian bats were out of form, but might be finding form. Yes There's an acknowledgment that English bats are out of form, but then seem to say will not be able to find form again?? Why can't Bairstow or Stokes get runs again, but there's an assumption that Khawaja, or Head or Burns are just given to make runs in England? You have to assume that England bats can also find form again too. Stokes has a 250 against a South African attack in South Africa to his name. He also has the fastest test century scored at Lords. Bairstow was in a phenomenal patch of form about a year ago.
Nick
Roar Guru
England's batting is suspect for sure. So is Australia's. Cheap runs on a road against a club grade Sri Lankan line up (when the entire first string line up is absent, you have to put an asterisk on all the centuries) does not absolve the series technical deficiencies Australian batsman demonstrated against a good Indian attack. You've seriously cut Stokes to size there... He's a better bowler than bat anyway, with a 258 to his name. No Australian has that against their name at the moment. You are asking our bats to be patient and weather the new ball...yet that wasn't even done against Sri Lanka. Each time Australia for 3 for not many in Canberra BEFORE they clued into being patient. If England weathered the new ball, and were patient, then they've immediately negated what Australia did/can do.
Nick
Roar Guru
It will be far, FAR more vicious during the Ashes. The sledging won't be as bad in the world cup because the English have never really been great sledgers in ODI's, the crowds will be a bit more international in flavour, and with a record like England's in world cups, they can't really offer much. However the crowd in the Ashes will be straight out English v Australian and they'll have 5 days to really zero in on some good targeted sledging, and it's the trophy they want back the most.
Jeffrey Dun
Roar Rookie
"few of our guys have played in English conditions, let alone against Anderson and co." Paul, you make it sound like every test will be played on a green seamer under heavy overcast. That's not been the case in the past - at Lords and the Oval we flogged England on wickets that didn't offer much to the bowlers. I keep reading about what Anderson is going to do to us over there. I decided to check his stats in Ashes tests in England. I couldn't believe what I read. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I can see: Anderson has taken 44 Ashes wickets in England at an average of 33.36 and at a strike rate of 61.45. Not great really. By contrast, Stark has taken 29 wickets at an average of 31.24 and a strike rate of 54.28. To complete the picture, Broad has taken 61 ashes wickets at an average of 26.02 (helped greatly by his 8/15 in 2015) at a strike rate of 47.56. Finally, Hazlewood has taken 16 ashes wickets in England at 25.75 and a strike rate of 42. So Starc has a better average and strike rate than Anderson and Hazlewood has the best record of all. Interesting because Hazlewood was having trouble transitioning to the Duke ball in 2015. He should be much better next time around. So, perhaps the England batsmen should be worried if they lose the toss and bat on a green seamer under heavy overcast with Hazlewood, Dukes ball in hand, at the top of his run.
Paul
Roar Guru
David, these guys are Test level, but not in the first half of the order. 6,7 & 8, no problems
Paul
Roar Guru
TB, when I was writing that last comment, I was thinking back to the '72 Ashes tour when some swing bowler out of WA named Massie was chosen to play. Thankfully that blind prejudice you describe wasn't around so much then, otherwise one of the great Test bowling efforts would never have happened.
The Bush
Roar Guru
England will rightly start as favourites for a the simple reason that Australia's test line up, even with the return of Smith and Warner, is incapable of scoring enough runs away from home. The contest will be a classic example of how sport isn't won on paper - on paper our line up will look far more impressive than theirs, but I still won't be putting my money on Australia.
The Bush
Roar Guru
I dunno about that David; Bairstow and Stokes can't buy runs at the moment and I'd back Head and Burns to do as well or better than them. And remember, we're missing two of the world's best batsmen and they'll be back by then. If Australia's banned duo return well and play to their ability, Australia has a far better batting up than England; Khawaja, Smith and Warner's test records (at least on paper) all suggest they'd walk into the England top 5. In contrast I'd only take Root out of their top 5.
The Bush
Roar Guru
Australia's selectors can't get their heads around different types of fast bowlers full stop. If you're not 6'5 and bowling at 140+, you almost never get a look in.
Mark
Guest
"We’ve barely won in England in the last 15 years, maybe one series." It's worse than that - the last time Australia won a test series in England was 2001. Four straight losses since.
Raimond
Roar Guru
I didn’t mention our batsmen. Anyone arguing that England’s batsmen are even half decent must be watching a different game.
David Schout
Expert
If Bairstow, Buttler and Stokes are 'county-level' then most of Australia's top order are club-level