In the days leading up to the first Ashes Test, I made some predictions that I thought I’d revisit.
In hindsight, more than a few were on the hopeful side, rather than being well thought-out.
Nevertheless, I think I did okay!
Below on the left is the team I named for the first Test and the team on the right took the field.
My team | England team |
Rory Burns | Rory Burns |
Haseeb Hameed | Haseeb Hameed |
Dawid Malan | Dawid Malan |
Joe Root | Joe Root |
Ollie Pope | Ollie Pope |
Ben Stokes | Ben Stokes |
Jos Buttler | Jos Buttler |
Ollie Robinson | Ollie Robinson |
Stuart Broad | Chris Woakes |
Mark Wood | Mark Wood |
Jimmy Anderson | Jack Leach |
How was I to know the sole England selector, Chris Silverwood, was going to have a brain explosion right at the start of the series? He managed to get nine names right, but the two he missed arguably cost his team any chance of winning that match.
I had high hopes for England’s openers, Hameed in particular, but both were disappointments.
My prediction was “one or both openers will have a broken finger or hand in the series, but will still make at least one century opening partnership”.
I’m still not sure if I got this even partly right. Obviously England didn’t get within cooee of a century opening stand but I’m not sure whether either batsmen broke a hand or finger. Hameed had enough tape on his fingers to suggest he did but I’ve not seen any reports to confirm that.
My next predictions were around two guys I thought could really step up with the bat, Dawid Malan and Olly Pope, calling both to improve their batting averages and both to score a hundred – Malan in Perth and Pope in Melbourne.
Malan finished with a series average of 24.40 and Pope with an average of 11.16. This was an epic prediction fail.
Ben Stokes was the late inclusion into the squad and all expected him to play a seriously important part in the Ashes. That he didn’t says a lot about how well Australia managed to contain both his batting and bowling.
My prediction was “Stokes will have a greater impact on the series with ball, rather than bat”.
Well compare ten innings, 236 runs at 23.6 versus 63 overs, four wickets at 71.50. None of these numbers are flattering so I’ll let you be the judge about whether my prediction was even partly right.
These are the other England predictions I made:
• Ollie Robinson will struggle across the series. He’ll take no more than 15 wickets at an average in excess of 35.
His 11 wickets at 25.54 suggests I got this wrong, but he did struggle to bowl – though when he did, he was generally very good.
• England will only play a spinner in Sydney.
And so they should have! Leach was a bad selection in Brisbane and a dubious selection in Hobart.
• Joe Root will win more tosses than he loses, but will lose more Tests than he wins.
Joe won two tosses and probably wished he’d lost both. I got that first part wrong but the second part right.
I moved on to Australia and started with the batting, predicting Marcus Harris and Travis Head would “both have 400-run series”.
I’m claiming a moral victory with Head, who must have been a near certainty to pass 400 but for missing the Sydney Test.
My Harris prediction was based on hope rather than any great conviction. I genuinely wanted him to have a great series and cement his spot at the top of the order, but that wasn’t to be.
I did slightly better with my next prediction, that Cameron Green would only take five to eight wickets, but they would be crucial ones, and he’d notch up his first ton.
Green exceeded my expectations with the 13 wickets he took, but it was taking key wickets at key times that was really impressive. Sadly he missed that first century, but in a low-scoring series, that’s fine. He certainly made up for the lack of runs in all other parts of his game.
Then there was the battle of the keepers and my prediction that Alex Carey would go better with bat and gloves than Jos Buttler.
Neither keeper was outstanding but Carey was streets ahead of Buttler with the gloves, the Englishman found out time and again, with his misses behind the stumps badly hurting England.
Regarding the bowlers, I said no Aussie bowler would dominate but Josh Hazlewood and Nathan Lyon would be Australia’s best.
The first part is right but the entire attack was extremely impressive.
Hazlewood’s early injury meant he was no chance to be a best bowler and I had high hopes for ‘The Goat’ after the first couple of Tests, but along came Scott Boland and he and Mitchell Starc had terrific series, as did the skipper.
Still I’m sure Garry would be thrilled to take his 400th wicket and 16 for the series at 23.56 is a fine return.
I finished with some other Australian predictions:
• Australia will only have to bat on eight occasions in this series.
I went within 20 runs of being right. If Australia had won the first Test by an innings, I’d have been on the money.
• Steve Smith and Marnus Labuschagne will have at least one partnership over 150.
Not even close, with Smith underwhelming.
• Jhye Richardson will play at least two Tests.
He was unlucky on two counts, as Starc maintained his form throughout the series and Boland was simply outstanding from the third Test onwards.
• Australian catching will significantly improve from last year.
It was better but there’s still plenty of room for improvement.
• The little urn will stay Down Under.
An easy one but still a big tick.
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
Dave, I am certain the only criteria I've ever seen you use to assess a player's performance in a series is what he averaged. You are at least smart enough not to be led into a trap by my very pertinent example. As for your last sentence, I won't cry foul, I'll just store it away to remind you of it should you ever call me out for talking to you in a less than friendly manner. :happy:
DaveJ
Roar Rookie
Over a 5-Test series, hardly. But why are you asking? Nothing I’ve said above could have prompted that question. Your chance to prove your ability to understand the written word in English.
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
And I'm intrigued to know what your answer will be. It's your chance to prove once and for all just how important averages are.
DaveJ
Roar Rookie
I’d be intrigued to know why you’re asking.
Ernest
Guest
Carey is a very average keeper, and the selectors know that they made the wrong call. Inglis is Australia’s long term test keeper, and it won’t be long before this occurs. He is the better bat too.
PeteB
Roar Rookie
We knew England were going to be bad, but not that bad. When they started the first test without Anderson and Broad the signs were well and truly there before a ball was even bowled that it was going to be a thrashing.
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
Goodness me. Tell me Dave, say, for example, a batsman scores 310 runs in a 5-test series at an average of 44.3, with no other information, having not watched any of the five tests, how do those numbers tell you how that player performed under pressure against the strongest of opposition … I await, extremely intrigued as to what you will say …
Johnno
Roar Rookie
Missed a sitter stumping & was generally not clean.
DaveJ
Roar Rookie
There’s no doubt he would have felt under pressure- the pressure of reputation, especially in your first Test - if not under much pressure in terms of contributing to the team’s objective of winning. Of course, scores and averages reflect not only ability to execute under pressure, but also your ability to score runs without getting out against bowlers of a certain level. So getting out in Brisbane did have significance in that sense, as you suggest Jeff. I sense we all agree we nevertheless wouldn’t mark him down too much or overemphasise the series average in judging how he fared in the series.
DaveJ
Roar Rookie
https://www.theroar.com.au/cricket/video/alex-carey-comes-under-fire-for-missing-a-stumping-that-could-have-changed-the-result-1174365/
DaveJ
Roar Rookie
Didn’t suggest you were. Though it’s pretty obvious that a number 7’s batting average across a long career (as opposed to a five test series) will tell you something if there’s a big difference between his average and other number 7’s, adjusting or taking into consideration opponents, conditions of the era, etc.
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
What happened? (I don't watch bbl)
Johnno
Roar Rookie
Batting aside, I think Carey is only an average keeper. Last nights BBL again showed this.
Choppy Zezers
Roar Rookie
My predictions: Khawaja to open: well that worked out in Hobart. He let me down. Warner to blaze a couple of run a ball hundreds: did he even get a century? He let me down. Scott Boland is never nor ever will be a test bowler: possibly the worst prediction from any century you care to mention. He let me down. Pat Cummins to struggle with the responsibility of captain/bowler: loads of wickets and led his team to a 4 blot victory. He let me down. To summarise, just a disappointing effort from the Aussies. They all need to take a long hard look in the mirror.
Jeff
Roar Rookie
Perhaps. But on the basis that a batsman values their wicket each time at the crease, then those things (unplayable deliveries) even out across a career.
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
I don't look at his average, a wicket keeper's raw average batting at 7 is the most easily distorted indicator of all the batsmen in a cricket team.
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
That's the situation to get an unplayable one you can do nothing about.
Jeff
Roar Rookie
Ok. So he valued his wicket and was dismissed cheaply in doing so.
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
That's fine Jeff, but it should not be in any way a black mark against him, the 4th innings in Brisbane or the 3rd innings in Sydney. In that way it is irrelevant. It would be drawing a long bow to say he didn't value his wicket on either occasion.
Jeff
Roar Rookie
Internally though, we’ve had a pretty good run over the last two years. There was always going to be a period of pain and disruption pushing through the last mile. But reckon we’ve been fortunate to not have to endure months of household lockdown and impact on local businesses up to this point.