John Gray's latest "Point of View" would seem to be entirely his own delusion.
If Gray actually took the time to speak to more atheists, I think he'd find that there was less disagreement between his own "religion friendly" version of atheism and their beliefs. The falsehood here is his own personal belief that modern atheism is all Dawkins and Harris: combative, offensive, provocative, disrespectful and rude; somehow inferior to that of the previous, considerate intellectual giants he reveres from his ivory tower. His confusion stems from the belief that so many current atheists follow so closely in the footsteps of said New Atheism; Gray is inventing a host of enemies where few actually exist.
Whilst there is undoubtedly merit in looking back at the lives of these atheists from bygone years, and indeed these case studies are the most interesting parts of Gray's article; the usefulness of his point of view ends when he starts taking his own personal vendetta with a small number of radical anti-theists to a larger stage, just to try and prove a point. One might argue that these people he describes need to exist, as they are just one end of the spectrum of beliefs - and you can't right a ship by jumping up and down in the middle - regardless, there is no particular reason to consider them "mainstream". And even these "atheist extremists" who I might add do not really represent the views of most atheists, tend to be wordsmiths or activists-lite. There are very few if any who actually resort to violence because of their unbelief. The same cannot be said of religious zealots.
"An atheist, we tend to assume, is someone who thinks science should be the basis of our beliefs and tries to convert others to this view of things"
No. YOU tend to assume, Prof. Gray, thus it's in your interests to paint this myopic viewpoint as fact. There is no need to convert others to a scientific view of things, as its benefits are self evident. One of the biggest factors leading to the fall in religiosity the world has seen in recent years has been that scientific and technological advancements actually work; and belief in Gods, seemingly, does not. And even if anyone wanted to convert someone - you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink, as the saying goes.
Atheists these days possess a huge range of beliefs and attitudes. If you put ten together in a room, none of them may agree exactly on anything. Embracing science and philosophy, which more and more atheists do, allows for nuances and perspectives that enhance our individuality. Far from being monolithic, modern atheists have some of the most diverse opinions you could hope to come across.
"But for both of them (Leopardi and Powys), religion was much more than an outdated theory. If Leopardi believed religion of one sort or another was beneficial for human happiness, Powys valued religion as a kind of poetry, which fortified the human spirit in the face of death."
Religion isn't a theory at all, it's a hypothesis. It's "outdated" only in the sense that it was devised a long time ago and in many cases hasn't changed much - plenty of people still believe it and this number will increase as the world population rises and parents continue to indoctrinate their children. So in fact it is very much still "here and now". And you can still believe that "religion of one sort or another" is beneficial to human happiness and be an atheist today. We just don't necessarily need the supernatural parts. The benefits of engaging in ceremony, ritual and being part of a large friendly group has been studied to death. And it's well known that kidding yourself (and having to believe it) is one way to increase performance or overcome hardship and psychological barriers. Again, there are ways of doing this that depart from what would be considered "religion" as well. For all his aggrandising of religion, Gray's reductionist views of the scope, range and variety of modern atheism are what's really short-sighted here.
His last paragraph just rehashes the same arguments from earlier in his article. What evidence does Gray have that most atheists even behave like this? I'd sure like to know. Until then I consider it to be his own personal delusion.
Sunday, 30 August 2015
Review: Ashes 2015 - England vs. Australia 5th Test, The Kia Oval, 20- 23 August 2015
Review: Ashes 2015 - England vs. Australia 5th Test, The Kia Oval, 20- 23 August 2015
Ashes-winning England crumble as captain Clarke bows out with final win
Fifth Test review: Australia won by and innings and 46 runs. England won the 5-match series 3-2
I don't want to overly dwell on the fifth test too much - it's been well covered elsewhere (see the many links I've provided in this post) and from an England perspective, after the series was already won, was a bit of an anti-climax!
England wasted a golden opportunity to give leg spinner Adil Rashid some extra experience before going out on their UAE tour. Instead they stuck with the same team, yet still succumbed to Australia by an innings thanks to some dodgy batting, especially in their first innings. Forced to follow on by outgoing Australian captain Michael Clarke, England made a better effort in the second innings but just failed to make Australia bat again, finally losing by an innings and 46 runs.
The Ashes were already won, but it felt slightly strange to parade the Urn round the Kia Oval having just lost the match so decisively. The celebrations should have ideally taken place at Trent Bridge after the last Test. It was a great series in many ways, but also an unusual one. Each side performed either very well, or very poorly in spells. England just had more very good spells than Australia. The victory was unexpected, but it may be telling for England going forward that the only 2 games that were played on good, flat batting wickets (Lord's and the Oval), Australia won comfortably.
Links:
Scorecard
http://www.espncricinfo.com/the-ashes-2015/engine/match/743971.html
ESPNCricinfo review
http://www.espncricinfo.com/the-ashes-2015/content/story/912791.html
Nicholas: High Drama, low tension
http://www.espncricinfo.com/the-ashes-2015/content/story/913043.html
Overall series ratings - Swanny
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/34034006
Preview going forward
http://www.alloutcricket.com/cricket/blogs/tougher-tests-ahead-for-englands-ashes-winners
BBC TMS podcast
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p030hgyf
Match ratings
Ratings Explained: 1-3 very poor, 4 poor, 5 average, 6 OK, 7 good, 8 very good, 9 excellent, 10 unbelievable
England - Overall rating: 5
Cook*- 7
Lyth - 4.5
Bell - 4
Root - 4.5
Bairstow - 5
Stokes - 5.5
Buttler+ - 6
Moeen Ali - 7
Broad - 5
Finn - 7
Wood- 6
Australia team rating - 8
---
Overall series ratings (all 5 Tests)
England Team Average - 7.2
Australia Team Average - 5.9
Average Player ratings (ordered with top first):
Finn - 7.8 (only 3 matches)
Broad - 7.7
Anderson - 7.5
Cook*- 7,4
Root - 7.3
Moeen Ali - 7.2
Stokes - 7.0
Wood- 7.0
Buttler+ - 6.3
Bairstow - 6.3
Bell - 6.1
Ballance - 5.8
Lyth - 5.3
---
Going forward:
Here is a brief summary of the England fixtures up to and including next summer. We have a couple of long winter tours ahead of us, followed by the excitement of the iT20 world cup next spring. Sri Lanka and Pakistan will be the visiting teams next year. The life of an international cricketer is sure a busy and hard one!
2015-16
Oct-Nov: PAKISTAN (in UAE) - 3 Tests, 4 ODIs, 3 iT20s
Dec-Feb: SOUTH AFRICA - 4 Tests, 5 ODIs, 2 iT20s
2016
Mar-Apr: ICC iT20 World Cup (India)
May-Jun (in ENG now): SRI LANKA - 3 Tests, 5 ODIs and 1 iT20
Jul-Sep: PAKISTAN - 4 Tests, 5 ODIs and 1 iT20
...
Ashes-winning England crumble as captain Clarke bows out with final win
Fifth Test review: Australia won by and innings and 46 runs. England won the 5-match series 3-2
I don't want to overly dwell on the fifth test too much - it's been well covered elsewhere (see the many links I've provided in this post) and from an England perspective, after the series was already won, was a bit of an anti-climax!
England wasted a golden opportunity to give leg spinner Adil Rashid some extra experience before going out on their UAE tour. Instead they stuck with the same team, yet still succumbed to Australia by an innings thanks to some dodgy batting, especially in their first innings. Forced to follow on by outgoing Australian captain Michael Clarke, England made a better effort in the second innings but just failed to make Australia bat again, finally losing by an innings and 46 runs.
The Ashes were already won, but it felt slightly strange to parade the Urn round the Kia Oval having just lost the match so decisively. The celebrations should have ideally taken place at Trent Bridge after the last Test. It was a great series in many ways, but also an unusual one. Each side performed either very well, or very poorly in spells. England just had more very good spells than Australia. The victory was unexpected, but it may be telling for England going forward that the only 2 games that were played on good, flat batting wickets (Lord's and the Oval), Australia won comfortably.
Links:
Scorecard
http://www.espncricinfo.com/the-ashes-2015/engine/match/743971.html
ESPNCricinfo review
http://www.espncricinfo.com/the-ashes-2015/content/story/912791.html
Nicholas: High Drama, low tension
http://www.espncricinfo.com/the-ashes-2015/content/story/913043.html
Overall series ratings - Swanny
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/34034006
Preview going forward
http://www.alloutcricket.com/cricket/blogs/tougher-tests-ahead-for-englands-ashes-winners
BBC TMS podcast
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p030hgyf
Match ratings
Ratings Explained: 1-3 very poor, 4 poor, 5 average, 6 OK, 7 good, 8 very good, 9 excellent, 10 unbelievable
England - Overall rating: 5
Cook*- 7
Lyth - 4.5
Bell - 4
Root - 4.5
Bairstow - 5
Stokes - 5.5
Buttler+ - 6
Moeen Ali - 7
Broad - 5
Finn - 7
Wood- 6
Australia team rating - 8
---
Overall series ratings (all 5 Tests)
England Team Average - 7.2
Australia Team Average - 5.9
Average Player ratings (ordered with top first):
Finn - 7.8 (only 3 matches)
Broad - 7.7
Anderson - 7.5
Cook*- 7,4
Root - 7.3
Moeen Ali - 7.2
Stokes - 7.0
Wood- 7.0
Buttler+ - 6.3
Bairstow - 6.3
Bell - 6.1
Ballance - 5.8
Lyth - 5.3
---
Going forward:
Here is a brief summary of the England fixtures up to and including next summer. We have a couple of long winter tours ahead of us, followed by the excitement of the iT20 world cup next spring. Sri Lanka and Pakistan will be the visiting teams next year. The life of an international cricketer is sure a busy and hard one!
2015-16
Oct-Nov: PAKISTAN (in UAE) - 3 Tests, 4 ODIs, 3 iT20s
Dec-Feb: SOUTH AFRICA - 4 Tests, 5 ODIs, 2 iT20s
2016
Mar-Apr: ICC iT20 World Cup (India)
May-Jun (in ENG now): SRI LANKA - 3 Tests, 5 ODIs and 1 iT20
Jul-Sep: PAKISTAN - 4 Tests, 5 ODIs and 1 iT20
...
Sunday, 16 August 2015
Women's Ashes: Only Test Review, comments, opinions, fallout and iT20 series Preview
Women's Ashes: Only Test Review, comments, opinions, fallout and iT20 series Preview
Let's just get this out of the way first: I absolutely love this team and want them to do well. They are a terrific bunch of girls and outstanding role models for aspiring young players both male and female. They are all very talented and committed, and many are world-class.
This is not a rant. I've tried to take on a more reflective tone. I've got the rant out of the way already earlier this year. I'll leave it up to the papers for that - I doubt they'll be kind. The next few lines will suffice.
This Test match was a disaster for England Women cricket. There's no other way to put it. We were outplayed in all departments, out-thought and outclassed.
On Friday afternoon after Nat Sciver walked off for 2, having edged Megan Schutt behind to keeper Alyssa Healy, England were 29-5. Amazingly, it was the 21st over. The run rate was closer to 1 run an over than 2. At that point, as a pessimistic onlooker who loves to moan, even I was shocked. It was another stuttering, frightened and fearful performance where we just didn't do ourselves justice. We were playing like the proverbial rabbits in the headlights.
The scorecard, if you dare, can be found here.
Of course, captain Charlotte Edwards has to talk up our remaining chances, such that they are.
She has to pretend everything can be fixed with a bit more work.
But it does appear the problems go much deeper.
Test Review
Australia won the toss on what started out as a good pitch and batted. England put on early pressure and managed to restrict the Aussie openers early on. Shrubsole returned for a devastating spell which ripped through the middle order, removing the top four players. Brunt also struck. The Southern Stars were in trouble at this point but there was then a period of recovery when Healy and Jonassen put on 77 for the sixth wicket. Marsh then made an impact with a couple of wickets but another partnership between Jonassen and Beams took Southern Stars to a very competitive score, which they finally declared the following morning with 274-9, Jonassen out for 99 finishing just a single short of her maiden Test century on debut. It was a classy, punishing innings full of beautiful off drives. England had let Australia off the hook after getting them in trouble early on, and it did not bode well.
England started slowly and were soon losing regular wickets, as Winfield and Knight departed, with Taylor out LBW playing across the line for a golden duck in between. Edwards (30) then added some solidity and played nicely for a while with Greenway (22) before she was bowled by a beauty from Megan Schutt. Sciver came in and batted well, top-scoring with 35 before she was erroneously judged LBW to Schutt, the ball clearly going down the leg side. Elwiss was then bowled by Jonassen's left arm spin - a ripper which turned sharply from leg to hit the top off off stump. Brunt offered late, typically belligerent resistance, but the remainder of the tail could only block and add few extra runs. When Brunt was castled by Coyte, the scoring innings was effectively over. England were soon all out for 168. It has been a slow and underwhelming effort, at under 2 runs an over. So ended day 2. We thought that was bad, but worse was to come unfortunately.
Being 106 runs ahead, Australia could have been more positive on the heavily rain affected day 3. Instead they batted relatively slowly and did not declare. An inspired early spell by Brunt saw Australia reduced to 2-2 as she claimed the impressive scalps of Villani and Lanning, both for ducks. Nicole Bolton who survived the early onslaught only to be later dismissed by Cross for 25, said it was some of the best bowling she'd ever faced. Shrubsole then removed Perry cheaply, but there was another very good partnership between Blackwell (47*) and Jonassen (54), the latter carrying on where she'd left off in the third innings. Play had now progressed to the final day, and Southern Stars were leaving their second declaration worryingly late. But England did not bowl well on the final morning and went defensive. Something did not feel right. The England players did not look up for the fight to come. Fielding and bowling was tentative. And they showed us why after Australia declared, setting England a victory target of 263.
England were soon in trouble again with the bat. The pitch was taking more turn and showing inconsistent bounce. And Southern Stars bowled very well. The batters seemed intent on playing around their pads or wafting outside off stump. This time, there was no middle order recovery even like the small one we'd seen in the first innings. England were 29-5 in the 21st over before they knew it, unable to meet the run rate needed for victory, and in a rapid downward spiral. It was Perry, Schutt and Coyte wot did it. Let's face it, England may not have reached the target with a third innings! In stepped Greenway and Elwiss, and there was a serene period between lunch and tea when the sun shone, and one could almost be forgiven for thinking that England might actually get a draw. The Southern Stars bowling wilted towards Tea, and with Greenway dead batting everything at one end and Elwiss (46) playing the best innings of any England player in the game so far at the other, that dreaded feeling emerged - hope. I could cope with the despair, but not with the hope, as the saying goes.
Shortly after Tea though, the game rapidly moved towards its conclusion. Greenway, having been hit by the Perry short ball, ducked under what she though was a bouncer and was bizarrely bowled on her leg stump as the ball kept extremely low. Marsh soon followed, to complete a miserable pair with the bat, and Brunt was given another bad decision by the umpires, incorrectly adjudged to have edged a short ball when actually it hit her helmet. That effectively ended all hopes of resistance with only Shrubsole and Cross to come. As a final insult, the magnificent Perry (6-32) denied Elwiss a much deserved 50 when her delivery was tamely patted up to mid on for Schutt to take. Shrubsole didn't last much longer and England were all out for 101. Southern Stars won by 161 runs, but effectively it was an innings and 5 runs, as the Aussie second innings only amounted to 156-6 dec. This was, by all accounts, a very effective and very clinical performance by Australia.
Post-Match
Ebony Rainford-Brent (ERB) gave a particularly candid summary on BBC's TMS: She said certain players were underperforming badly and could do with a "refresh" (referring to Sarah Taylor). And also that she thought England would now be entering a "potential 5 year lull" before the effects of the upcoming domestic T20 (WCSL) and 50 overs franchise competitions kick in.
I agree. There is no reason to expect things to pick up significantly before this time. During this "lull" I predict we will move away from the top couple of spots in world women's cricket and maybe down into fourth or fifth. As much as I've previously resisted it, now even I will admit that our automatic qualification spot in the 2017 world cup (50 overs) may be in jeopardy. England don't look as good as the Aussies, West Indies, New Zealand (who we narrowly beat recently when playing much better than right now) or even South Africa.
This winter we are touring South Africa. Their women's team have a lot of promise and have improved under captain Mignon Du Preez (who is a good, positive player if maybe a little too forthcoming with her personal religious beliefs on social media!) England almost lost out to them in one match when we last played them in 3 T20s last summer. The last game, was pretty much won by Nat Sciver's fielding and what I regard as Lauren Winfield's best performance for England.
It seems some time ago now. England have gone backwards since then, whilst South Africa have no doubt improved. We were, I'm sure, playing much better than now. On their home turf, I fear that we may lose out to South Africa, especially in the ODI format.
The WCSL (women's cricket super league) just can't come quickly enough.
If it's anything like the FAWSL is for women's football, it will be fantastic.
On now to some of the criticisms received so far. Some are fair, others maybe misplaced. One of the common themes and one I'm not sure I care too much for, is the insinuation that the England team is much less athletic than the Australian one. There seem to be geographical, cultural and genetic reasons for this: for Example the Australian women's football team (The Maltildas) are mostly tall, blonde and athletic, more so than the England's Lionesses but that doesn't mean they're better. In fact we beat them 3-0 earlier this year in the Cyprus cup. Australia is hotter, and its inhabitants have more of a penchant for the outdoors. Spend too much time outside in England and you're likely to get drenched to the skin.
But could there be other reasons for the difference in athleticism? Indeed, and here may lie the answer - because and it reveals another issue with the England development system.
England's team was almost 2 years older than Australia's on average. Australia have more very young players around 19-21, and even their quite young players (23-25) like Lanning and Perry seem to have been around forever because they started at such a young age. Meanwhile England are just starting to bring through Academy players who are already in their mid-20's. We need to be better at identifying talent at a young age and backing it, all the way through to a later level more often. Inclusion of Academy players Amy Jones (22) and Fran Wilson (23) would bring the average age down.
Unrest in the England camp?
I wondered if there’s some sort of psychological contagion in the dressing room affecting the batters – whenever a player is in the team for more than a few games, they start to play negative, frightened cricket; but Elwiss didn’t catch the bug yet. Jones and Wilson won't have, either.
I wondered. Then came this article. Entitled "There's a hubris about England"
All connected to the women's game in England would do well to read it.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/33932360
Defnition:
Hubris ("Hyoo-bris")
noun
1. excessive pride or self-confidence; arrogance.
Izzy Westbury continues some of her excellent punditry and analysis on the women's game by telling it like it is. She should know as a former England player, tossed out by the system like so much waste. There are serious structural problems that must be addressed, but basically can't be, because of the current set-up.
There is an "Old Guard" of players who get kept in the squad despite any bad performances - they are effectively allowed more "chances" than the players who have to prove themselves coming out of the academy. The obvious example would be Amy Jones who is young and VERY talented but got dropped after just a couple of failures. I know I said she looked out of her depth before, I may have been wrong but nevertheless, we need to give her another go in the upcoming T20 series. Whereas Jenny Gunn has been around for a long time, not done too much for us for a while, but still would have played in the Test if it were not for a late injury. This is some strange selection protocol going around.
* See "The squad - going forward" later on
One of the most unfortunate things that's happened with Lottie's captaincy this summer has been the disconnect between her rhetoric and the reality of England's cricket. How, for example, she claimed that England would adopt a more attacking style of play against the Aussies in the wake of the England men's team one-day renaissance against New Zealand. I'm sorry, but there has been very little sign of that. In fact, quite the opposite has happened. England have now gone into their shells. They turned turtle, and are batting with a timidity and lack of confidence which is neither good to watch, nor good for results.
I wonder if the team have been sat down and just told to play aggressively. I wonder if there's too much control-freakery and micro-management going on behind the scenes in the England camp. When things go so badly wrong, this often turns out to have been the case.
As an example of how this tactic does not work, please see the following:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KE0-zQBL-Sc
(Youtube search:
I hope you'll agree - it's a very amusing little light hearted clip but possibly quite appropriate to the current situation with England Women. That is, if there has been too much interference from the top-down.
I always laugh when Homer yells "Rest!" while carrying on with the whip. The huskies is an unfortunate analogy - I hope you accept that in no way or by no means do I consider any member of the team "dogs" or anything - nor as dumb as Homer Simpson!
D'oh! :-)
Raf Nicholson also agrees that the problems for England go deeper than their own camp would like to make out.
Her writing is impressive, and always worth a look.
Predictions
So it seems my predictions have been not too bad, so far. I predicted the ODI series loss, Test loss ("possibly by an innings" and seeing as Australia's second innings was 156-6 and they won by 161, it's effectively an innings and 5 runs; and 161 was pretty close to England's first innings of 168; so I regard this as a decent call). I am predicting Aussie to go on and win the Ashes, certainly within the first 2 games. They will win the iT20 series either 2-1 or 3-0. England may fight back a bit more - this could come in the first game, but more likely in the dead rubbers to follow if they lose that first one.
I wondered if the third ODI at Worcester, bad though it was, would be the nadir for England - and indeed it wasn't, because the test match beat it by some margin. Looking at it from outside, people must think "what on earth is happening?". The bedrock of women's cricket has shifted - this is change on a tectonic scale. The televising of the women's Ashes Test may have led to some tense and interesting cricket, but it was not fast-paced enough for some.
Even some of those involved in the broadcast (Paul Allott) on Sky TV basically advised the viewers to go elsewhere if they wanted to watch something more exciting. I don't need to remind people that when a programme is hinting at you not to watch it, there are serious problems around. When he said that the match was not easily watchable, with Lisa Sthalekar and Isa Guha sat there in the studio, there was an uncomfortable moment of silence which spoke volumes. (I, and no doubt the two women in the studio, wanted to shout "Be quiet Allott you great big sexist!" but there was some truth in his words which stopped us).
But looking at it analytically, this defeat for England had been coming for some time. Going forward in the series, it seems like Taunton will continue to have been the zenith for England - any T20 glory will surely be darkened by the overall series loss. I even wonder if anything further can be gained. It would disappoint me greatly (but not surprise me too greatly) if England failed to reach 100 in any of their upcoming 3 T20 innings. That would be both embarrassing, and devastating, so let's hope it doesn't happen. One more win to get us up to that 4 point mark is surely possible. Isn't it?
Positives
Enough doom and gloom. What plus points can England take out of the game?
+ Well Georgia Elwiss batted absolutely beautifully in the second innings of the Test. She kept on trying to score and didn't get bogged down like Greenway, who herself at least showed more resistance than most. Elwiss showed the resolve, technique and temperament that was desperately needed, but ran out of partners unfortunately. She plays positively and is particularly effective on good flat batting tracks like those often found abroad. At times in that session between lunch and tea, she looked like the best test player in all of England.
But she isn't. This is my larger point so don't jump to conclusions yet. Her speciality is really the shorter formats of the game. Hell, Elwiss isn't even a batter, she's an allrounder who used to be a bowler. Greenway’s been one of England’s few consistent players this summer and Elwiss looked much better than her at the crease. Most observers think that Amy Jones and Fran Wilson, who staggeringly continue to languish in the background, are just as good as Elwiss, if not better. They're specialist bats, plus Jones can keep wicket. Just imagine how good we could be if all these players were on their game at once (and all playing for us at the same time, as they should be).
Anyway Elwiss would hopefully have won a few fans out there and is just the type of player we need – dynamic, positive, classy and able to do herself justice with bat and ball. Plus she obviously has the type of resolve so lacking amongst many of the other players. You could tell she was absolutely devastated in her post match interview – she really believed England could save the game. On top of all that, as a last minute replacement for Gunn, I think Elwiss did better than we can possibly have expected. Hopefully she'll be given a proper chance now. The main area of her game that needs to be improved first as far as I can see is her fielding.
Some it seems though, are keen to play down Elwiss's performance, now what reason there could be for that I can't possibly imagine. It's almost as if they may have something against her, but I'd never suggest such a thing so I suppose it must be my imagination. Why you wouldn't want to take one of the few genuine positives from the game, I'll never know.
http://crickether.com/2015/08/14/random-thoughts-womens-ashes-test-day-4/#comments
"A cameo with a lame dismissal". Seriously?
Right, so my last words on this issue, because it's a sideshow to the main event of England and where they go from here, and distracting me from moving forward. No-one is claiming that Elwiss covered herself in glory, just that she covered herself in less of the bad-smelling stuff than everyone else who batted. That's something. It was more the manner in which she played which was impressive rather than the score she got. Top score for England in either innings though, for what it's worth, and a pretty long "cameo" at 118 balls, almost an entire T20 innings. Her end was tame, but when most of the other England batter's ends were too, if not more so, that's not saying much. Even Jonassen holed out so mid off/on in similar fashion, it was just a harder catch which Greenway took comfortably. Also not saying much is the assertion that Elwiss is not as good as Jonassen. So what? Right now, who is? On the evidence of that game, Lanning and Perry can't bat as well as JJ either, but we're not all shouting that from the rooftops. Because we know they are great players.
Anyway enough of that, back to the positives (for England).
+ Brunt and Shrubsole can still tear apart the opposition batting. We saw in a couple of devastating spells from both of our main strike bowlers, what they can still do with the ball. Shrubsole has that dangerous swing and nip that the batters never feel truly "in" against and Brunt can take her pace and aggression to another level when she wants. Both are great exponents of their craft.
+ Sarah Taylor is a fantastic wicket-keeper. Some of her keeping in the test was class. Hand speed and awareness is on another level. But at what price does this excellence come? We should study how she bats in comparison, when relieved of her glove-butler duties. If only she could bat well in Tests...
T20 preview
One advantage that England have is that they won't be needing scores up above 200 now the T20s are up. As long as they bowl reasonably well, that is.
Just a quick aside to set the tone. In 1964, great film director Stanley Kubrick made a film called: "Dr. Strangelove, Or: How I learned to stop worrying and love the bomb".
It is a political satire on the cold war. In it, an unhinged US military commander seeks to destroy everything by initiating a first nuclear strike. There are parallels to the current England situation. Their management seem to have "gone nuclear" in tactics and team selection, and have had a good go at destroying England's reputation and chances of retaining the Ashes.
But let's turn this around. The film's eccentric title is ripe for satire itself. Now, I wait all year to be able to use lines like this:
"Dr. StrangeGlove, or: How England can learn to stop worrying and love the BOOM!"
Apologies. It's a crummy, stolen line and one that I admit does sound a bit condescending coming from a bloke. But, that single line contains a lot of content, not only to describe England's current travails, but also the solution required. Mix up the wicketkeeping. Bringing the superbly talented Amy Jones into the side will enable her to keep wicket and allow Taylor to focus on batting. We need to lose our fear at the crease and play naturally, as Sciver did in ODI 1, and as Elwiss did in the second innings of the Test. But this should not be done by just putting further demands on the players. Micromanage less. Let players do things their own way. We should not be afraid to get out, but should be looking to score whenever possible. Every batter trying to be defensive, as if they'd been told they would get dropped if they got out (which probably wasn't the case but it sure looked like it in the Test) just makes everyone play badly. If we need more solid players, sure include them but don't give everyone the same job.
In the T20s everyone should play as positively as they can. Whack the ball to the boundary! Hence the BOOM!
My worry is, our best possible score seems to be around the 140 mark;
(I was at that game by the way - it was absolutely fantastic)
whilst Australia can surpass that with scores of around 150.
My T20 squad
Edwards*, A. Jones +, Sciver, Greenway, Taylor, Elwiss, Wilson, Wyatt, Brunt, Hazell, Shrubsole
(Winfield, Knight, Cross, E. Jones, Farrant, Gunn)
Australia: We already know they will be missing Delissa Kimmince which is a big loss, as she is a fast-scoring batter and medium pace bowler who can bowl out 4 overs in T20. Although this is a plus for England, the Aussie squad so far otherwise looks strong, and barring any further injury should prove more than a match for a dispirited England team.
T20 is possibly their strongest format. They will surely welcome back the destructive batter Jess Cameron who has been unlucky to not play more, probably only kept out by the strong performances of her compatriots so far. Expect her to replace the more sedate but solid Nicole Bolton in the team. We may also see Erin Osborne and Rene Farrell return during the series.
It will be more exciting, and I expect Australia to post some very challenging scores (140+) should they bat first. If England bat first, they will need at least 130 depending on the pitch, to have any sort of chance, and will also need to bowl very well and take early wickets, as well as field well and take all the catches that come.
So up next in the series England head off to Chelmsford to start the 3-match iT20 series. The games come thick and fast with only a 1 or 2 day break in between. England must win ALL 3 matches to retain the Ashes trophy. Seeing as Southern Stars are reigning iT20 champions, coupled with the fact that England's scoring rates have been very low so far, this seems extremely unlikely indeed. Here are the fixtures. Just to note, I will be attending the final game at Cardiff on the bank holiday Monday. I will take pictures and also for the men's iT20 afterwards and publish them on the picture blog. Expect to see more excitement than the Test, and I expect England to put up at least one good performance (hopefully when Australia have a bad day at the office) and be more competitive all-round.
* The squad, going forward
It appears that some England players are "passengers", according to various observers and journalists, that is neither contributing with bat or ball. If this moniker were to apply to anyone, the following names spring to mind. Not a final nor exhaustive list and only my opinion of course. These players have not stepped up so far and could take a little look at themselves. I'm not suggesting they never play for us again or anything, but their role in the team needs to be considered. They need a "refresh", as ERB puts it. Think about how our contracts can be renewed. Mix up their position in the order and rework their bowling roles with the benefit of the team in mind. The final 3 players, although decidedly members of "The Old Guard" as it were, I have included in brackets as I don't agree with Izzy that there's quite enough evidence to include them here.
Laura Marsh, Lauren Winfield, Kate Cross, Heather Knight
(Jenny Gunn - although she's not played much of late so this is a bit harsh in my view)
(Lydia Greenway - having performed somewhat more consistently this summer, I also think her inclusion here is harsh)
(Sarah Taylor - Her failures with the bat have mostly been in Tests. Her ODI / T20 record still very strong. And wicketkeeping remains excellent. Too good a player to drop)
Further ideas
We need to bring in more left-handers to keep opposition bowlers on their toes. Greenway will only be around a few more years at most and I understand Evelyn Jones is the only other left-handed Academy prospect. So bring her in closer to the team and give her a few try outs.
The central contracts need to be looked at every six-months, or certainly every year at most. 2 years is too long a gap. Most if not all of the contracted players should be playing decent standard of cricket somewhere in the winter, especially if not in the current main squad. At the moment this seems to be just a few rather than most of them.
International fixtures need to be stepped up so we are touring for longer series every winter; and have 2 sides over here to play every summer with ODIs and T20s against both.
---
Finally, we all know how fickle sports fans can be. England fans in particular are known for their penchant for moaning. And moaning can be fun. So much fun, in fact, that it can become our only recourse. Especially in tough times like these.
How wonderful it would be if England Women's cricket team could deliver a performance so supreme** (**beating Australia in T20 counts) that revelling in its glory would actually be more fun than moaning! They have the ability to make it happen and make a BOOM, and let's hope they do.
Let's just get this out of the way first: I absolutely love this team and want them to do well. They are a terrific bunch of girls and outstanding role models for aspiring young players both male and female. They are all very talented and committed, and many are world-class.
This is not a rant. I've tried to take on a more reflective tone. I've got the rant out of the way already earlier this year. I'll leave it up to the papers for that - I doubt they'll be kind. The next few lines will suffice.
This Test match was a disaster for England Women cricket. There's no other way to put it. We were outplayed in all departments, out-thought and outclassed.
On Friday afternoon after Nat Sciver walked off for 2, having edged Megan Schutt behind to keeper Alyssa Healy, England were 29-5. Amazingly, it was the 21st over. The run rate was closer to 1 run an over than 2. At that point, as a pessimistic onlooker who loves to moan, even I was shocked. It was another stuttering, frightened and fearful performance where we just didn't do ourselves justice. We were playing like the proverbial rabbits in the headlights.
The scorecard, if you dare, can be found here.
Of course, captain Charlotte Edwards has to talk up our remaining chances, such that they are.
She has to pretend everything can be fixed with a bit more work.
But it does appear the problems go much deeper.
Test Review
Australia won the toss on what started out as a good pitch and batted. England put on early pressure and managed to restrict the Aussie openers early on. Shrubsole returned for a devastating spell which ripped through the middle order, removing the top four players. Brunt also struck. The Southern Stars were in trouble at this point but there was then a period of recovery when Healy and Jonassen put on 77 for the sixth wicket. Marsh then made an impact with a couple of wickets but another partnership between Jonassen and Beams took Southern Stars to a very competitive score, which they finally declared the following morning with 274-9, Jonassen out for 99 finishing just a single short of her maiden Test century on debut. It was a classy, punishing innings full of beautiful off drives. England had let Australia off the hook after getting them in trouble early on, and it did not bode well.
England started slowly and were soon losing regular wickets, as Winfield and Knight departed, with Taylor out LBW playing across the line for a golden duck in between. Edwards (30) then added some solidity and played nicely for a while with Greenway (22) before she was bowled by a beauty from Megan Schutt. Sciver came in and batted well, top-scoring with 35 before she was erroneously judged LBW to Schutt, the ball clearly going down the leg side. Elwiss was then bowled by Jonassen's left arm spin - a ripper which turned sharply from leg to hit the top off off stump. Brunt offered late, typically belligerent resistance, but the remainder of the tail could only block and add few extra runs. When Brunt was castled by Coyte, the scoring innings was effectively over. England were soon all out for 168. It has been a slow and underwhelming effort, at under 2 runs an over. So ended day 2. We thought that was bad, but worse was to come unfortunately.
Being 106 runs ahead, Australia could have been more positive on the heavily rain affected day 3. Instead they batted relatively slowly and did not declare. An inspired early spell by Brunt saw Australia reduced to 2-2 as she claimed the impressive scalps of Villani and Lanning, both for ducks. Nicole Bolton who survived the early onslaught only to be later dismissed by Cross for 25, said it was some of the best bowling she'd ever faced. Shrubsole then removed Perry cheaply, but there was another very good partnership between Blackwell (47*) and Jonassen (54), the latter carrying on where she'd left off in the third innings. Play had now progressed to the final day, and Southern Stars were leaving their second declaration worryingly late. But England did not bowl well on the final morning and went defensive. Something did not feel right. The England players did not look up for the fight to come. Fielding and bowling was tentative. And they showed us why after Australia declared, setting England a victory target of 263.
England were soon in trouble again with the bat. The pitch was taking more turn and showing inconsistent bounce. And Southern Stars bowled very well. The batters seemed intent on playing around their pads or wafting outside off stump. This time, there was no middle order recovery even like the small one we'd seen in the first innings. England were 29-5 in the 21st over before they knew it, unable to meet the run rate needed for victory, and in a rapid downward spiral. It was Perry, Schutt and Coyte wot did it. Let's face it, England may not have reached the target with a third innings! In stepped Greenway and Elwiss, and there was a serene period between lunch and tea when the sun shone, and one could almost be forgiven for thinking that England might actually get a draw. The Southern Stars bowling wilted towards Tea, and with Greenway dead batting everything at one end and Elwiss (46) playing the best innings of any England player in the game so far at the other, that dreaded feeling emerged - hope. I could cope with the despair, but not with the hope, as the saying goes.
Shortly after Tea though, the game rapidly moved towards its conclusion. Greenway, having been hit by the Perry short ball, ducked under what she though was a bouncer and was bizarrely bowled on her leg stump as the ball kept extremely low. Marsh soon followed, to complete a miserable pair with the bat, and Brunt was given another bad decision by the umpires, incorrectly adjudged to have edged a short ball when actually it hit her helmet. That effectively ended all hopes of resistance with only Shrubsole and Cross to come. As a final insult, the magnificent Perry (6-32) denied Elwiss a much deserved 50 when her delivery was tamely patted up to mid on for Schutt to take. Shrubsole didn't last much longer and England were all out for 101. Southern Stars won by 161 runs, but effectively it was an innings and 5 runs, as the Aussie second innings only amounted to 156-6 dec. This was, by all accounts, a very effective and very clinical performance by Australia.
Post-Match
Ebony Rainford-Brent (ERB) gave a particularly candid summary on BBC's TMS: She said certain players were underperforming badly and could do with a "refresh" (referring to Sarah Taylor). And also that she thought England would now be entering a "potential 5 year lull" before the effects of the upcoming domestic T20 (WCSL) and 50 overs franchise competitions kick in.
I agree. There is no reason to expect things to pick up significantly before this time. During this "lull" I predict we will move away from the top couple of spots in world women's cricket and maybe down into fourth or fifth. As much as I've previously resisted it, now even I will admit that our automatic qualification spot in the 2017 world cup (50 overs) may be in jeopardy. England don't look as good as the Aussies, West Indies, New Zealand (who we narrowly beat recently when playing much better than right now) or even South Africa.
This winter we are touring South Africa. Their women's team have a lot of promise and have improved under captain Mignon Du Preez (who is a good, positive player if maybe a little too forthcoming with her personal religious beliefs on social media!) England almost lost out to them in one match when we last played them in 3 T20s last summer. The last game, was pretty much won by Nat Sciver's fielding and what I regard as Lauren Winfield's best performance for England.
It seems some time ago now. England have gone backwards since then, whilst South Africa have no doubt improved. We were, I'm sure, playing much better than now. On their home turf, I fear that we may lose out to South Africa, especially in the ODI format.
The WCSL (women's cricket super league) just can't come quickly enough.
If it's anything like the FAWSL is for women's football, it will be fantastic.
On now to some of the criticisms received so far. Some are fair, others maybe misplaced. One of the common themes and one I'm not sure I care too much for, is the insinuation that the England team is much less athletic than the Australian one. There seem to be geographical, cultural and genetic reasons for this: for Example the Australian women's football team (The Maltildas) are mostly tall, blonde and athletic, more so than the England's Lionesses but that doesn't mean they're better. In fact we beat them 3-0 earlier this year in the Cyprus cup. Australia is hotter, and its inhabitants have more of a penchant for the outdoors. Spend too much time outside in England and you're likely to get drenched to the skin.
But could there be other reasons for the difference in athleticism? Indeed, and here may lie the answer - because and it reveals another issue with the England development system.
Player Ages of Test
squad (Source: ESPN Cricinfo)
Name
|
Age (Yrs - at Test match)
|
Australia: Elyse Villani
|
25
|
Nicole Bolton
|
26
|
Meg Lanning
|
23
|
Ellyse Perry
|
24
|
Alex Blackwell
|
31
|
Jess Jonassen
|
22
|
Alyssa Healy
|
25
|
Sarah Coyte
|
24
|
Megan Shutt
|
22
|
Kristen Beams
|
30
|
Holly Ferling
|
19 (Australia average: 24.6 yrs)
|
England: Heather Knight
|
24
|
Lauren Winfield
|
24
|
Sarah Taylor
|
26
|
Charlotte Edwards
|
35
|
Lydia Greenway
|
30
|
Natalie Sciver
|
22
|
Georgia Elwiss
|
24
|
Laura Marsh
|
28
|
Katherine Brunt
|
30
|
Anya Shrubsole
|
23
|
Kate Cross
|
23 (England average: 26.3 yrs)
|
England's team was almost 2 years older than Australia's on average. Australia have more very young players around 19-21, and even their quite young players (23-25) like Lanning and Perry seem to have been around forever because they started at such a young age. Meanwhile England are just starting to bring through Academy players who are already in their mid-20's. We need to be better at identifying talent at a young age and backing it, all the way through to a later level more often. Inclusion of Academy players Amy Jones (22) and Fran Wilson (23) would bring the average age down.
Unrest in the England camp?
I wondered if there’s some sort of psychological contagion in the dressing room affecting the batters – whenever a player is in the team for more than a few games, they start to play negative, frightened cricket; but Elwiss didn’t catch the bug yet. Jones and Wilson won't have, either.
I wondered. Then came this article. Entitled "There's a hubris about England"
All connected to the women's game in England would do well to read it.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/33932360
Defnition:
Hubris ("Hyoo-bris")
noun
1. excessive pride or self-confidence; arrogance.
Izzy Westbury continues some of her excellent punditry and analysis on the women's game by telling it like it is. She should know as a former England player, tossed out by the system like so much waste. There are serious structural problems that must be addressed, but basically can't be, because of the current set-up.
There is an "Old Guard" of players who get kept in the squad despite any bad performances - they are effectively allowed more "chances" than the players who have to prove themselves coming out of the academy. The obvious example would be Amy Jones who is young and VERY talented but got dropped after just a couple of failures. I know I said she looked out of her depth before, I may have been wrong but nevertheless, we need to give her another go in the upcoming T20 series. Whereas Jenny Gunn has been around for a long time, not done too much for us for a while, but still would have played in the Test if it were not for a late injury. This is some strange selection protocol going around.
* See "The squad - going forward" later on
One of the most unfortunate things that's happened with Lottie's captaincy this summer has been the disconnect between her rhetoric and the reality of England's cricket. How, for example, she claimed that England would adopt a more attacking style of play against the Aussies in the wake of the England men's team one-day renaissance against New Zealand. I'm sorry, but there has been very little sign of that. In fact, quite the opposite has happened. England have now gone into their shells. They turned turtle, and are batting with a timidity and lack of confidence which is neither good to watch, nor good for results.
I wonder if the team have been sat down and just told to play aggressively. I wonder if there's too much control-freakery and micro-management going on behind the scenes in the England camp. When things go so badly wrong, this often turns out to have been the case.
As an example of how this tactic does not work, please see the following:
(Youtube search:
The Simpsons Movie clip 11 "Whipping Dogs")
I hope you'll agree - it's a very amusing little light hearted clip but possibly quite appropriate to the current situation with England Women. That is, if there has been too much interference from the top-down.
I always laugh when Homer yells "Rest!" while carrying on with the whip. The huskies is an unfortunate analogy - I hope you accept that in no way or by no means do I consider any member of the team "dogs" or anything - nor as dumb as Homer Simpson!
D'oh! :-)
Raf Nicholson also agrees that the problems for England go deeper than their own camp would like to make out.
Her writing is impressive, and always worth a look.
Predictions
So it seems my predictions have been not too bad, so far. I predicted the ODI series loss, Test loss ("possibly by an innings" and seeing as Australia's second innings was 156-6 and they won by 161, it's effectively an innings and 5 runs; and 161 was pretty close to England's first innings of 168; so I regard this as a decent call). I am predicting Aussie to go on and win the Ashes, certainly within the first 2 games. They will win the iT20 series either 2-1 or 3-0. England may fight back a bit more - this could come in the first game, but more likely in the dead rubbers to follow if they lose that first one.
I wondered if the third ODI at Worcester, bad though it was, would be the nadir for England - and indeed it wasn't, because the test match beat it by some margin. Looking at it from outside, people must think "what on earth is happening?". The bedrock of women's cricket has shifted - this is change on a tectonic scale. The televising of the women's Ashes Test may have led to some tense and interesting cricket, but it was not fast-paced enough for some.
Even some of those involved in the broadcast (Paul Allott) on Sky TV basically advised the viewers to go elsewhere if they wanted to watch something more exciting. I don't need to remind people that when a programme is hinting at you not to watch it, there are serious problems around. When he said that the match was not easily watchable, with Lisa Sthalekar and Isa Guha sat there in the studio, there was an uncomfortable moment of silence which spoke volumes. (I, and no doubt the two women in the studio, wanted to shout "Be quiet Allott you great big sexist!" but there was some truth in his words which stopped us).
But looking at it analytically, this defeat for England had been coming for some time. Going forward in the series, it seems like Taunton will continue to have been the zenith for England - any T20 glory will surely be darkened by the overall series loss. I even wonder if anything further can be gained. It would disappoint me greatly (but not surprise me too greatly) if England failed to reach 100 in any of their upcoming 3 T20 innings. That would be both embarrassing, and devastating, so let's hope it doesn't happen. One more win to get us up to that 4 point mark is surely possible. Isn't it?
Positives
Enough doom and gloom. What plus points can England take out of the game?
+ Well Georgia Elwiss batted absolutely beautifully in the second innings of the Test. She kept on trying to score and didn't get bogged down like Greenway, who herself at least showed more resistance than most. Elwiss showed the resolve, technique and temperament that was desperately needed, but ran out of partners unfortunately. She plays positively and is particularly effective on good flat batting tracks like those often found abroad. At times in that session between lunch and tea, she looked like the best test player in all of England.
But she isn't. This is my larger point so don't jump to conclusions yet. Her speciality is really the shorter formats of the game. Hell, Elwiss isn't even a batter, she's an allrounder who used to be a bowler. Greenway’s been one of England’s few consistent players this summer and Elwiss looked much better than her at the crease. Most observers think that Amy Jones and Fran Wilson, who staggeringly continue to languish in the background, are just as good as Elwiss, if not better. They're specialist bats, plus Jones can keep wicket. Just imagine how good we could be if all these players were on their game at once (and all playing for us at the same time, as they should be).
Anyway Elwiss would hopefully have won a few fans out there and is just the type of player we need – dynamic, positive, classy and able to do herself justice with bat and ball. Plus she obviously has the type of resolve so lacking amongst many of the other players. You could tell she was absolutely devastated in her post match interview – she really believed England could save the game. On top of all that, as a last minute replacement for Gunn, I think Elwiss did better than we can possibly have expected. Hopefully she'll be given a proper chance now. The main area of her game that needs to be improved first as far as I can see is her fielding.
Some it seems though, are keen to play down Elwiss's performance, now what reason there could be for that I can't possibly imagine. It's almost as if they may have something against her, but I'd never suggest such a thing so I suppose it must be my imagination. Why you wouldn't want to take one of the few genuine positives from the game, I'll never know.
http://crickether.com/2015/08/14/random-thoughts-womens-ashes-test-day-4/#comments
"A cameo with a lame dismissal". Seriously?
Right, so my last words on this issue, because it's a sideshow to the main event of England and where they go from here, and distracting me from moving forward. No-one is claiming that Elwiss covered herself in glory, just that she covered herself in less of the bad-smelling stuff than everyone else who batted. That's something. It was more the manner in which she played which was impressive rather than the score she got. Top score for England in either innings though, for what it's worth, and a pretty long "cameo" at 118 balls, almost an entire T20 innings. Her end was tame, but when most of the other England batter's ends were too, if not more so, that's not saying much. Even Jonassen holed out so mid off/on in similar fashion, it was just a harder catch which Greenway took comfortably. Also not saying much is the assertion that Elwiss is not as good as Jonassen. So what? Right now, who is? On the evidence of that game, Lanning and Perry can't bat as well as JJ either, but we're not all shouting that from the rooftops. Because we know they are great players.
Anyway enough of that, back to the positives (for England).
+ Brunt and Shrubsole can still tear apart the opposition batting. We saw in a couple of devastating spells from both of our main strike bowlers, what they can still do with the ball. Shrubsole has that dangerous swing and nip that the batters never feel truly "in" against and Brunt can take her pace and aggression to another level when she wants. Both are great exponents of their craft.
+ Sarah Taylor is a fantastic wicket-keeper. Some of her keeping in the test was class. Hand speed and awareness is on another level. But at what price does this excellence come? We should study how she bats in comparison, when relieved of her glove-butler duties. If only she could bat well in Tests...
T20 preview
One advantage that England have is that they won't be needing scores up above 200 now the T20s are up. As long as they bowl reasonably well, that is.
Just a quick aside to set the tone. In 1964, great film director Stanley Kubrick made a film called: "Dr. Strangelove, Or: How I learned to stop worrying and love the bomb".
It is a political satire on the cold war. In it, an unhinged US military commander seeks to destroy everything by initiating a first nuclear strike. There are parallels to the current England situation. Their management seem to have "gone nuclear" in tactics and team selection, and have had a good go at destroying England's reputation and chances of retaining the Ashes.
But let's turn this around. The film's eccentric title is ripe for satire itself. Now, I wait all year to be able to use lines like this:
"Dr. StrangeGlove, or: How England can learn to stop worrying and love the BOOM!"
Apologies. It's a crummy, stolen line and one that I admit does sound a bit condescending coming from a bloke. But, that single line contains a lot of content, not only to describe England's current travails, but also the solution required. Mix up the wicketkeeping. Bringing the superbly talented Amy Jones into the side will enable her to keep wicket and allow Taylor to focus on batting. We need to lose our fear at the crease and play naturally, as Sciver did in ODI 1, and as Elwiss did in the second innings of the Test. But this should not be done by just putting further demands on the players. Micromanage less. Let players do things their own way. We should not be afraid to get out, but should be looking to score whenever possible. Every batter trying to be defensive, as if they'd been told they would get dropped if they got out (which probably wasn't the case but it sure looked like it in the Test) just makes everyone play badly. If we need more solid players, sure include them but don't give everyone the same job.
In the T20s everyone should play as positively as they can. Whack the ball to the boundary! Hence the BOOM!
My worry is, our best possible score seems to be around the 140 mark;
(I was at that game by the way - it was absolutely fantastic)
whilst Australia can surpass that with scores of around 150.
My T20 squad
Edwards*, A. Jones +, Sciver, Greenway, Taylor, Elwiss, Wilson, Wyatt, Brunt, Hazell, Shrubsole
(Winfield, Knight, Cross, E. Jones, Farrant, Gunn)
Australia: We already know they will be missing Delissa Kimmince which is a big loss, as she is a fast-scoring batter and medium pace bowler who can bowl out 4 overs in T20. Although this is a plus for England, the Aussie squad so far otherwise looks strong, and barring any further injury should prove more than a match for a dispirited England team.
T20 is possibly their strongest format. They will surely welcome back the destructive batter Jess Cameron who has been unlucky to not play more, probably only kept out by the strong performances of her compatriots so far. Expect her to replace the more sedate but solid Nicole Bolton in the team. We may also see Erin Osborne and Rene Farrell return during the series.
It will be more exciting, and I expect Australia to post some very challenging scores (140+) should they bat first. If England bat first, they will need at least 130 depending on the pitch, to have any sort of chance, and will also need to bowl very well and take early wickets, as well as field well and take all the catches that come.
So up next in the series England head off to Chelmsford to start the 3-match iT20 series. The games come thick and fast with only a 1 or 2 day break in between. England must win ALL 3 matches to retain the Ashes trophy. Seeing as Southern Stars are reigning iT20 champions, coupled with the fact that England's scoring rates have been very low so far, this seems extremely unlikely indeed. Here are the fixtures. Just to note, I will be attending the final game at Cardiff on the bank holiday Monday. I will take pictures and also for the men's iT20 afterwards and publish them on the picture blog. Expect to see more excitement than the Test, and I expect England to put up at least one good performance (hopefully when Australia have a bad day at the office) and be more competitive all-round.
|
Date
|
Format
|
Venue
|
Points
for a win
|
Points
for a draw
|
|
Wed August 26
|
NatWest T20I
|
The Essex County Ground,
Chelmsford
|
2 points
|
N/A
|
|
Fri August 28
|
NatWest T20I
|
The BrightonandHoveJobs.com
County Ground, Hove
|
2 points
|
N/A
|
|
Mon August 31
|
NatWest T20I
|
SWALEC Stadium, Cardiff
|
2 points
|
N/A
|
I hear tickets are selling out fast, but as always with England Women offer excellent value for money. Before this, to warm up, Southern Stars are heading out to Ireland to play their women's side in a 3-match iT20 series on 19, 21 and 22 Aug. Ireland are much improved of late, but still expect the Aussies to win comfortably.
* The squad, going forward
It appears that some England players are "passengers", according to various observers and journalists, that is neither contributing with bat or ball. If this moniker were to apply to anyone, the following names spring to mind. Not a final nor exhaustive list and only my opinion of course. These players have not stepped up so far and could take a little look at themselves. I'm not suggesting they never play for us again or anything, but their role in the team needs to be considered. They need a "refresh", as ERB puts it. Think about how our contracts can be renewed. Mix up their position in the order and rework their bowling roles with the benefit of the team in mind. The final 3 players, although decidedly members of "The Old Guard" as it were, I have included in brackets as I don't agree with Izzy that there's quite enough evidence to include them here.
Laura Marsh, Lauren Winfield, Kate Cross, Heather Knight
(Jenny Gunn - although she's not played much of late so this is a bit harsh in my view)
(Lydia Greenway - having performed somewhat more consistently this summer, I also think her inclusion here is harsh)
(Sarah Taylor - Her failures with the bat have mostly been in Tests. Her ODI / T20 record still very strong. And wicketkeeping remains excellent. Too good a player to drop)
Further ideas
We need to bring in more left-handers to keep opposition bowlers on their toes. Greenway will only be around a few more years at most and I understand Evelyn Jones is the only other left-handed Academy prospect. So bring her in closer to the team and give her a few try outs.
The central contracts need to be looked at every six-months, or certainly every year at most. 2 years is too long a gap. Most if not all of the contracted players should be playing decent standard of cricket somewhere in the winter, especially if not in the current main squad. At the moment this seems to be just a few rather than most of them.
International fixtures need to be stepped up so we are touring for longer series every winter; and have 2 sides over here to play every summer with ODIs and T20s against both.
---
Finally, we all know how fickle sports fans can be. England fans in particular are known for their penchant for moaning. And moaning can be fun. So much fun, in fact, that it can become our only recourse. Especially in tough times like these.
How wonderful it would be if England Women's cricket team could deliver a performance so supreme** (**beating Australia in T20 counts) that revelling in its glory would actually be more fun than moaning! They have the ability to make it happen and make a BOOM, and let's hope they do.
Saturday, 8 August 2015
Review: Ashes 2015 - England vs. Australia 4th Test, Trent Bridge, 06 - 08 August 2015
Ashes 2015 - England vs. Australia 4th Test, Trent Bridge, 06 - 08 August 2015
Fourth Test review: England won by and innings and 78 runs and lead the 5-match series 3-1 with one match left to play
After another great performance, the England men's cricket team have won back the Ashes from Australia following a remarkable win in Nottingham.
Reports
http://www.espncricinfo.com/the-ashes-2015/content/story/907771.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/33833833
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/video_audio/907963.html
Scorecard
http://www.espncricinfo.com/the-ashes-2015/engine/match/743969.html
Twitter reaction
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/33836020
Magnificent England complete Ashes victory with Trent Bridge rout
With helpful, overcast bowling conditions on the first morning, captain Cook won the toss and put the Aussies in first. They were soon in trouble, unable to cope with the lateral movement of the ball, both swing and seam, that the England opening bowlers Broad and Wood generated.
The innings, which amounted to just 60, set a series of records. See here for a list of them!
It was remarkable to follow live. Almost the whole country was hooked! Broad finished with the best Ashes figures for any fast bowler, a truly remarkable 8-15. He bowled with pace and great accuracy, moving the ball enough to find the edge with regularity. Almost every ball he bowled looked like creating a chance for a wicket, and England let nothing slip in the field. There were some great catches, including a seemingly impossible one from Ben Stokes that seemed to already have gone past him when he grabbed it.
The amount of movement we generated was not overwhelming. As well as Broad performed, was this also a big failing from the Australian batting order? It was telling though that only Broad, Wood and Finn actually bowled in the first innings: Stokes , Ali and Root did not even get a look-in. And the former players did so well because there was no weak link, no let up in the pressure - they supported each other, bowled a lot of wicket-taking deliveries, helped by the conditions, and gave away next to no bad balls. Although some of the Aussies did let themselves down in the first innings, they did not play as poorly as 60 all out would suggest.
From that point on it was always going to be a big struggle for Australia to get back into the game. And they didn't quite bowl well enough. Cook (43) played a solid role at the top of the England innings, ably supported by Joe Root (widely known as Joe Rooooooooooooooooooot!) who played a masterful hand, going about his innings in just the right way as he so often does, and scoring at a good clip to get 130 off 176 balls, including 19 fours and a bludgeoning six off spinner Lyon. Jonny Bairstow (74) came to the party in capable fashion, forming a good Yorkie partnership with Root. Wood did a decent job as Nightwatchman, and later, Ali and Broad carved some useful late runs to get us to 391-9 when the declaration came.
Both Australian openers made a good start to their second innings but their side were so far behind by this point that there was not much chance of them coming back into the game unless something truly special happened. But England persisted, and after Rogers went for 52 the middle order stuttered again. Only Warner (64) and Voges (51*) offered much resistance to the England victory charge. Stokes bowled superbly this time, getting the ball to swing and seam both ways at a fast pace, and claiming 6 victims. When No.11 Nathan Lyon played on to Mark Wood, and had his leg stump uprooted, Australia were still 78 runs away from making England bat again. Wood had 3-69, Stokes had 6-36 and England had won the Ashes!
The biggest problem for Australia in this series has been their inability to adapt to English conditions - no great pace or bounce, but plenty of swing, and somewhat grassed pitches that offered movement off the seam. Their batsmen tended to play too hard at the ball, with firm grips that made the ball fly off the edge so fast, it carried to fielders. Good players of English conditions know that it's often a good idea to do as little as possible until you get in - leave the ball whenever you can, and play late, with soft hands to give yourself the best chance to read any movement and cause any edges to not carry.
"T20 gone horribly wrong"
This was not just a failure to adapt to foreign environs though. We see increasingly in Test cricket, and this is something that's been noticeable for at least the last couple of years, that the influence of T20 is starting to make batsmen impatient. There is often a lack of application, the need to hit runs all the time, and the generation of a false sense of run-rate pressure which the Australian batsmen showed in their sub-20 over first innings. It was, in effect, a T20 innings gone horribly wrong, masquerading as a Test innings. Or, as ESPNCricinfo put it, "Australia slashed their Ashes away in a 93-minute video nasty"
England set another record in this series - they are the only side to have 4 different bowlers take 5-fors (actually, 6 or more wickets) in 4 successive innings - Anderson, Finn, Broad and Stokes. It's now 4 consecutive home Ashes series wins - this is getting to be a habit! 2005, 2009, 2013 and now 2015. And all this just 19 months after we were hammered 5-0 in the last Ashes series down under. It seem that whenever England get a winning result on the board, we go on to win the series! And this was a better-feeling win than the 2013 one, followed up so quickly as it was by the bad reversal down under.
I would like to think that England can take this opportunity which presents itself with the last match at the Oval, to get some spin practice in. This is before a winter away which features matches in the Middle East, on tracks which will no doubt be slow, but very responsive to spin. The only real aspect of their game lacking over the summer was the spin option. Even if we persist with Moeen Ali's bowling (and he is at least useful to have for his bowling) I'd like to see at least one more attacking spin option, such as Rashid, given some more time with the ball.
As much as this was was a wondrous day, and as magnanimous as most of the Australian players were in defeat (Clarke's post match interviews were remarkable for their emotional content as well as being very respectful and candid) you can always find a sour note amongst the glory.
Ian Healy - Really?
The one I found was provided by none other than ex-Aussies keeper Ian Healy, who blamed the Aussies' poor performances on "the WAGS". Tut, tut. I could almost want Australia to win the women's Ashes (not quite though - I'm not that generous) just to show how misguided Ian Healy was with these remarks.
Misogyny like this has no place in the sport no matter how loosely connected. Healy is behaving like an arrogant and inconsiderate antipodean lout. The bloke seems to have forgotten his own niece Alyssa, who is not too bad a player herself (showing more application that some of her male compatriots) and has been ripping up the England attack in the women's ashes (turning this all around, her own HAB, Mitchell Stark must be "along for the ride" I suppose!)
More on the Women's Ashes later. And also a photo update from Northampton as I am going to day 2 of the match against the Australians! Where I totally won't make any comments about them having just lost the Ashes!
:-)
Team ratings
Ratings Explained: 1-3 very poor, 4 poor, 5 average, 6 OK, 7 good, 8 very good, 9 excellent, 10 unbelievable
England - Overall rating: 9
Cook*- 8
Lyth - 6
Bell - 6.5
Root - 9
Bairstow - 8
Stokes - 9
Buttler+ - 6.5
Moeen Ali - 7.5
Broad - 10
Wood - 8
Finn - 7.5
Australia team rating - 4
Fourth Test review: England won by and innings and 78 runs and lead the 5-match series 3-1 with one match left to play
After another great performance, the England men's cricket team have won back the Ashes from Australia following a remarkable win in Nottingham.
Reports
http://www.espncricinfo.com/the-ashes-2015/content/story/907771.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/33833833
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/video_audio/907963.html
Scorecard
http://www.espncricinfo.com/the-ashes-2015/engine/match/743969.html
Twitter reaction
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/33836020
Magnificent England complete Ashes victory with Trent Bridge rout
With helpful, overcast bowling conditions on the first morning, captain Cook won the toss and put the Aussies in first. They were soon in trouble, unable to cope with the lateral movement of the ball, both swing and seam, that the England opening bowlers Broad and Wood generated.
The innings, which amounted to just 60, set a series of records. See here for a list of them!
It was remarkable to follow live. Almost the whole country was hooked! Broad finished with the best Ashes figures for any fast bowler, a truly remarkable 8-15. He bowled with pace and great accuracy, moving the ball enough to find the edge with regularity. Almost every ball he bowled looked like creating a chance for a wicket, and England let nothing slip in the field. There were some great catches, including a seemingly impossible one from Ben Stokes that seemed to already have gone past him when he grabbed it.
The amount of movement we generated was not overwhelming. As well as Broad performed, was this also a big failing from the Australian batting order? It was telling though that only Broad, Wood and Finn actually bowled in the first innings: Stokes , Ali and Root did not even get a look-in. And the former players did so well because there was no weak link, no let up in the pressure - they supported each other, bowled a lot of wicket-taking deliveries, helped by the conditions, and gave away next to no bad balls. Although some of the Aussies did let themselves down in the first innings, they did not play as poorly as 60 all out would suggest.
From that point on it was always going to be a big struggle for Australia to get back into the game. And they didn't quite bowl well enough. Cook (43) played a solid role at the top of the England innings, ably supported by Joe Root (widely known as Joe Rooooooooooooooooooot!) who played a masterful hand, going about his innings in just the right way as he so often does, and scoring at a good clip to get 130 off 176 balls, including 19 fours and a bludgeoning six off spinner Lyon. Jonny Bairstow (74) came to the party in capable fashion, forming a good Yorkie partnership with Root. Wood did a decent job as Nightwatchman, and later, Ali and Broad carved some useful late runs to get us to 391-9 when the declaration came.
Both Australian openers made a good start to their second innings but their side were so far behind by this point that there was not much chance of them coming back into the game unless something truly special happened. But England persisted, and after Rogers went for 52 the middle order stuttered again. Only Warner (64) and Voges (51*) offered much resistance to the England victory charge. Stokes bowled superbly this time, getting the ball to swing and seam both ways at a fast pace, and claiming 6 victims. When No.11 Nathan Lyon played on to Mark Wood, and had his leg stump uprooted, Australia were still 78 runs away from making England bat again. Wood had 3-69, Stokes had 6-36 and England had won the Ashes!
The biggest problem for Australia in this series has been their inability to adapt to English conditions - no great pace or bounce, but plenty of swing, and somewhat grassed pitches that offered movement off the seam. Their batsmen tended to play too hard at the ball, with firm grips that made the ball fly off the edge so fast, it carried to fielders. Good players of English conditions know that it's often a good idea to do as little as possible until you get in - leave the ball whenever you can, and play late, with soft hands to give yourself the best chance to read any movement and cause any edges to not carry.
"T20 gone horribly wrong"
This was not just a failure to adapt to foreign environs though. We see increasingly in Test cricket, and this is something that's been noticeable for at least the last couple of years, that the influence of T20 is starting to make batsmen impatient. There is often a lack of application, the need to hit runs all the time, and the generation of a false sense of run-rate pressure which the Australian batsmen showed in their sub-20 over first innings. It was, in effect, a T20 innings gone horribly wrong, masquerading as a Test innings. Or, as ESPNCricinfo put it, "Australia slashed their Ashes away in a 93-minute video nasty"
England set another record in this series - they are the only side to have 4 different bowlers take 5-fors (actually, 6 or more wickets) in 4 successive innings - Anderson, Finn, Broad and Stokes. It's now 4 consecutive home Ashes series wins - this is getting to be a habit! 2005, 2009, 2013 and now 2015. And all this just 19 months after we were hammered 5-0 in the last Ashes series down under. It seem that whenever England get a winning result on the board, we go on to win the series! And this was a better-feeling win than the 2013 one, followed up so quickly as it was by the bad reversal down under.
I would like to think that England can take this opportunity which presents itself with the last match at the Oval, to get some spin practice in. This is before a winter away which features matches in the Middle East, on tracks which will no doubt be slow, but very responsive to spin. The only real aspect of their game lacking over the summer was the spin option. Even if we persist with Moeen Ali's bowling (and he is at least useful to have for his bowling) I'd like to see at least one more attacking spin option, such as Rashid, given some more time with the ball.
As much as this was was a wondrous day, and as magnanimous as most of the Australian players were in defeat (Clarke's post match interviews were remarkable for their emotional content as well as being very respectful and candid) you can always find a sour note amongst the glory.
Ian Healy - Really?
The one I found was provided by none other than ex-Aussies keeper Ian Healy, who blamed the Aussies' poor performances on "the WAGS". Tut, tut. I could almost want Australia to win the women's Ashes (not quite though - I'm not that generous) just to show how misguided Ian Healy was with these remarks.
Misogyny like this has no place in the sport no matter how loosely connected. Healy is behaving like an arrogant and inconsiderate antipodean lout. The bloke seems to have forgotten his own niece Alyssa, who is not too bad a player herself (showing more application that some of her male compatriots) and has been ripping up the England attack in the women's ashes (turning this all around, her own HAB, Mitchell Stark must be "along for the ride" I suppose!)
More on the Women's Ashes later. And also a photo update from Northampton as I am going to day 2 of the match against the Australians! Where I totally won't make any comments about them having just lost the Ashes!
:-)
Team ratings
Ratings Explained: 1-3 very poor, 4 poor, 5 average, 6 OK, 7 good, 8 very good, 9 excellent, 10 unbelievable
England - Overall rating: 9
Cook*- 8
Lyth - 6
Bell - 6.5
Root - 9
Bairstow - 8
Stokes - 9
Buttler+ - 6.5
Moeen Ali - 7.5
Broad - 10
Wood - 8
Finn - 7.5
Australia team rating - 4
Saturday, 1 August 2015
Review: Ashes 2015 - England vs. Australia 3rd test, Edgbaston, 29-31 July 2015
Ashes 2015 - England vs. Australia 3rd test, Edgbaston, 29-31 July 2015
Well I'd said in my previous post on the second Test, that Jimmy Anderson would be hoping to come back with some wickets in this game, and boy he didn't disappoint! It was a strangely confident decision to bat first by Australia, perhaps buoyed on by the success of the team batting first in the series so far. But it turned out to be the wrong decision, as the pitch seamed much more than expected, and England's bowlers were able to make the most of the atmospheric conditions as well, and it was tough to bat on the first day.
Steven Finn and Jimmy Anderson bowled brilliantly, and were moving the ball around a lot, Anderson swinging it and Finn getting pace and bounce from the surface. Australia were quickly in trouble and Anderson, capably assisted by Finn, destroyed the middle order to reduce the Aussies to 94-7 inside the first 27 overs. Broad then joined the party and the innings was done for the very poor total of 136. As much as England moved the ball around with skill, Australia gave their wickets away badly. Only Chris Rogers, with a determined 52, and a couple of double-digit contributions from the tail showed any fight of note.
England then made a decent reply, getting to 281 which almost gave them the 150 run lead they would have liked. It probably would have been possible to get 220+, but the middle order of Bairstow, Stokes and Buttler misfired and none of Bell, Root or Moeen, all who showed application and ability in reaching the half-centuries, managed to go on to a higher score.
The resurgence of Steven Finn, the tall pace bowler, was also a huge feature of the game. Since being in a bad place in 2013, when he was called "unselectable" by Ashley Giles, Finn has recovered much of his form with Middlesex and seemed "unplayable" in this match! He bowled brilliantly in both innings. In the first he started well and got the important wicket of Steve Smith, and then and Michael Clarke with a yorker that seemed to come down out of the clouds to smash under Clarke's bat. It was in the second innings that he really shined though, taking 6-79 in devastating series of spells where he decimated the entire Aussie middle order: batsmen 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 were all removed by him.
It was the short-pitched bowling that really did them, with Finn getting surprising bounce and movement too. The only worry for England would be if they take this approach too seriously on unsuited pitches. Normally, on calmer surfaces, bowling that short would not be a good tactic and would likely result in many boundaries. Let's hope that the short bowling is not "locked in" as it sometimes seems to be.
Australia's second effort with the bat was less disastrous, but still not enough to give them much hope of lasting four days, or setting England a challenging target. Their middle order of Smith, Clarke and Marsh totalled only 34 runs between them in both innings combined. A swashbuckling 77 from David Warner was the best the specialist bats offered, and it was down to Peter Nevill (59) and the tail (including a fighting 58 from Starc) to post 265.
England made their target (124 in fact) for the loss of Cook and Lyth and so won by 8 wickets to rapturous cheers from a raucous Edgbaston crowd. Bell and Root, who got the final runs, batted very well in both innings. Bell looks more comfortable in his role at number 3. Bairstow will get more chances to come, but Lyth must be under pressure now. Perhaps the biggest worry for England may be the sie injury to Anderson meaning he will miss the next Test at Trent Bridge and realistically maybe the last one too. Likely Mark Wood or perhaps Liam Plunkett will come in to replace him, depending on the pitches presented. For Australia, captain Clarke is under pressure as well as the middle order bats, and possibly Mitchell Starc.
One of the crazier things about this remarkable match was that both teams (particularly the Aussies) seemed intent on playing ODI cricket and could not apply themselves and knuckle down for the long haul. There is talk of scrapping the fifth day of Test matches going forward, as modern games are regularly finishing inside four. With games like this one, we could go a step further and scrap the fourth day as well!
England only need to draw the next 2 games to win back the Ashes! Maybe more realistically though, unless we get rain we only need one more win...lets hope the inconsistency we've seen from them in the last few months can be overcome. This could be another memorable year.
Report
http://www.espncricinfo.com/the-ashes-2015/content/story/905157.html
Scorecard
http://www.espncricinfo.com/the-ashes-2015/engine/match/743967.html
Interesting Sky Cricket Podcast:
http://www.acast.com/skysportscricket/skysportscricketpodcast-31stjuly?autoplay
Lots of other episodes also linked on there
Team ratings
Ratings Explained: 1-3 very poor, 4 poor, 5 average, 6 OK, 7 good, 8 very good, 9 excellent, 10 unbelievable
England - Overall rating: 8
Cook*- 7
Lyth - 5
Bell - 8.5
Root - 8
Bairstow - 6
Stokes - 6
Buttler+ - 6.5
Moeen Ali - 7
Broad - 8
Finn - 9
Anderson - 9
Australia team rating - 4
Well I'd said in my previous post on the second Test, that Jimmy Anderson would be hoping to come back with some wickets in this game, and boy he didn't disappoint! It was a strangely confident decision to bat first by Australia, perhaps buoyed on by the success of the team batting first in the series so far. But it turned out to be the wrong decision, as the pitch seamed much more than expected, and England's bowlers were able to make the most of the atmospheric conditions as well, and it was tough to bat on the first day.
Steven Finn and Jimmy Anderson bowled brilliantly, and were moving the ball around a lot, Anderson swinging it and Finn getting pace and bounce from the surface. Australia were quickly in trouble and Anderson, capably assisted by Finn, destroyed the middle order to reduce the Aussies to 94-7 inside the first 27 overs. Broad then joined the party and the innings was done for the very poor total of 136. As much as England moved the ball around with skill, Australia gave their wickets away badly. Only Chris Rogers, with a determined 52, and a couple of double-digit contributions from the tail showed any fight of note.
England then made a decent reply, getting to 281 which almost gave them the 150 run lead they would have liked. It probably would have been possible to get 220+, but the middle order of Bairstow, Stokes and Buttler misfired and none of Bell, Root or Moeen, all who showed application and ability in reaching the half-centuries, managed to go on to a higher score.
The resurgence of Steven Finn, the tall pace bowler, was also a huge feature of the game. Since being in a bad place in 2013, when he was called "unselectable" by Ashley Giles, Finn has recovered much of his form with Middlesex and seemed "unplayable" in this match! He bowled brilliantly in both innings. In the first he started well and got the important wicket of Steve Smith, and then and Michael Clarke with a yorker that seemed to come down out of the clouds to smash under Clarke's bat. It was in the second innings that he really shined though, taking 6-79 in devastating series of spells where he decimated the entire Aussie middle order: batsmen 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 were all removed by him.
It was the short-pitched bowling that really did them, with Finn getting surprising bounce and movement too. The only worry for England would be if they take this approach too seriously on unsuited pitches. Normally, on calmer surfaces, bowling that short would not be a good tactic and would likely result in many boundaries. Let's hope that the short bowling is not "locked in" as it sometimes seems to be.
Australia's second effort with the bat was less disastrous, but still not enough to give them much hope of lasting four days, or setting England a challenging target. Their middle order of Smith, Clarke and Marsh totalled only 34 runs between them in both innings combined. A swashbuckling 77 from David Warner was the best the specialist bats offered, and it was down to Peter Nevill (59) and the tail (including a fighting 58 from Starc) to post 265.
England made their target (124 in fact) for the loss of Cook and Lyth and so won by 8 wickets to rapturous cheers from a raucous Edgbaston crowd. Bell and Root, who got the final runs, batted very well in both innings. Bell looks more comfortable in his role at number 3. Bairstow will get more chances to come, but Lyth must be under pressure now. Perhaps the biggest worry for England may be the sie injury to Anderson meaning he will miss the next Test at Trent Bridge and realistically maybe the last one too. Likely Mark Wood or perhaps Liam Plunkett will come in to replace him, depending on the pitches presented. For Australia, captain Clarke is under pressure as well as the middle order bats, and possibly Mitchell Starc.
One of the crazier things about this remarkable match was that both teams (particularly the Aussies) seemed intent on playing ODI cricket and could not apply themselves and knuckle down for the long haul. There is talk of scrapping the fifth day of Test matches going forward, as modern games are regularly finishing inside four. With games like this one, we could go a step further and scrap the fourth day as well!
England only need to draw the next 2 games to win back the Ashes! Maybe more realistically though, unless we get rain we only need one more win...lets hope the inconsistency we've seen from them in the last few months can be overcome. This could be another memorable year.
Report
http://www.espncricinfo.com/the-ashes-2015/content/story/905157.html
Scorecard
http://www.espncricinfo.com/the-ashes-2015/engine/match/743967.html
http://www.acast.com/skysportscricket/skysportscricketpodcast-31stjuly?autoplay
Lots of other episodes also linked on there
Team ratings
Ratings Explained: 1-3 very poor, 4 poor, 5 average, 6 OK, 7 good, 8 very good, 9 excellent, 10 unbelievable
England - Overall rating: 8
Cook*- 7
Lyth - 5
Bell - 8.5
Root - 8
Bairstow - 6
Stokes - 6
Buttler+ - 6.5
Moeen Ali - 7
Broad - 8
Finn - 9
Anderson - 9
Australia team rating - 4
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)