Australia vs England 1st test match thread

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

First topic message reminder :

The Ashes - 1st Test, Brisbane
21-25 November, 2013

Australia:
CJL Rogers, DA Warner, SR Watson, MJ Clarke*, SPD Smith, GJ Bailey,
BJ Haddin†, PM Siddle, MG Johnson, NM Lyon, RJ Harris.

England:
AN Cook*, MA Carberry, IJL Trott, KP Pietersen, IR Bell, JE Root,
MJ Prior†, SCJ Broad, GP Swann, JM Anderson, CT Tremlett

Umpires: Aleem Dar (Pakistan) and HDPK Dharmasena (Sri Lanka)
TV umpire: M Erasmus (South Africa)
Match referee: JJ Crowe (New Zealand)
Reserve umpire: P Wilson (Australia)

[guildfordbat]

Lunch. 145/2. A lead of 304.

Warner and Clarke in charge of proceedings and both impressing. Even with two rather lucky wickets (both poor shots) and an interruption for rain, England have failed to put the brakes on and exert any real control. Australia extremely well placed.

Good night, folks.

[Pal Joey]

Yes Guildford, the 236 record is there... but in this case, we'll need a decent buffer to cover the unexpected.

304 run lead now - so at least up towards 400 by Tea. I wouldn't mind seeing a declaration around then or early in the session after tea.

If weather permits, then have a bowl at England... maybe a mixture of Mitch and Lyons.

G'nite mate!  

[msp83]

Australia 310-6. The Haddin-Johnson combo out in the middle. Warner and Clarke did much of the work though, with 124 and 113 respectively. George Bailey had a relatively better 2nd innings in his first test, scoring 34 before he was bowled by Swann. Swann had looked out of sorts for much of the day, but eventually found Clarke's stumps, and then added Bayley also. Chris Tremlett took the wicket of Steven Smith besides accepting the gift from Shane Watson, but hasn't really looked all that threatening. James Anderson is yet to make an impact with the ball in the 2nd innings. He has the new ball in his hands now.

[KP_fan]

Tremlett--build like a garner.....bowls like a bopara  

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Nice to see the return of the England losing WUMS BTW

Batting is in complete disarray, feel for the bowlers pretty much having to bowl for 3 straight days in the Aussie heat

[Mike Selig]

Morning all,

Watched most of the first and last sessions. A few jumbled thoughts then.

Wouldn't read too much into Rogers's dismissal. He got a short and wide one, and played it terribly. These things happen. I think he is a good foil to Warner, and hopefully (for Australia) will allow the younger players like Warner and Smith to grow into the side.

I am still unconvinced by Watson at 3. Australia see him as one of their main batsmen, and he probably deserves a decent run there (rather than moving up and down the order as he has done these last few years) but for me this test match has showed his limitations in that position. First innings got himself in, then out to an innocuous ball; 2nd innings allowed the bowlers to get on top, and then got himself out.

Warner played very well; I was particularly impressed with how he played against Swann - spin used to be a real weakness for him, and he has obviously worked hard at his game with success. He has this brash character which makes him come across as a tad arrogant, but it seems like he is a hard working guy as well; his technique is more compact than when he started also.

Clarke decided to take on the short ball and it worked. I still think England will fancy getting him out by bowling short. It is much easier backing yourself to take on the bouncers when:
a) the bowling is 80mph rather than 90mph
b) you are effectively 220odd for 2, and not 1-1 chasing 560.
It will be interesting to see whether he can play the hook and pull with such confidence if he comes in under more pressure.

I have to say I thought Tremlett despite his 2 wickets looked a bit pedestrian. It was noticeable that his short balls carried less venom than Johnson (obviously) or Broad, and Clarke played him comfortably. If Australia can get after Swann, England will have to seriously consider Finn for his extra pace, because otherwise Broad and Anderson are going to bowl a lot of overs.

Overall Australia were able to play with a lot of freedom because of the game situation. This suited them well, and going almost purely by the figures, it seems they got after Swann with success - that will be an area of concern for England should it continue. It is noticeable though that Australia (even Haddin and Johnson) didn't play with the same freedom in the first innings. In that context the 400-7 they got will do wonders for their confidence, but may not be all that telling in the grand scheme of things.

I thought Clarke might have declared 20 minutes earlier, but as things turned out he got a couple of wickets which is as much as he would have hoped for probably.

Carberry was unlucky; that type of dismissal won't happen all that often.

Trott is fast becoming a major concern. I think his issues were compounded by the game situation. He had clearly decided to take the short ball on, but with the situation as it is, I wonder whether he wasn't totally committed to his game plan. However it is obviously an issue; Johnson really fancies him (he bowled dross in the most part in the short session, but got it spot on to Trott) and he could have been out a couple of times before he finally holed out.

Not much turn yet, but a bit of up and down bounce.

Looking onwards, Australia will be desperate to finish the job off - they need a win to convince themselves that they can indeed beat this England side in tests. Rain may yet come to England's rescue, or something extraordinary could happen.
This sets the series up nicely. England have been caught a bit cold (as others have mentioned, the bowling they faced in the warm-ups was pedestrian in the extreme, and this has been rather a step-up). Australia's batting still looks fragile, but without anything from Trott and particularly if Root's rough patch continues, so too increasingly does England's. Runs on the board key.

[mystiroakey]

Amazing play by Aus.

Eng bulldozed. Sometimes it's so hard to turn the tide.

Not much to say really but Aus could be back..

Which is very good for test cricket. I just wish they did it against ind or SA not us..

[alfie]

Confound you Mike ...you have just about summed up everything I came on to say   ... Not that I saw a lot of it , but the impressions I have match what you are saying .
Warner surprised me a bit. Didn't expect him to successfully transfer his limited overs form into this game , but he has played very well here. Flower and co will be busy working on the antidote before Adelaide.
I honestly do not see any way out for England here. Surely they can't make 550 , and batting two days would be harder ...if there is weather about , they would want a lot of it  

So can they bounce back ? Recent series suggest maybe they can : ask India. And they generally start tours slowly...but the top order is a worry. Not yet convinced by Carberry - he is no Strauss , anyway - and unless Trott recovers his mojo we could be looking at two or three down early quite often : in which case all the messing about with Compton/Root/ Carberry will eventually be seen as costing England the Ashes...

Striking back in Adelaide will require some serious batting : and I cannot imagine England will consider changing their lineup before
then. So they better get it right , because it may be too late afterwards. Trott needs some solid work on the bowling machine.

Less concerned about the bowlers. They did well on day one , despite a limited buildup , and were always on a hiding to nothing in the second innings. Swann did look a bit short of his best though , especially in the first knock ...good to see him with a couple of late wickets. Tremlett still down on pace , but tidy enough. I would prefer a fit Bresnan , but unless they make serious runs it is irrelevant.

[mystiroakey]

It's all about trying to get a 300 or something.

Forget about the result, just play some cricket.

[Duty281]

Is that bad weather around the corner? Possibly, but it's not certain.

What is certain though is that England's two best batsman are at the crease.

The greatest counter-attack since El-Alamein coming up. Let's go for a target of 250/1 (or none!) from Day four, and then England really can win it on the fifth day.

Don't give in just yet...I certainly haven't!

[Duty281]

The fickle fans over at the BBC do my head in.

England are overrated, England's worst batting-line up for a while, Swann's overrated, Australia outbowled us in England (eh?), blah, blah, blah.

4 Tests after this one would you believe.

[alfie]

The fickle fans over at the BBC do my head in.

England are overrated, England's worst batting-line up for a while, Swann's overrated, Australia outbowled us in England (eh?), blah, blah, blah.

4 Tests after this one would you believe.

Blimey Duty , you should try living here : one of my Aussie mates has already assumed five - nil. And suggested this proves England were dead lucky to win three-Nil a few weeks ago...Give 'em a sniff and they are chest beating like it's 2001...relentless , it is...

Between this and listening to the local TV commentary I am contemplating a choice between a fierce England fight back in Adelaide (sorry mate , this one has gone !) and jumping off a bridge...

[alfie]

...by coincidence , just as I finished typing the above , there came on my television , which is currently employed as a random music generator by my dear wife , a splendid rendition of Jerusalem...

I go on with hope... 

[mystiroakey]

The cracks have been there- but its nothing to do with our bowling unit.

This is just a bogey ground for swan and our batting is void of any confidence.

Everyone bangs on about trott-

Every batter bar Bell has actually underperformed over the last year.. And tbh there was no point even having a spinner at this track- Root would have been fine as a spin option if needed

[CaledonianCraig]

Facts are England's batting has been rank and flaws exposed. I wouldn't put that down to any superb sort of bowling but more to do with pathetic batting. Unless Trott can sort his technical issues, Carberry can step up to the plate, Pietersen finds consistent hot form and Root also I can't see England reversing the trend in this series. However, Australia should not go wetting themselves yet as I am still far from convinced by their overall standard.

[mystiroakey]

For me its more about trott kp and cook, those are the 3 experienced World class batters .

Cook seems to have been void of criticism. And for some reason people keep having a pop at Root!!(root has the second highest average of any England batter in the last year, and is the rookie!!)

[KP_fan]

--the problem is not Eng's batting.
7 out of 10 times they will out perform the Aussies against like bowling attacks.
 
--problem by far is english bowling.
the pitches are not dry and scruffed up like designed especially in eng.
so Swann does not get spin and bite....and Anderson doesn't find reverse nor conventional swing 7 seam is assisted by the pitch or atmosphere.
 
--take anderson and swann out as potent match winners and reduce to merely support bowlers.....and eng look toothless.
broad is trying hard but is like a good 2nd bowler.
tremlett with that big a body and turnimg out at 122kph is an embarrasement to those who picked him.
 
so with 3 bowlers turned ineffective.....even an average batting side like aus is whacking them around.
 
--Flower's designer pitch formula and 4th bowler selection for cotainment + some useful runs¨with bat has given some short term success but hasn't produced the all condition robustness that a champion side needs.

[mystiroakey]

KP fan. TBH mate that is hogwash.

This pitch is batting friendly.

the batters should just leave the short balls,

aus have only batted to par, England underperformed

[Duty281]

The problem is surely England's batting, no?

England's good bowling in the first innings, Broad in particular, put England on top and Australia at least 100 runs light.

England's batting then threw it away.

[KP_fan]

KP fan. TBH mate that is hogwash.

This pitch is batting friendly.

the batters should just leave the short balls,

aus have only batted to par, England underperformed

anderson didn't get any reverse nor anywhere close to the new ball swing he gets.
swann turned square on d2 in englnad...and was comparitively gentle and friendly.

the pitch does not seam, nor spin, nor umeven...but does have pace, carry and bounce.....and unfortunately eng has no one to exploit it like harris and johnson.
so even nos 7 and 8 of aus can whack the gentle stuff being dished out by all but broad.

[mystiroakey]

not sure what KP is talking about tbh..

swann is ineffective on this track so I do question his involvement. But other than that they have performed adequately

[mystiroakey]

KP fan our batters should have all dealt with there pace attack.

Bounce shouldnt hurt our batters and rarely has done in the past.

Our batters however seriously underperformed- our bowlers did fine first innings

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Scoring 130 odd first innings isn't the problem #headsgone

[Guest]

I am fast learning to come here and read Mike Selig's reports of the days play rather than go over to the BBC and read their sensationalist nonsense.  I also like to read Boycotts reports (quite often the BBC cherry pick his comments out of (full) context).

I had worried that Johnson had worked out Carberry in the first innings, but he goes for a duck this innings to Harris.  Not sure what to do with Trott he has picked up a bad habit in Test cricket and seems unable to return to basics (what originally got him into the test side) in the short term.

[KP_fan]

The problem is surely England's batting, no?

England's good bowling in the first innings, Broad in particular, put England on top and Australia at least 100 runs light.

England's batting then threw it away.

eng did bat badly in first inning...but that's not where the match got away from them..
it's when they had aus 120-6 and did not have the fire and pace to blast out the aussie nos 7 and 8 on a pitch that has pace and bounce.......is when  match got away.
 
they should have rolled up aus for 180 odd if they had right fire-power.
and had they scored even abou 150 match would have been still in balance going into second inning....and not the pressure-less free ride that aus had in 2nd innings.
eng may have still lost but not in this hopeless 550 run chase, instead in a closer 250 run chase

[mystiroakey]

NO KP

AUs have only batted to par. England haven't

coinceading 170 runs to a BAD score is the problem

[Guest]

NO KP

AUs have only batted to par. England haven't

coinceading 170 runs to a BAD score is the problem

That's true many were saying this was a "400" pitch and that it would get more difficult to play on in the final innings, hence the importance of winning the toss.

[KP_fan]

NO KP

AUs have only batted to par. England haven't

coinceading 170 runs to a BAD score is the problem

i guess my reply to duty above answers your point also

[mystiroakey]

All you do in Test match cricket when you need to settle things down a bit is STOP PLAYING SHORT PITCHED BOLWING.

Short pitched bowling can not get you out if you leave it

[alfie]

I agree Swann looked underdone. But the rest of KP fan's stuff is rubbish.

England did quite well to dismiss Australia for under 300 on a decent pitch ..I felt it was under par , but the truly dreadful England batting made that irrelevant.
Second innings Australia made hay. As I would have expected. And will go on to win comfortably.

But I would think the England bowlers will likely come back from this better - mercifully they have a break before Adelaide.

The batting is another story : hopefully a few of them will get in and play a bit second time around. Batting at the Gabba after coming from England via only meaningless warm ups against sub-standard attacks on flat decks was always likely to be tricky , but they should have dealt with it better.

After Perth in 2010 the Aussies deluded themselves into thinking the Ashes were there for the taking ; and we all know what happened.
May not be the same this time , but I would caution against taking too much from one game.

[mystiroakey]

NO KP

AUs have only batted to par. England haven't

coinceading 170 runs to a BAD score is the problem

i guess my reply to duty above answers your point also

In a way you are right in the fact we should have been more clinical and got the tail of aus out.

however we were still up on par at that point. and we still took the top order out for next to nothing!!(the batters are the harder wickets!)

what took us out the game was ineffective batting

[trebellbobaggins]

Hi All.

so it seems all my fears about Englands batting and that a rude awakening was in store down under have come to fruition.

I have a strong feeling Aussie will walk this series.  Been saying it since the summer.

[alfie]

The problem is surely England's batting, no?

England's good bowling in the first innings, Broad in particular, put England on top and Australia at least 100 runs light.

England's batting then threw it away.

eng did bat badly in first inning...but that's not where the match got away from them..
it's when they had aus 120-6 and did not have the fire and pace to blast out the aussie nos 7 and 8 on a pitch that has pace and bounce.......is when  match got away.
 
they should have rolled up aus for 180 odd if they had right fire-power.
and had they scored even abou 150 match would have been still in balance going into second inning....and not the pressure-less free ride that aus had in 2nd innings.
eng may have still lost but not in this hopeless 550 run chase, instead in a closer 250 run chase

Just to take up this point : at 132/6 the Aussies might have been knocked over for 180 , indeed. But neither Haddin or Jonnson are total mugs with the bat , and I question whether any amount of fire and pace may have made any difference with the ball softening and no lateral movement available. If anything the usually reliable spin option came up short.

The difference on day two was the collapse started a bit earlier and ran through quickly to eight out , from which there was no coming back. Can't blame the bowlers when you lose 6/9 in a Test Match..

[mystiroakey]

Alight trebbs.

We need to get a couple of minor victories out of this test. If Cook and KP can put on a 100, then that's something,

Aus was allways going to win a test match at some point- It might as well be at the start/

It sets up the series, England allways suck first test anyway.

[alfie]

Hi All.

so it seems all my fears about Englands batting and that a rude awakening was in store down under have come to fruition.

I have a strong feeling Aussie will walk this series.  Been saying it since the summer.

Saved ! Trebell is back  

(where were you when we needed you on Friday man ?)

But my confidence for Tests 2-5 is climbing now  

[liverbnz]

England score 136 first up yet

--the problem is not Eng's batting.

 

Quite possibly the stupidest thing I've ever read on here. And before you say to read your replies, I have and they're garbage. You will not win Test matches scoring 136, especially in Australia. This bowling unit has pulled England out of many holes caused by the batsman. Rarely remember it the other way round if ever.

[trebellbobaggins]

I think England are too fragile and aussie have everything to prove and are hungry.

i think England will be struggle to win 1 or 2 honestly, they aren't as good as they think.

and if MJ is playing well away from Perth now, he will destroy them in Perth.  No more MJ songs for the army, just a Christmas stuffing.

[KP_fan]

All you do in Test match cricket when you need to settle things down a bit is STOP PLAYING SHORT PITCHED BOLWING.

Short pitched bowling can not get you out if you leave it

carberry's first inning dismissal was to the contrary.....unavoidably short and fast.

even those that are theoritically avoidable sitting amd watching from a distance......in the middle aren't.
there are so many cob webs, doubts fears, emotions that guide a batsman's mind when in middle....that simple, "see ball, leave ball " doesn't work

[KP_fan]

NO KP

AUs have only batted to par. England haven't

coinceading 170 runs to a BAD score is the problem

i guess my reply to duty above answers your point also

In a way you are right in the fact we should have been more clinical and got the tail of aus out.

however we were still up on par at that point. and we still took the top order out for next to nothing!!(the batters are the harder wickets!)

what took us out the game was ineffective batting

 
par is not what commentators say at the start...purely theortical.
a 130-6 of aus and 130-9 from eng suggested that 180 wouöd have been par......given that teams had "par" bowling resourcec.
that's where eng were shown to be below par

[mystiroakey]

maybe you struggle to understand the concept of par then KP,

eng are behind the game

Par isnt about the game at the time - its a theoretical measurement of the track not the in game situation.

[KP_fan]

England score 136 first up yet

--the problem is not Eng's batting.

 

Quite possibly the stupidest thing I've ever read on here. And before you say to read your replies, I have and they're garbage. You will not win Test matches scoring 136, especially in Australia. This bowling unit has pulled England out of many holes caused by the batsman. Rarely remember it the other way round if ever.

¨

if they had the fire power to bowl out aus for 180 in first inning, which they wre looking set to at one time, they would not be staring at a 300 run defeta but instead a close 2wkt win or 30 run defeat....which would have put both teams in a different mind set going into T2

[VTR]

I think KP_Fan operates on the mantra that if you say the same thing over and over again it eventually becomes true.

The batting is the problem, how anyone can argue otherwise is beyond me.

[KP_fan]

maybe you struggle to understand the concept of par then KP,

eng are behind the game

Par isnt about the game at the time - its a theoretical measurement of the track not the in game situation.

¨

the theoritical measure of the pitch being worth 400 or even 300 was purely ttheoritical.
in cricket these theoritical par scores are meaningless.

only material is what happens in middle....and 130-6 for one side and 130-9 for the other showed what pitch +22 players in reality were worth

[Duty281]

NO KP

AUs have only batted to par. England haven't

coinceading 170 runs to a BAD score is the problem

i guess my reply to duty above answers your point also

In a way you are right in the fact we should have been more clinical and got the tail of aus out.

however we were still up on par at that point. and we still took the top order out for next to nothing!!(the batters are the harder wickets!)

what took us out the game was ineffective batting

 
par is not what commentators say at the start...purely theortical.
a 130-6 of aus and 130-9 from eng suggested that 180 wouöd have been par......given that teams had "par" bowling resourcec.
that's where eng were shown to be below par

Doesn't the lovely pitch, fast outfield, lovely conditions, and lack of swing, seam and spin, show that 400 should have been the par score here?

Australia were poor first up, England were rank awful.

[mystiroakey]

maybe you struggle to understand the concept of par then KP,

eng are behind the game

Par isnt about the game at the time - its a theoretical measurement of the track not the in game situation.

¨

the theoritical measure of the pitch being worth 400 or even 300 was purely ttheoritical.
in cricket these theoritical par scores are meaningless.

only material is what happens in middle....and 130-6 for one side and 130-9 for the other showed what pitch +22 players in reality were worth

as said then- you misunderstand the meaning of par

[CaledonianCraig]

KP it is clear - England are set to lose this first test due to terrible batting. After day one it was definitely advantage England when bowling. Day two was the match changer when too many England batsmen gifted wickets ridicukously cheaply and Australia had a healthy first innings lead to build on. From that point momentum was with Australia and the pitch (a batsman's dream) plus confidence to play their shots that a healthy lead gives you just made batting so much easier for them.

[Duty281]

You're 91/8 on a sunny day 2, on a lovely flat wicket, having been 82/2.

Don't worry though, it's the bowlers' fault, not the batsmans!

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Trebell welcome back! We need now more than ever

[GSC]

Englands 2 biggest issues come to the fore. Batting big and starting an away series on the front foot

[CaledonianCraig]

The big worry for England has to be the flaws in technique discovered in Trott. For so long he has been an unflappable and solid performer who they coould rely on to drop anchor and deliver big scores. That is not the case just now so it weakens the batting somewhat especially as it is clear he wont be dropped - besides who is there to replace him? England's best hope is that Trott can exorcise the demons of his mind and sort out his flaws. If not England are left severely hamstrung.

[Sponsored content]