England's Summer of Cricket 2023, Featuring The Ashes

First topic message reminder :

Well done to Scott Boland, a very tidy job and added precious runs.

Another fantastic day in a fantastic test in a fantastic rivalry in a fantastic sport. Fantastic.

And just as the pattern has been throughout, when one team looked to be taking control, it just got yanked back. And it was Broad yanking it back with a brilliant spell. Labuschagne is the new Warner, as far as Broad's concerned.

174 to get. Seven wickets left. Still favouring Australia, but it'll be interesting to see how the bowling conditions are after the expected rain tomorrow. If they're anything close to what England's top order had to face yesterday, it could be curtains for Australia, but I'm not anticipating it to be that bad.

Will almost certainly be a delayed start. Hopefully the BBC's more pessimistic forecast doesn't come to fruition.

It'll probably go to the wire, that's the way the whole test has been shaping up. Might even be a tied test...

Duty281 wrote:Joe Root! Two out of nowhere. Bairstow will be delighted with the stumping, then Green with the worst shot you'll see.

The game has changed a little.

Absolutely. Good combo between bowler and keeper for Head's wicket. Braindead play from Green.

England aren't out of jail but have loosened the cell door .... got to make the very most of this opportunity.

alfie wrote:

VTR wrote:Shocking day for England, any chance of winning The Ashes as good as gone on day 6 of the series

Should probably give you a lot of credit for those two wickets !

Need a few more though…

Still think England are more or less out of this. Its still a good score for Australia, England are likely to have Pope out injured, which means Broad or Robinson at 7

Btw, Nasser confirmed 6:48 for stumps tonight.

VTR wrote:

alfie wrote:

VTR wrote:Shocking day for England, any chance of winning The Ashes as good as gone on day 6 of the series

Should probably give you a lot of credit for those two wickets !

Need a few more though…

Still think England are more or less out of this. Its still a good score for Australia, England are likely to have Pope out injured, which means Broad or Robinson at 7

Maybe Pope will magically have a concussion overnight? Like the time Foakes injured his back in a test, went off, then amazingly tested positive for Covid and was allowed to be substituted.

VTR wrote:

alfie wrote:

VTR wrote:Shocking day for England, any chance of winning The Ashes as good as gone on day 6 of the series

Should probably give you a lot of credit for those two wickets !

Need a few more though…

Still think England are more or less out of this. Its still a good score for Australia, England are likely to have Pope out injured, which means Broad or Robinson at 7

Yeah they are going to have to bat really well. And still have to take five wickets of course !

But those two wickets at least shift the dial from ‘total disaster’ to just ‘very disappointing day’. Australia massively on top anyway ; but perhaps not completely out of sight - yet.

The least Pope could have done is go off holding his head!

Well, 339/5. With all respect to Root, when Root is the leading bowler in a test in England after a day's play, you know there's some issues.

400 should be a minimum for Aus from here, but even 500 isn't out of the question.

I hope this test serves as a wake-up call for England.

VTR wrote:

alfie wrote:

VTR wrote:Shocking day for England, any chance of winning The Ashes as good as gone on day 6 of the series

Should probably give you a lot of credit for those two wickets !

Need a few more though…

Still think England are more or less out of this. Its still a good score for Australia, England are likely to have Pope out injured, which means Broad or Robinson at 7

Yes, that is truly alarming.

For someone who is only 25 years old Ollie Pope does seem to get injured a lot.

Duty281 wrote:.... I hope this test serves as a wake-up call for England.

On a man per man basis they're not nearly as good as Australia?  I think injuries to key players have played a part - England's squad depth seem's shallow.

Pope has long standing shoulder issues sadly.

Tough day. Bowling first a no brainer, but the ball didn't do nearly as much as expected and some decent England bowling didn't get as much reward as you'd hope. In addition to the usual poor fielding that has to be addressed. Largely then unravelled late in the day to a Travis Head onslaught against a tired attack on a slow pitch.

Think England would've probably shuffled the pack further if injuries permitted. Robinson doesn't look fit enough for another workload within a week, broad and Anderson bowled well without reward but how far can they go in this series if rotation isn't feasible?

See if they can keep the score down tomorrow but effectively batting a man down for the entire match I fear the worst

No name Bertie wrote:

Duty281 wrote:.... I hope this test serves as a wake-up call for England.

On a man per man basis they're not nearly as good as Australia?  I think injuries to key players have played a part - England's squad depth seem's shallow.

Serves as a wake-up call in that they should shut up and stop spewing nonsense.

Australia are the best test team in the world. They go about their business, concentrate and do most of their talking on the pitch. They get results.

England are arrogant and aloof and talk a load of rubbish (the test team that is). They're the equivalent of a boxer who's beaten up a bunch of nobodies, delude themselves that they're something special, and then get splattered by a quality opponent in the title fight.

'We’re in the entertainment business rather than the sporting business.' Ben Stokes

'After day four [of the Edgbaston test] Brendon McCullum said we had won already regardless of the result because of the reaction from people about the way we played, and the fact we had stuck to our style.' James Anderson

'We're not about results. We always talk about that. We're not about winning or losing: we're about entertainment. But I think it will suit us a bit more, that pitch [at Lord's today]. So I think we'll win by, I don't know, 150 runs?" Zak Crawley

And you also have the bizarre followers of the cult of Bazball, who think that some magical transformation has happened because England have beaten a load of rubbish.

Well, the wake-up call is happening now. Australia are going to beat England in England for the first time in 22 years. Then England are going to go to India and get smashed. Maybe after England have lost 7/8 of these ten tests against the best in the world, everyone will realise that England are roughly at the same level that they've been for the last 5/6 years, which is able to regularly beat the mid-tier and lower teams home and away, but short of that top table.

And hopefully the leadership team of England's test side will realise that entertainment is no substitute for winning. Fans would rather see England win 1-0, than lose 4-3, so to speak (not that England were dull pre-Bazball). Then England can go out on the field with the energy and intensity of a side that actually wants to win, rather than today's half-arsed effort.

GSC wrote:Pope has long standing shoulder issues sadly.

Tough day. Bowling first a no brainer, but the ball didn't do nearly as much as expected and some decent England bowling didn't get as much reward as you'd hope. In addition to the usual poor fielding that has to be addressed. Largely then unravelled late in the day to a Travis Head onslaught against a tired attack on a slow pitch.

Think England would've probably shuffled the pack further if injuries permitted. Robinson doesn't look fit enough for another workload within a week, broad and Anderson bowled well without reward but how far can they go in this series if rotation isn't feasible?

See if they can keep the score down tomorrow but effectively batting a man down for the entire match I fear the worst

They've messed up the team selection. Should have had Woakes in for Robinson, then Robinson could have rested here and played at Headingley, with Anderson being rested at Headingley. Instead now England are going to have to rotate Anderson and Robinson out for Headingley, and either accommodate Broad (who won't be 100%) or change the bowling attack entirely.

I don't have the energy for the second coming of the Moenn debate but just miss me with the nobody is good stuff.

Root's fortuitous double strike turned a 600-8 d. into a 465 a.o I think
But even that is 150 above par on this pitch
Eng will come out swinging........but there is enuf in the pitch for them to go down swinging for 270 odd.

It's like the first day of WTC final.....Eng bowling looked tried, off-mark and lackluster...and on the other hand Aus identified and rectified their folly of getting into a hole of "strokelessness" from T1.

Fortune favored the brave....Smith was due....he looked good in WTC final and learnt from T1 he needs to play strokes...cannot get stuck.
Manus is still not in form and yet he got something going ......Warner played as well as he can.......he is a 30s 40s and low 50s guy now on a good day (like Kohli)
Law of averages caught up with Khawaja

Head was chancing in arm....never in control....Eng need to have a persistent bouncer/ short dug into the body plan to him.
Green has potential people tell me

Anderson looks literally on last legs.......I don't see him being picked for too long if he takes 1 or 2 wickets for the game even in such helpful conditions.
Ditto Robinson.....he is young but looks exhausted.

Stokes' too clever, too cute, too convoluted a mind & too much out of the box talk & expectations from his bowlers ain't helping them either...I think.
Straight, steady, disciplined, hard yards is the way to bowl and get 20 wickets.
You can't trick 20 test wicket with cleverness.

I really don't think this is a bad batting track at all. Especially considering Lords has a propensity to flatten out in the middle of Tests. It's green but fairly slow and we've seen genuine edges not carrying on D1. There's movement but it isn't spectacular. From the colour it looks like a green top but it isn't behaving like one.

Duty281 wrote:

No name Bertie wrote:

Duty281 wrote:.... I hope this test serves as a wake-up call for England.

On a man per man basis they're not nearly as good as Australia?  I think injuries to key players have played a part - England's squad depth seem's shallow.

Serves as a wake-up call in that they should shut up and stop spewing nonsense ...

I don't agree with some of the things you say but you raised some fair points.

I see Duty is (predictably) on with the "they are all rubbish" stuff after a bad day at the office

And indeed for anyone disposed to embrace the negative , day one was manna from heaven. Very little went right for England (apart from winning the toss - and even that hasn't brought the rewards expected). Pope injury a dreadful blow ; and staring down a big Aussie total to chase.

But honestly : all this stuff about England being "arrogant" really has no basis in fact. They've certainly been confident - and have over the last year backed up that confidence with results. Should they have gone into this series apologetically saying "oh we know we have only beaten poor teams and we defer to the might of Australia but will try to do our best " ? Of course not.

I could do with less of Robinson's quotes - Broad is much better at winding them up ; but really they are similar to what we've heard from Australian players pre-series in the past. It's all just words. I have no problem with the attitude of the team - it's been execution that has let them down. Especially today.

I also agree with GSC and KC about the pitch. Commentators going on about perfect bowling conditions seemed to me to put too much emphasis on the overcast skies (which is fair enough) and ignored the real lack of pace and bounce which negated much of the expected advantage. Certainly not a bad day to be bowling ; but this is no Green Mamba.

Of course Australia may bowl better on it. I think Cummins in particular will get more than the England bowlers ; and we will have to see how it changes over the coming days ; but I will be seriously disappointed if England's bats just roll over and die in response.

Selection we can debate until the cows come home. I would have had Woakes in the side and rested one of the main three ; but no guarantee that would have made any huge difference. Apart from that they are picking the players who are fit - and unfortunately that is a limitation. Should have been able to do way better than this anyway - and to be honest I reckon they might have done with an ounce of luck going their way over the first half of the day. They really lost their way when Head got going and that would be my main criticism of the day one effort.

Impressions of a performance tend to be influenced by the scoreline - reasonably enough. We forget how different the situation might be had a couple of catches been taken - or a couple of marginal lbw calls gone the other way (Smith would certainly be out had the on field umpire upheld what looked a very good shout by Tongue late in the day) Hasten to add that for all that they absolutely bowled far too many loose balls. And too many no balls again as well ! But should remind ourselves that the opposition is entitled to play well : and the Australian bats ; notably Warner , Smith and Head really did just that (Khawaja battled - but didn't throw it away ; and Marnus was unconvincing and a bit lucky) One team on top of its game ; the other just a bit off and that is enough to make a huge difference at this level. Doesn't mean they are suddenly a bunch of no hopers...

So here we are with a mountain to climb on day two. No point in stressing or looking too far ahead : each session as it comes ,eh ? First task to try and limit the damage by using this new ball to keep the final total within reason. Will be "over par" anyway ; but if my feelings about the pitch are correct that shouldn't be a death blow. Will be another test for the resilience which this team has generally shown under Baz and Ben ; but that's what we expect in any Ashes Series  - a test. Hopefully the players aren't as ready to despair as many of their supporters !

GSC wrote:Think England would've probably shuffled the pack further if injuries permitted. Robinson doesn't look fit enough for another workload within a week, broad and Anderson bowled well without reward but how far can they go in this series if rotation isn't feasible?

I'm not so sure, seems like no changing the team unless absolutely necessary is part of Bazball too. Probably a reaction to the complaints that there was too much rotation under the old regime, which touches on the 'when you're winning you're a genius, when you're losing you're an idiot' view of strategy fans tend to have that's already been referenced.

Hi Alfie - a characteristically detailed and level headed post although you don’t mention Stokes’ fitness. To me, that is the elephant in the room.

Lowlandbrit wrote:

GSC wrote:Think England would've probably shuffled the pack further if injuries permitted. Robinson doesn't look fit enough for another workload within a week, broad and Anderson bowled well without reward but how far can they go in this series if rotation isn't feasible?

I'm not so sure, seems like no changing the team unless absolutely necessary is part of Bazball too. Probably a reaction to the complaints that there was too much rotation under the old regime, which touches on the 'when you're winning you're a genius, when you're losing you're an idiot' view of strategy fans tend to have that's already been referenced.

I did wonder last night if Anderson is being held back a bit so he can play more Tests in this series. He only bowled 15 overs yesterday and the same on day 2 of the Edgbaston Test. I would have expected him to send down a few more.

Anderson's economy remains stand out impressive although more is wanted in his end column.

guildfordbat wrote:

Lowlandbrit wrote:

GSC wrote:Think England would've probably shuffled the pack further if injuries permitted. Robinson doesn't look fit enough for another workload within a week, broad and Anderson bowled well without reward but how far can they go in this series if rotation isn't feasible?

I'm not so sure, seems like no changing the team unless absolutely necessary is part of Bazball too. Probably a reaction to the complaints that there was too much rotation under the old regime, which touches on the 'when you're winning you're a genius, when you're losing you're an idiot' view of strategy fans tend to have that's already been referenced.

I did wonder last night if Anderson is being held back a bit so he can play more Tests in this series. He only bowled 15 overs yesterday and the same on day 2 of the Edgbaston Test. I would have expected him to send down a few more.

Anderson's economy remains stand out impressive although more is wanted in his end column.

Yes Guildford, I don't understand that at all.

Can't keep him in cotton wool for such long spells as that will mean a greater workload for the rest of the bowlers, which in turn, could affect their fitness in this match or further down the track. It's really adding more stress and fatigue to the overall performance of the team as a whole.

guildfordbat wrote:Hi Alfie - a characteristically detailed and level headed post although you don’t mention Stokes’ fitness. To me, that is the elephant in the room.

Yeah you are right there , guildford. It is a huge (elephant sized ? ) problem. He brings a lot to the team in terms of inspiration and leadership , no matter what the doomsayers claim. But if he cannot assume any serious amount of bowling he hamstrings the side for balance : eg , the need to pick 4 seamers at the cost of a spinner.
I
Trouble is , there isn't a ready made alternative. I like Woakes , and Sam Curran ; but not sure I want either batting at six for England. Not to mention who leads the team ? Making Pope vc seems to have jinxed him !

I do think I'd have preferred Stokes to miss the IPL and rest but I am not a doctor and don't know if it would have solved his issues. If he simply can't regain near enough to full fitness then a tough decision is not far away. The fact that he has bowled less in this game than last week is not a good sign. It is really rotten luck for him and England if this does prove "terminal".

Unfortunate that for one reason or another Stokes has not often been able to play an Ashes Series in full health. Really only 2013/14 - as a raw young 'un ; and the two home series of 2015 and 2019 where the oldest contest has seen the best of him.

guildfordbat wrote:

Anderson's economy remains stand out impressive although more is wanted in his end column.

Funnily enough, whilst I was watching one of his spells, I did think the Aussie's were a bit of cautious facing him. Made me wonder whether his economy was as much a reflection of how much they respect his record in English conditions and are therefore less inclined to take any chances.

Re Anderson : yes I'd have liked to see him bowl more in the evening session - to try and arrest that runaway scoring rate for one thing ! Fancy they were trying to keep him fresh for the new ball - though in the end he didn't take it for that token couple of overs.
When he was bowling in tandem with Robinson straight after tea , I thought the combination was working quite well. Robinson actually took the wicket but I think Jimmy's dot balls contributed there. Of course he couldn't bowl forever and Head then rather got away against the others.

Suppose Stokes doesn't want to run any of them into the ground but maybe fair to say he didn't quite get his changes right this time. Of course you don't plan for a couple of your bowlers to start bowling several loose balls per over...

guildfordbat wrote:Hi Alfie - a characteristically detailed and level headed post although you don’t mention Stokes’ fitness. To me, that is the elephant in the room.

Short term, Stokes having one spell an innings/day in him makes the management of the other bowlers more important(and thus so far more puzzling).
Long term, there could be an added wrinkle to the Pope injury if it adds another reason in Stokes' mind not to rest himself. Might be overthinking it, but thought the VC announcement before the series was significant.

Good start! Thought that was too high on first viewing

Good review !

Broad strikes early after a dodgy start. Thought it was high in real-time, and surprised it got overturned, but England will certainly take it.

351/6. Will Cummins continue his form with the bat, or will England roll through? Oops, I forgot, Starc's at 8! Tail's a bit longer with no Boland.

Michael Vaughan rabbiting on about England being "too casual". Just seen forty something Anderson throw himself full length to try and save a boundary...not my idea of casual.

Criticism is fine for things they do badly. But he could maybe spare us the silly sound bites.

Lowlandbrit wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:Hi Alfie - a characteristically detailed and level headed post although you don’t mention Stokes’ fitness. To me, that is the elephant in the room.

Short term, Stokes having one spell an innings/day in him makes the management of the other bowlers more important(and thus so far more puzzling).
Long term, there could be an added wrinkle to the Pope injury if it adds another reason in Stokes' mind not to rest himself. Might be overthinking it, but thought the VC announcement before the series was significant.

I'm sure you are right there, Lowland. In the County Championship match at Chelmsford shortly before the start of this series, Pope was clearly directing the field and effectively skippering the side even though Surrey's official captain Burns was on the outfield. The thought then was that this had come at England's request to aid preparation for what might come.

alfie wrote:Michael Vaughan rabbiting on about England being "too casual".  Just seen forty something Anderson throw himself full length to try and save a boundary...not my idea of casual.

Criticism is fine for things they do badly. But he could maybe spare us the silly sound bites.

Got to say, I wasn't exactly missing Vaughan during his hiatus...

Duty281 wrote:Broad strikes early after a dodgy start. Thought it was high in real-time, and surprised it got overturned, but England will certainly take it.

351/6. Will Cummins continue his form with the bat, or will England roll through? Oops, I forgot, Starc's at 8! Tail's a bit longer with no Boland.

Duty - you almost got a Dislike for forgetting Starc! Now PJ's comp can begin in earnest.

Another wicket I'm claiming!

alfie wrote:Michael Vaughan rabbiting on about England being "too casual".  Just seen forty something Anderson throw himself full length to try and save a boundary...not my idea of casual.

Criticism is fine for things they do badly. But he could maybe spare us the silly sound bites.

Spot on. No surprise to see Vaughan and Pietersen, both highly competitive winners, both frustrated at England's casualness.

Two for the new ball... Nice catch Bairstow

Jimmy will be pleased to get on the scoreboard...

Pitching the new ball up gets tailenders out? Who knew.

This bodes well for when Australia bowl……

Important to see Bairstow taking responsibility for that catch after the last game. If in doubt, go get it

Smith comes to the party with a fabulous 100

Well done to Steve Smith.

On it from ball one and is taking Australia to a formidable total. 32 test hundreds puts him level with Steve Waugh, in about 85 fewer innings.

Smith going to his inevitable hundred... Has been nailed on since he came to the crease yesterday

Has actually nibbled at a couple this morning. But he has generally looked invincible : it always seems a surprise when he gets out !

He might up a gear now so England need to stay focused and not let this run away...

Cummins is a handy chap to have coming in at nine...

I reckon he's a better bat than Starc , who is more of a hitter with a decent eye than a proper batsman. But probably fair enough to let Starc in first to try and whack a few.

Drinks after an interesting hour.

End did well to pluck out two early this morning.
Aus has very decent lower order batting skills....especially when there is a batsman on one end.
Even as both lower order they pulled off a half century partnership for 9th wicket under pressure.
450+ looking very likely.......which will be plenty, given the help from pitch and conditions

Smith gone.

pitch has more pace and carry today......loose from Smith

Note to Ben Stokes - Australia are 393/8, but they're not declaring. This is because every run matters and every run is precious in test cricket.

Good old drink waiter

Top catch by Duckett...and a very important scalp for Tongue. Ends a terrific innings

Now that pesky pair Lyon and Cummins to deal with...

alfie wrote:Cummins is a handy chap to have coming in at nine...

I reckon he's a better bat than Starc , who is more of a hitter with a decent eye than a proper batsman.  But probably fair enough to let Starc in first to try and whack a few.

Cummins certainly had the more natural as a batter when both were young but his performance with the bat had been really dreadful for a long time until those two useful scores in T1.

Whereas Starc has arguably kept improving with the bat. He's gone from a bit of a slogger against all bowling to a very good hitter of spin and more competent against seam. 10 Test half centuries for Starc to Cummins 2 would tend to back it up as well. Starc averaging nearly 5 runs more as well.

No doubt having both strengthens their batting compared to Boland though.

If there is ever a classic case for "High bat handle grip"...it's Lyon and Harbhjan was similar
With this high grip one can hit the ball sweetly like a tennis shot
but tend to be not in line and cross batted