Stewart's Big Match Report

It was worth the wait folks, here it is. Apologies for the formatting, can't seem to do anything about it.

My View - Stewart Robertson

Thanks to a possible bout of whooping cough (yes, I am as amazed as you) I
watched the entire 2nd test; not through a fever this time but through an
antibiotic and codeine filled pain killer induced haze. So, I have again
watched almost every ball multiple times with multiple commentators.

The most exciting test in recent times ? A great Australian fight back
showing how tough we really are ? The "Flintoff Test" ? The one that almost
got away ? The answer is probably Yes and No to almost any title you could
attempt to give this game. However, let me first try to peel away some of
the headline speak, then discuss why Australia is in the predicament that
it is and then lastly, let's go through each player's contribution.

One last thing : I have decided to grow a beard in protest until we win
again.

The reality

No matter what you say about this test let's be honest and calm for a
second : England played all over Australia and should never have looked
like losing. The only reason Australia got close was poor bowling on the
4th morning (where was the line and length, the changes of pace ?) and some
pretty gutsy batting from 3 bowlers. Warne, Lee and Kasper are to be
commended as much as the batsmen are to be chastised.

England has won more sessions in the two tests than Australia and Australia
is looking wobbly. We are not out of the series yet (especially as England
need to win the series and we need to only draw it) but we are in the worst
trouble since we lost in 86/87 (Dave, I still can’t forgive Chris Broad).
If we look at the big picture, one thing is certain : Australian cricket is
on the way down and English cricket is on the way up.

A final piece of seriousness through the milky fog of euphoria : Australia
will not give this up without a fight. The Ashes are by far our most
treasured sporting trophy. We went bananas when we won in 1989 (I wagged
school to watch the Ashes squad parade through the streets of Sydney). We
have gently, and slightly more quietly, gone bananas every time we have
held the Ashes since. I am not even sure what to equate this to for an
English audience. Perhaps if your football team has beaten its archrivals
every game for 18 years ? We do see you as the old enemy in cricket. And,
at the risk of getting too personal, we probably see you as the big brother
than never really gave us the attention or respect we wanted and thought we
deserved. Consequently, Australian sport loves nothing better than beating
England at cricket. It brings out the ugly Australian in all of us.

None of this Australian team want to be the ones that finally gives up the
Ashes. If they do, they will forever go down in Australian cricket infamy
and I, along with the rest of the country, am firmly committed to going all
Pakistani on them (in reference to the quaint Pakistani practise of burning
down the homes and abducting the fathers of members of their vanquished
cricket team).

How did we get here ? Didn’t Glen tell us Australia would win 5 - 0 ?

Whilst there are multiple reasons why Australia has ended up here, let me
list a few.

1. The England team

I would be ignoring the obvious if I didn't start with the fact that
England, for the first time in 18 years, have played good, tough cricket.
To save repeating myself, every time I mention something that Australia
have not done well, remember to add "You can only play as well as you are
allowed". E.g. Australia batting badly : partly because England is bowling
well. You get the idea.

2. The curse of the 3rd generation

There is a famous adage in business (family business in particular) : The
first generation builds it, the 2nd generation expands it and the 3rd
generation squanders it. There are probably lots of reasons why this
happens so often. However, for mine, it happens because clawing your way to
the top, step by arduous step, builds character and skill much more than
being born into privilege. This Australian team has been born into
privilege.

Border was the leader of the first generation. He captained a team that was
simply cr*p. He stopped us losing all the time and built a tough attitude
and fostered some good young players. He started the climb by winning the
89 ashes. He handed over to generation 2er, Mark Taylor. Mark made us
really good. He beat the West Indies at home in 95 and, in doing so,
planted the Australian flag right at the summit of world cricket.

Australia has been lucky. Our 3rd generation didn’t squander the work of
Border and Taylor; instead, it made us great. Steve Waugh took good test
players into really good ones, he made really good players truly great and
he won everything, even 16 tests in a row, a record that will never be
broken. We even stopped losing the “dead rubbers”

He was finally forced, kicking and screaming, to hand over to the 4th
generation in Ricky Ponting. Ricky captains a team that contains not a
single player from the losing side of an Ashes series. I think everything
stems from this. We have been spoilt and praised and we have grown soft.

Conversely, England is mirroring the rise and rise of Australia. Atherton
was the English Border (stopped the losing, provided stability). Nass was
the English Taylor (tried to be aggressive and improved the team he was
given) and Vaughan could well be the English Waugh (has turned them nasty
and instilled a winning mentality).

3. Captaincy

Please indulge me, I am going to use some corporate management jargon for a
minute.

There are quite a few good technicians out there. They aren't easy to find
but you can get them if you try. There are less good managers. Organising a
group of people, disciplining them, etc is something that relatively few
people can do.

There is a VAST chasm between management and leadership. Whilst they’re a
few good managers, there are even fewer good leaders. Out of 100 good
technicians, maybe 10 will be good managers and less than 1 will be a good
leader. We have a captain who is a good technician and has picked up some
management along the way. He is not a leader.

Ricky's lack of leadership manifests itself in a number of ways.

N.B. Leaders rarely, if ever, have names such as "Ricky". They tend to have
strong, adult sounding names such as "Allan", "Mark" or "Steve". "Ricky"
sounds like the 13 year old that captained your Saturday morning side.

3.1. Consensus manager

Ricky always talks about how he canvasses his senior players for their
opinion. This worries me. Managing by committee never gets results in work
or sport.

3.2. Reacts like a team member.

Ricky doesn't always react like the mature leader of a side. I think too
often, he reacts like a member of the team. A great example of this was the
crazy decision to bowl first in the second test.

These guys are not uninformed. They would have been told that there is
usually turn here in the 4th innings and that teams rarely score much in
the 4th; a perfect "win the toss and bat" scenario, especially when we have
Warne bowling well. However, Ricky won the toss and bowled. I am convinced
that the reason for this was nothing more than an attempt to "show them we
don't need Glen to win". Well Rick, we sort of do need big Glen to win and
throwing an out of form pace attack without Glen onto a totally dead pitch
was not the way to do it. This was in immature decision that we a big
factor in the loss. Mark Taylor, for example, would have risen above the
emotion and made the right decision for the team and the match.

3.3. Not a motivator

One of the most important aspects of leadership is the ability to motivate
and get the best out of a team. Ricky is clearly not doing this. Hayden is
a great example. His decline started at just about the time that Steve
Waugh retired. Steve talked him into believing that he could be the best
batsman in the world and he responded. Ricky has clearly said nothing and
he has become the Test player that he was probably always destined to be.
In fact, all of our batsmen are walking out and playing like no one is
saying anything to them.

4. You want it, we expect it

We are playing like we just expect to turn up, roll the arm over, play a
few windy whooshes and watch you fall apart. To England's credit, they are
not doing this. They are trying their hardest and seeing some results. We
have grown soft, lazy and arrogant and it shows in everything from our
crazy batting (Warne's shot in the first innings, Martyn being run out, or
should I say jogged out, etc) to our less than impressive catching to our
sometimes amazing bowling (Won't the real Jason Gillespie please stand up,
please stand up, please stand up). This may work with sub standard teams
(as most of the world are currently fielding) but not with good teams.

We are terribly out of practise being under pressure. Whilst England batted
well in their first innings, our bowling was generally woeful. We fell
apart when attacked. England bowled well in our second innings but we
should have easily got 282 on a 3rd day pitch. Again, England applied
pressure, we all batted like the other guy would get the runs and we ran
out of other guys.

5. Luck

To win a tight series, you have to have some luck. In past series, we have
had it, this time we don't.

How many recent Ashes series can you think of where Australia was fully fit
and England weren't ? The last series, Flintoff was out as was S Jones
after the first day. The series before, Thorpe was out for most of it and I
think Gough's knee was either gone or going. This series, McGrath rolled
his ankle (why was he not locked up ??!?!), Lee has an infected knee (these
are delicate people remember) and Gillespie, well, something is just wrong
with Gillespie.

You also need some decisions to go your way. Again, I think it would be
fair to say that we have had the best of this in recent years. This time, I
think most observers would say that more of the close ones are probably
going to England this time. I am not saying there is any funny business,
this sometimes just happens.

6. Coping with the bowling

As I said previously, this series will come down to how well each team
combats the other's bowling attack. This test England coped with
Australia's attack much better than we coped with theirs. They flayed us on
the first day, we were meagre in our first innings. England succumbed in
their second, but we succumbed even more in ours (side from our bottom
three).

Player by player

Australia

Langer

Was my pick to score the most runs for Australia and I see nothing to make
me change my mind. Is having another excellent series with the bat. My only
concern is that for someone who plays the hook and pull as well as he does,
I can't see why he feels the need to turn his back on so many short ones
and let them hit him. Tough little guy, my Dad's favourite player so I am
genetically predisposed to like him as well.

Hayden

Oh boy. Matty, Matty, where for art thou Matty ? Still out of form, still
disappointing. Played a terrible shot in the first innings to record his
first ever Test golden duck and looked like a man struggling to cement a
spot in the team in the 2nd innings.

Seems to be struggling to know how to bat against an attack to which some
respect must be shown. Spent a year or two smashing everyone he faced
everywhere whilst batting 3 feet out of his crease. Form and the English
bowling attack have meant that this is no longer possible and seems to have
a very weak Plan B.

Time for a change Australia. I would drop Hayden and select Mike Hussey, an
excellent player who is in form and has lots of English experience.

Ponting

I have covered his captaincy already but his batting continues to not be
quite with it. Looked good in the first innings only to play a very weak
shot and get out (a good example of us expecting it to happen). I know
Flintoff bowled well to him in the 2nd innings but he played a terrible
shot to get out : both feet were next to each other, pointing down the
wicket to a ball he should have come forward it. Needs to regain form.

Bad captaincy sending England in on a featherbed, bad captaincy letting his
quicks bowl pies all day on the first day and bad captaincy letting McGrath
play football before the game !

Martyn

I should call him Mr "We expect it" he is proving my theory so well. Batted
well in the first innings only to forget that the English team could now
pick up and ball and throw it. Again batted well in the 2nd innings until
he got himself out very softly, hitting a simple catch to midwicket off
Hoggard. Too casual and distracted by his trouser region (was the focus of
an Australian women's tabloid magazine article entitled "Australian
Cricket's new love Rat". Yep, Marto is on the root as well !).

Clarke

Tough for Clarke as he got out to good balls in both innings. Showed some
inexperience in the 2nd innings when he let himself become too caught up in
an argument with Flintoff about Flintoff's killer ankle beamers (hit them
for 4 Michael, forget about getting angry about it !). Surprise, Surprise,
was not concentrating enough after the argument and let a good slow one get
through him in the last over.

Batting much better now than he was before the tests began and looks like a
solid Test player. If I were his Mum, I would be telling him to stop
hanging around with naughty boys like Warne and Martyn though.

Katich

Like Clarke, got good ones in both innings. Will score well in this series.
Warning : If you see him bowl a long spell of his left arm leggies, we are
really desperate and we may be about to lose the Ashes.

Gilchrist

Played a very sensible knock in the first innings only to contrast this
with a very silly shot in the 2nd. Trying to hoik Giles out of the rough on
the 4th ball you have faced when your team is looking down the barrel is
not smart, no matter whether he was "playing his natural game" or not.
Needs to remember how he used to pace his innings.

On the bright side, keeping as well as I have ever seen him. Has taken some
really good catches off Warne.

Warne

Continues to bowl wonderfully. His control is exceptional as is his guile.
Hard to say much else about his bowling, it has mostly been said. His ball
to Strauss was a wonder. Still seems to have no answer to Pieterson (aside
from a dodgy caught behind).

His batting still confounds me. How can the man that played that wonderful,
gutsy knock in the second innings, play the sub club cricket shot in the
first innings when Gilchrist was sitting on his bat at the other end ?
Needs to apply the same level of thinking to his batting that he does his
bowling. We need some application from our tail and aside from their effort
to almost steal the game in the second innings, we have not seen any so far
this series.

Is it any wonder his private life is a mess when he cannot step on his
stumps like a normal tailender but clip the other stump with his right leg
by curling it around behind his left leg ? He should be a dancer !

Lee

Dismal bowling in the first innings. Again, too short or too full. Needs to
bowl line and length when the pitch isn't letting him scare the batsmen
into silly shots with his pace. Looked much better in England's second
innings.

Great effort with the bat in the 2nd innings. He can bat well when he
applies himself.

How can a finely tuned athlete with the best medical assistance anywhere
get an infected knee from a scrap he sustained whilst fielding ? What is
going on in that dressing room ?!

Gillespie

Gillespie reminds us all that Karma does exist. First came the very dodgy
mullet and then went the form. I picked him to be near top form by the 3rd
test in my last report and I hope he doesn't let me down, as we really need
him.

Kasprowicz

Kasper, purely for not ducking Harmison's fateful short one in the second
innings, I would drop you. More rational people would probably cite your
bowling. Was the least used bowler in England's first innings and only
bowled 3 overs in their 2nd. Is Ricky trying to tell you something ?
Probably. Start bowling well Kasper or make way.

Tait (possible Lee replacement)

Quick with a strange action that is hard to pick up. However, did not
impress with Durham at all last season. Not enough control yet and would be
an interesting and risky replacement.

Clark (possible Lee replacement)

I heard him described as a McGrath clone on the news tonight and I think
that is a good description. The more I think about it, the more I would
like him to play. We really need someone who can bowl some line and length
and he is in good form.

England

Trescothick

Remember, I said that Marcus would not consistently get runs against
Australia. I never said he would not ever get any runs. Phew ! Like the
flat track bully that I think he is, thumped a solid 90 without once even
moving so much as a little toe in the first innings. Out to a terrible
shot, similar to the terrible shot he got out to in the 2nd innings. Looked
much better attacking Warne though.

Batsmen with techniques sans feet movement never consistently get runs
against attacks that can consistently put the bat on a length on, or
slightly outside, off stump. With McGrath out for at least another test,
Gillespie out of form and Lee still bowling too full or too short at times,
Marcus finds himself with his best attack to get big runs against
Australia.

Strauss

Something still worries me about Strauss and I still can't put my finger on
it. Looked far batter in the first innings playing some good attacking
shots and was out to a rare piece of Warne brilliance. However, showed Bell
that you don't need to go down the wicket every ball, just the ones you can
get to the pitch of and when you are there, you whack it. Interestingly,
Warne is calling him his new bunny. History says that for whatever reason,
every time Warne says this sort of thing, he usually follows it through.
Watch for Warne bowling early in every innings if Strauss is still around.

Vaughan

Looked a faint glimmer of his old self in the first innings before a top
edge ended it. However, again missed a straight one by bringing the bat
down from gully in the second innings (and again walking off looking at the
pitch and making that funny face ! You have to stop that Michael). Still
nowhere near any form and has some serious technical issues to overcome.

Captaincy was better this test. Those men in funny catching positions are
having some effect, especially to Hayden. Obviously has the team believing
that they can win. If England keeps winning they will, and should, carry
Vaughan through the series even if he doesn't make another run.

Bell

Still looked startled in the first innings. However, started playing with a
little more confidence in the second innings before Warne got him with a
good ball (regardless of what the snickomomomometer and Richie says he did
hit it. You could see the edge from behind the keeper angle and even from
in front).

I don't think he should be dropped. Good teams turn into great teams by
making sure that good young players get experience when the team can carry
them a little. England should persist with Bell as I think he has the sort
of temperament that will mean that this series is the making of him rather
than the breaking.

Pietersen

He has got me, and the Australian team, well and truly spooked. Looks like
a giant playing with little people sometimes. The way he continues to swat
Warne for 6 at will is amazing. Generally plays Warne as well as almost
anyone I have ever seen except Tendulkar, who could drive Warne out of the
rough past Gilchrist for 4 (I would need to draw a diagram but trust me it
was incredible) and Laxman when he got 281 (who kept dancing down 5 paces
and smashing him through cover out of the rough). None of the quicks know
what to do with him. If these 4 innings are anything to go by, could well
become a true legend of the game.

However ........ was out the first ball he faced in the second innings.....
which compensates for not being out caught behind off Warne when he was 20.

I usually have a theory on everything. However, I can't offer anything on
how we should bowl to him. Let's try top of off stump length, 30 cms
outside off. Deny him his leg side shots and try to make him do something
silly.

Flintoff

This will, of course, be known as the Flintoff test. 10 6s in a test was
incredible and his second innings knock with one shoulder (I reckon he was
faking it to make the day seem more memorable) was, in the end, the
difference between the 2 sides. Did anyone notice that as well as this, he
kept bowling well over 90 mph and taking wickets with good balls. My Dad
loves Flintoff so I will grudgingly respect him as well.

I stand by my original summary that I don't think he is a test number 6.
Consistent good bowling will see him keep his average at 31...but he was
peerless in this test.

G Jones

Still keeping badly (26 byes in the test is inexcusable) and still not
batting well enough to keep his place. Yes, I know he caught that last
catch but it was an easy one really despite what Richie said (Richie had a
bad match with the mike)

Get rid of him and make an old keeper happy.

Giles

Bowled better this test. I can’t bring myself to say he bowled well though.
Most of his wickets were batsmen getting themselves out but he at least
looked test standard this game and turned a few. Has to learn not to put
pressure on himself by writing that he is really much better than given
credit for and that he is really upset a few days before the test.

Hoggard

Still the weakest performer of the England quicks. The only wicket in the
first innings was Hayden committing suicide and he went for over 5 an over.
The only wicket he got in the 2nd innings was a gift from Martyn and again
was at over 5 an over. Leave him there, being different from the others
will, at worst, get the other bowlers some wickets and, at best, will get
him some.

Harmison

Another good match from Harmison. Don't worry that he didn't hit everyone
in the head this match and didn't take 9 wickets. The key to good test
performance is consistency even in adverse conditions. The wicket didn't
suit his style of bowling, especially early on but he still went for only a
little over 4 in the first innings and picked up 2 valuable wickets in the
second at a reasonably economical rate.

Australia don’t like facing him and England is a much better team with him
in it.

S Jones

Bowled better in the first innings than the second. Managed to extract some
reverse swing with the old ball, which Australia found difficult to play.

I never really know what to say about Jones. I think this means that he is
bowling well and not doing anything silly enough to warrant a mention. Oh,
I've got one : thankfully dropped Kasper when Australia needed 15 to win or
so to ensure that it turned into a real nail bighter. Thanks Simon !