Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Yeah, England's batting was almost inexcusably poor, with the same mistakes cropping up again. Cook, yet again edging past off stump from a ball that didn't need to be played at. Pietersen going for a big shot that didn't pay off. There's plenty to look at and hopefully rectify before the next game. I think it may have had a bit to do with complacency as well, Australia played far better than in the summer and England seriously underestimated them.

I agree with your assessment of Johnson. When he turns up, he's amazing, but didn't seem to bowl with any degree of consistency over the summer. Same can be said of Warner's batting, good for this game but I'm not sure he'll be able to keep it up.

Bring on the next one, and hopefully England will do a lot better.

*******
UPDATE: Trott goes home.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/25085025

Jonathan Trott: England batsman leaves Ashes tour of Australia

England's Jonathan Trott has left the Ashes tour of Australia because of a long-standing stress-related condition.
Batsman Trott scored 19 runs in two innings during England's first Test defeat and struggled against the bowling of Mitchell Johnson.
"I don't think it is right that I'm playing knowing that I'm not 100%," said the 32-year-old.
England coach Andy Flower added: "He needs time away from this environment and time with his family."
The tourists will play an Australian Chairman's XI over two days from Friday, before the second Test in Adelaide on 5 December.
Trott scored 10 and 9 in two innings as England suffered a 381-run defeat in the first Test at the Gabba in Brisbane.

Okay. Sad about his issues but why the hell - if he wasn't 100% - was he selected to play in the cauldron that is an ashes series abroad?

*******

I still say the real shock was Englands seeming inability to play that 'doyen' of spin, Lyon.
In a few session he locked up an end with innocuous delivers whilst Johnson and Harris set about charging into the other. Net effect was Johnson being a destructive wicket taker.

Swann and Flower should take note.

I was reserving judgement on Trotts performances but after seeing highlights of his shuffling around the crease in terror I can see no hop unless he changes his stance slightly to allow him to fully see the ball coming onto him from the left handed bowlers.

And as much as it pains me. we desperately need to find a replacement for Pieterson. Good captains find him out with both spin and pace. There are a lot of good captains in test cricket and a lot of good bowlers - good enough to frustrate him - so I think Pietersons position needs to be looked at rather carefully with view to the future.

The pressure is all on England for Adelaide. Carberry can afford to fail (I think) but Trott, Pieterson, Cook, Bell and Prior need some form ASAP.

Earlier in this thread, I asked: what happened to Australian grit? This should be re-phrased to aske what the feth happened to English grit?

Probably the biggest English collapse since the Dutch Navy sailed up the Thames and sunk the English fleet in the 17th century!!

 Paradigm wrote:
Yeah, England's batting was almost inexcusably poor, with the same mistakes cropping up again. Cook, yet again edging past off stump from a ball that didn't need to be played at. Pietersen going for a big shot that didn't pay off. There's plenty to look at and hopefully rectify before the next game. I think it may have had a bit to do with complacency as well, Australia played far better than in the summer and England seriously underestimated them.

I honestly think it comes down to method. Every batsman needs to feel they have a method for dealing with each opposition bowler, a way of scoring fairly often without great risk. If a bowler can find a way to overcome that method then batsmen stop trusting in their defence, stop trusting in their ability to accumulate runs over a long period of time, and start doing stupid things. Most wickets don't fall because of the technical flaw a batsman has, but because of all the adventurous shots they play because they know the technical flaw will get them sooner or later.

A few of the English batsmen seem to have no method to play balls between the ribcage and the grill. Lacking method against these deliveries, the Englishmen suddenly become more keen to play shots at other deliveries.

But it's not an entirely English problem. Watson's got a significant problem as well. Everyone knows Watson has a big flaw - to full balls slanting in he plays across the line and tries to hit through midwicket, sooner or later he misses the ball, it hammers in to his pad and its another LBW (and another review used up ). Watson is trying to counter that by making sure he keeps the bat straight, but his driving is mechanical and while powerful always goes to the same place. So England put mid-on straight, and Watson keeps hitting straight to him. Now Watson has no method to score off that full ball, and England can just keep putting it there knowing sooner or later he'll miss one. Looking for some way to score runs, Watson attempts to pull a ball that's nowhere near short enough, and that was the end of that.

I agree with your assessment of Johnson. When he turns up, he's amazing, but didn't seem to bowl with any degree of consistency over the summer. Same can be said of Warner's batting, good for this game but I'm not sure he'll be able to keep it up.

I think there's a bit to suggest Warner might have taken another step in his cricket. He didn't just blast England, but showed real maturity and composure - when conditions favoured England he batted long period with little addition to his score.

Johnson... well who knows? He did bowl well in both innings, which is new (even when he blasted out England at the WACA last Ashes, he did his work in the first innings, Harris took the wickets in the second). And he bowled well without needing swing, which is also new, so perhaps he might have matured to a point where he can take test wickets without needing the ball to swing. Or then again, this might just be yet another time when he has a good test, everyone gets excited that he's finally arrived, only to be disappointed.

Bring on the next one, and hopefully England will do a lot better.

Adelaide could be very different. Plays pretty low, and gives little to the bowlers. Phillip Hughes clattered a double ton there the other week.

I suspect the Australians might even rest on of the quick bowlers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mr. Burning wrote:
Okay. Sad about his issues but why the hell - if he wasn't 100% - was he selected to play in the cauldron that is an ashes series abroad?

It is said, and a good reminder that for all the fun of the competition, there are more important things in life than winning cricket matches. I hope he recovers soon and completely.

As for why he played... well maybe they thought he was 100%, only to find he wasn't as the test wore on? It's a really hard thing to get right.

I still say the real shock was Englands seeming inability to play that 'doyen' of spin, Lyon.

Lyon is highly under-rated, and bowled with a lot more overspin than Swann, which suited the bouncy Gabba more than Swann's method.

I was reserving judgement on Trotts performances but after seeing highlights of his shuffling around the crease in terror I can see no hop unless he changes his stance slightly to allow him to fully see the ball coming onto him from the left handed bowlers.

It isn't the stance, but the first movement. Trott pushes forward and the bat comes down to a driving position. This is fine if the ball is full, or if the bowler is slow enough that Trott has time to adjust and bring the bat flat in order to pull. But against a short ball of real pace he's left in no position to pull, and the result is that he either has to glance, or play a pull while bring the ball from low to high, resulting in his second innings dismissal.

And as much as it pains me. we desperately need to find a replacement for Pieterson. Good captains find him out with both spin and pace. There are a lot of good captains in test cricket and a lot of good bowlers - good enough to frustrate him - so I think Pietersons position needs to be looked at rather carefully with view to the future.

I think Pietersen is a unique talent, and there's been a lot of time people have started picking out technical flaws and weaknesses after a string of low scores, only for Pietersen to respond with an innings of authority that only the truly gifted can play. He's a key player in the line up, and the man most likely to win you a test with the bat.

He was also the guy who looked most comfortable at the Gabba. His dismissals really did come out of nowhere.

Well.

England have been soundly beaten, again, and have surrendered the Ashes - Being 3-0 down with 2 still to play.

Congratulations to the Aussies, they played the better cricket.

Yeah, well done Aussies. I would like to try and defend England's performance, but apart from the innings from Stokes, there was nothing really defendible. Poor bowling, poor batting.

England need to look at really changing up the team going forward.

If Stokes keeps performing, I'd be happy with him getting man of the series. I always think it takes more to perform like he does in a poorly playing team that is losing repeatedly than it takes someone like Johnson to perform in a team that is just clicking and winning.

The media has been full of great praise for the Australians, and plenty of scorn for the English. But we are still just a few months away from England beating Australia soundly in England (while 3-0 wasn't representative of the contest, I don't think many people would claim England weren't clearly the better side through the series).

Point being, cricket is a funny old game, where it doesn't take much to go from mediocre to world beating, or best in the world to woeful. For Australia, there were only two real changes - Johnson joined an already impressive bowling attack and proved the critical mass that meant pressure could be sustained long enough that long partnerships rarely developed, and Warner seems to have come of age, providing a second class batsman to an otherwise rickety batting line up. All of a sudden it becomes very hard to post really big scores against us, and we've now got two players who are reasonably likely to make match winning scores. Suddenly the odd batting cameo from Smith or Watson looks substantial, because the opposition doesn't post massive scores, and there are two actual good batsman making regular scores.

For England the problem is reversed. Players who'd given high quality performances for a long time - Cook, Trott, Anderson and Swann, just aren't doing so any more. In England that was covered by Bell with the bat and Broad with the ball, and that was good enough. But with Johnson and Warner contributing as they have for Australia, suddenly those two aren't enough, and the rest get exposed. It's the opposite to what's happened to Australia, suddenly the odd cameo score made by the series of support players that have filled the opening & #6 slot are shown as being just not good enough... especially now the opposition is posting large scores.


For the WACA test, I was actually quite pleased that England fought it out as they did. Stokes looks like a player of real promise*, combining strong technique with a very smart method of batting. They were still whalloped, no doubt about that, but compared to Adelaide there at least seemed some fight in the batting.


*It's kind of ironic that coming in to this series England would have identified two major issues - the third seam bowler and the number 6 position. With Bresnan's rapid recovery the third seam bowler is settled, and with Stokes they've uncovered a #6 who could be very good for a long time... but everything else, all the good solid stuff they thought they had nicely settled, has just fallen apart for England.

Well,

It looks like the ashes themselves are a side show to the real prize this series.

England avoiding a 5-0 whitewash.

Are the Aussies that much better? kudos to them for keeping England down.

1 more to play. Will England pass 400 or even 300 in an innings? If Monty is picked will he get to bowl ahead of batsman Root?

More importantly now who gets man of the series - will be Australian obviously.

Anyone but Johnson. He gets fawned over enough as it is.

Brad Haddin has to be in with a shout.