Jeor

I just don't see the Yes vote passing at this stage. The criteria for referenda are difficult by design (constitutional founders not being particularly fond of their constitution being changed), and at this stage (when even the national popular vote is dicey) then being only able to lose two states out of 6 is virtually impossible. When you consider Queensland and Tasmania are probably already a hard No that doesn't leave much wiggle room.

Oh alright - here's one!!

So we have a date for the Voice referendum, October 14. I think it will be closer than people think and the Yes vote will probably tick up as we get closer to the date, but in terms of the result I think it won't get through. A symbolic national majority would still be a decent result and avoid some of the negative fallout, but not being able to lose more than two states is a pretty high bar. On other matters, Qantas is getting rightly hammered in the press and in the courts. First for trying to expire all the flight credits and not refund them so they can hold onto customers' money, and second for taking the money for bookings when they knew the flights had already been cancelled for weeks. This second one might be the killer with the ACCC going to court. It's definitely not a good look for the Labor government which has been, somewhat mystifyingly for a union-friendly party, in the back pocket of Qantas management by blocking other airlines from running more flights into Australia and in the process strengthening Qantas' monopoly and keeping prices high for consumers. Alan Joyce will maddeningly get away with this because he retires soon and he's already pocketed all the money. I hope the board at least cancels his last bonus.

Spain will be disappointed to only be one goal up at halftime. If England can reorganise themselves they're still in this.

Global markets look like they are at a fork in the road here. China's unexpected weakness (and the authorities' unwillingness to provide any major stimulus) is causing a few jitters. Evergrande declaring bankruptcy and Country Garden teetering is bad news for consumer confidence in China. This isn't good news for the Australian share market (where the three iron ore majors make up a huge component of the index) though other markets might be a bit more isolated given a lot of Chinese debt is held internally. But with the big run up in stocks this year, it does feel like it won't take much for some of the air to come out of the balloon. I think the rest of the calendar year is going to be a bit choppy though it might turn around again in December when the market decides the Fed really is done with rate rises.

Wow, a fairytale ending for Broad. Australia had a good shot at winning it. If Khawaja/Warner had another hour of play before rain stopped play, or if Head/Smith had another hour instead of having to go to lunch, it would have been different, and they'll probably talk about the ball change as well. But overall England bowled better on that last day and were definitely more threatening. But natural justice was served, as 2-2 is a fairer reflection of the series than 3-1 would have been. It was a great series and apart from Old Trafford, every match was very close and had genuine chances for both sides to win. It was nice also to see a genuine contest between bat and ball throughout.

Yes, it looks like half the bowlers are carrying something. Stokes isn't bowling because of his knee, Moeen is moving very gingerly and unable to bowl long spells, and Wood is clearly not up to scratch - apparently due to a bruised heel. Woakes is the only non-injured bowler under the age of 37. Australia's go-slow operation in the first innings put some overs into their legs and I imagine it hasn't been easy for the bowlers to back up. That being said, it's a long series and it's not just Australian tactics that has done this. I'm still surprised England didn't make more use of Tongue in the series. I think it emphasises that to really employ Bazball you definitely need at least five frontline bowlers (plus a good part-timer like Root).

Yes, this would have been some final day if we were 2-2. Stokes goes full-on Herschelle Gibbs and drops the ball after he's cleanly taken the ball. I'm surprised he reviewed it, knowing that he hadn't completed the catch, but I suppose it's in the spirit of cricket...

Yes, that ball looks far newer than the ball that was traded in. The conditions were overcast for a lot of yesterday and there was not nearly the same amount of swing and movement through the air than there is today. Can't blame England for it, though - the umpire made the decision about which ball to use. Wood still clearly struggling with something, but Australia's three wickets lost has really hurt them. England well on top now and with the ball talking.

England will be the happier side for the rain delay, who would've thought that at the top of the day. Still a long way to go for Australia with 249 runs needed, a lot can happen in that time. But when Joe Root (9 overs) has bowled more than Moeen and Wood combined (8) that's a sign that England will have to work hard for the victory. The rain delay will help them get some rest as they'll be primarily relying on Broad, Anderson and Woakes to pull them through. If there's too much rain, though, then that helps Australia get closer to safety (draw) which might help them in going for the win.

Well, a 100-run opening partnership was definitely unexpected. Australia effectively now only need to chase down a target of 280 which doesn't sound nearly as imposing. However, fourth innings run chases are hard for a reason, the ball is turning, and I expect it will still prove difficult to get there in the end, so I'd rate the match evenly poised. Mark Wood not used until the 33rd over which is unusual and no doubt one of the reasons for Australia's success so far. He didn't bowl at all in the first session so I suspect he must be carrying some niggle.

A wonderful career for Broad. His combination of unusual durability and constant competitive fire is basically unheard of for a pace bowler, unless you of course include Anderson in the mix as well. Pacemen are not meant to last this long in their career and stay as effective as Broad has. It's fitting he gets to go out this way - partnered with Anderson to come out to bat at the top of the day (hitting a six no less), and looking like bowling England to a Test victory in a series-saving Ashes decider. With no Test cricket for 6 months (and the next one being a tour to the subcontinent), it's the perfect time and he'll join a long list of legends to bow out at the Oval at the end of a Test summer.

The lead's 214, I think with the remaining 6 wickets there's plenty of margin of safety. Anything above 300 will be out of Australia's reach. They only managed close to 300 with a wagging tail in the first innings. Yes, there should have been a clear plan what to do if Warner failed. In fact the reserve batsman in the touring party is a specialist opener (Marcus Harris) though he has an awful record in England with an average of 9.66 in 6 innings and he had a terrible time of it last tour. So not exactly a great backup plan...

Well, at least one Australian opener has performed exactly as expected... EDIT: And it's been a big liability to carry him these last couple of Tests especially. Not that Australia have a high-performing replacement to insert, but they couldn't have been any worse.

Khawaja has actually been going very well these past two years, but due to his batting style he generally doesn't get the attention. Cricinfo tells me he's actually averaged 60.14 since the start of 2022, which has included 22 Tests and 7 centuries, by which he's actually been Australia's best performing batsman for a while as Smith and Labuschagne have waned. Marsh on the other hand is a complete surprise, yes...

And just reflecting - as much as Bazball and England's batting have really claimed the ascendancy in these last couple of games, and Australia ruing the loss of Nathan Lyon who would have been a key weapon against that, I think the thing that's flown under the radar is that the Australian batting lineup has really struggled (which means England have also bowled well). You look at the top runscorers in the series and Khawaja is the only Australian near the top of the list. Warner has been anonymous. Smith and Labuschagne apart from their one century each haven't really made much of an impact. Carey and Green haven't scored and Travis Head has looked dangerous at times but not really threatened to make it count. Khawaja and Mitch Marsh are really the only two batsmen who have looked comfortable throughout the series.

If it ends 2-2 with England essentially thrashing Australia in this win (which looks increasingly likely) and having a rained out draw that they would have thrashed Australia in, then yes I can see how it would be a lopsided draw. But I wouldn't say most lopsided ever. Their other win was a close one (Headingley) and Stokes aside, in Lords they were well behind and only came close right at the end. I can understand England feeling aggrieved with what feels like two emphatic wins (if you count Old Trafford draw), one narrow win, and the two Australian wins being narrow and in the distant past. But I'm sure there have been worse Test series draws going around.

This first session has decisively handed England the advantage. 130+ runs for only 1 wicket is just about as perfect a morning as you can have. Australia once again started very sloppily. Lots of bad balls, boundaries aplenty, defensive field settings that didn't cut off the boundaries but also gave easy singles. For such an important session they really should have been much tighter, though credit to England for taking full advantage. This match looks like it will be the reverse of the Second Test. A team loses their spinner early in the match, but still manage to set a big target and win. Only this time I can't see Australia having anyone who is playing at a Stokes-like level to make it close!

Australia going full Chris Tavare here. I guess with Moeen and Stokes not bowling, it leaves the overs to be bowled by the aged legs of Broad and Anderson, the short-spells-only Wood and then Woakes. So in theory they're trying to tire out the attack. But they have to cash in sometime. It's a high risk strategy, if they lose a few wickets to good balls then the score hasn't really crept up at all and they could still concede a chunky first innings lead.

5 dropped catches is pretty bad. They probably could have bowled England out for sub-200 if they held their chances (the Brook drop alone cost about 80 runs). A lot will depend on the Australian batting first innings. If they can show some solidity then that will go a long way to securing the series win (since they can go at their own pace and don't mind a draw). Australia's route to a win is probably the same as England's last Test - get a big first innings lead and hope to not have to chase (the last day of this test looks like there's a bit of rain, but I doubt it will get to that at the rate England bat!). Losing Moeen's bowling might be a bit of a blow for England at least from a workload perspective.

Australia have clawed it back to have England 7/224. Could have been much better if they'd snaffled Brook in single digits, that drop cost 80 runs. They've made good use of the conditions, apart from the appalling catching, and they've created lots of chances and half chances. However, the poisoned chalice is that if they wrap up the English tail (not a foregone conclusion with Woakes there) then the fragile Australian top order is going to have to face up in these same conditions. I'm pretty sure England's bowlers will enjoy that opportunity with the customary David Warner wicket and the swinging/seaming conditions.

The dropped catch off Brook has been costly. Brook/Moeen on another Bazball 100-run partnership at run a ball pace. I must admit it is an impressive style of playing to be doing this sort of thing regularly and to have a number of different players capable of scoring at this clip. Previously it would happen in isolated circumstances, with most teams having one or two players capable of taking the bowlers apart at a high-octane rate (Gilchrist, Afridi, Sehwag), but this England team keeps them coming all through the lineup.

Interesting morning on the Fifth Test. Australia finally win the toss and bowl; seems to have been the correct call but they've dropped three catches in the first 90 minutes. One of them (Warner) was a sitter, one was a fairly easy keeper catch (Carey dropping Brook just now) and one was pretty hard (Smith). Pretty poor for an Australian team which usually prides itself on good fielding. That they've managed to still get three wickets shows it was the right decision to bowl. Jimmy Anderson would have liked bowling in these conditions. That being said, he has had opportunities to bowl in swinging conditions and still hasn't had the breakthroughs that he would have liked. At 41, and with the next English Test series in January 2024, the scene would be set for a retirement but looks like he wants to keep going.

This has been an excellent series. Australia were obviously outplayed in the Fourth Test and if England go on to win the Fifth, I'm sure many will point to this draw as justification that England was robbed of a series win and winning back the Ashes. 2-2 would have been the fairer reflection so far in the series and a decider would have been tantalising. All that being said, it's easy to forget that Australia did win the first two Tests and they did that with only 10 men in the second (Lyon's injury) while losing both tosses and having to bat in very poor conditions. England might say the Australian wins happened while Mark Wood wasn't available, but the Aussies could just as easily say the English win (by only 3 wickets) happened while Lyon wasn't available (and he had taken 9 wickets in just over 2 innings at the time). Winning two Tests (and the previous series) does mean you retain the Ashes with a draw and I guess Australia were able to take advantage of that position. The nature of momentum and the feverish write-ups will always switch. After two Tests, the media was saying England were naive idiots and Bazball was dead, and then after the Fourth Test suddenly everyone's saying Australia are overhyped and Bazball is the greatest thing ever. The truth is somewhere in the middle.

It will matter to the historical scoreboard but I don't think either team really thinks that "retaining the Ashes" is mission accomplished. The competitiveness of both sides right now means that the Oval will definitely be hotly contested and I think a 2-2 will be seen as a "win" for England and a "loss" for Australia, given how things began. Australia will be keen to win to "legitimise" the series.